User talk:Caravaca

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Splitting business ethics

Anyone with messages about my bold split of business ethics is kindly requested to insert their comments here.Caravaca 08:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Marketing ethics

Test page: /marketing ethics

[edit] Biopiracy

Test page: /biopiracy

You made a Great work at Biopiracy! I was wondering how to repair its POV since long ago, but I have too little knowledge about the subject. Now the article looks much better then before. Well, I feel few inappropriate statements but it is still good.--Alvin-cs ✉ 17:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Capital punishment

I seem to have successfully advanced the state of that article (prodded others into doing it too) I wonder if you have any sources, I think added by you, for the statement that blood feuds predate religious executions. I quickly scanned the German article and found no mention of any religious practice before Constantinian Rome. Rmhermen 19:52, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I would like to take the human sacrifice and entertainment issue out of what I termed an "identifiable sequence". The reason it is there is loyalty to a previous (unknown) editor, who didn't provide verifiability, but claimed that human sacrifice was "the" origin. The article seemed to claim, before I got to it, that human sacrifice was the origin of the death penalty. This directly contradicted the German article, which I consider to be correct (it also doesn't footnote a source, although I have found some myself). The problem I faced was where to put the human sacrifice issue, given that it had previously been assigned primary causal status and clearly shouldn't be removed from the article. Human sacrifice may have evolved from cannibalism - i.e. it is a more ritualised and controlled form of cannibalism. Cannibalism itself in turn can arise out of feuds between tribes. Possibly if one puts cannibalism into the picture as an intermediate step, it would be easier to find sources which reconstruct the causal chain. However while all societies took the blood-feud-->legal processes route, probably only some went through cannibalism and human sacrifice on the way. While it would be nice to clarify the relationships here, I don't have enough sources to do so, so I feel compelled to leave the issue in a fog until someone comes up with some sources. Caravaca 06:13, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I believe that you are the one that needs to provide evidence that "blood feuds" was the basis of cpaital pounishment and not ritual sacrifice. I would suggest that the opposite is actually true - that all societies went through human sacrifice but blood feud represents an advancement of legal system that only some tribes went through. Rmhermen 14:38, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Also note that I pointed out the lack of discussion of religion in the German article as a particularly grievous fault of that article. I beleive that this is another case were the article may be featured in another language but its equivalent would not pass muster on the English version. Rmhermen 14:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Another way to approach this is this: While we have early physical remains of religious rituals - it is difficult, if not impossible, to trace the origins of the concept of "blood feud" which left no physical traces. Rmhermen 14:51, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I have an interesting quote from Julius Caesar on the practices of the Celts. However, assuming I choose not to use this (because I fear being original), what would you have me do? I see a certain destructiveness in your criticism, but I would like guidance. I already agreed myself that I see a shortcoming, and tried to describe a dilemma between two inherited versions of the primary origin. Help me out of the dilemma, please. Caravaca 14:51, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Note that the last two edits were simultaneous - both at 14:51 :)
In response to your comment about blood feuds, they have been very well researched in anthropology. RU aware of this? Caravaca 14:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I don't know what you mean would be "original" about a quote from Caesar; however, the time period we are discussing far pre-dates written records, hence part of the problem. Rmhermen 14:53, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
The interpretation would be original. Caravaca 14:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Time-periods are also not strictly relevant - it is a question of the development state of a society. Caesar was talking about Celts, who practiced human sacrifice and blood feuds. He explains their motivation. Caravaca 14:56, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
A direct question: were you the person who said that the death penalty originates from human sacrifice? Caravaca 14:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I advanced this most recent when I rewrote the list of methods into a prose section but the statement in the article predates my edits. The problem, I see, is that we are saying that the primitive emotion of revenge gave rise to a legal system of punishment through an intermediate step of group vengeance as opposed to saying that religion gave the organization that gave rise to the laws of which capital punishment is only one. Rmhermen 15:09, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
OK - I see better where our differences lie now. To summarise the issue: you see the origin in religious practices, and I see it in the cultural practice of the blood feud. Correct me if I am wrong. If I am correct, can I suggest we both try and find evidence to support our positions? Caravaca 15:15, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I notice that the article contains no mention of trial by combat, a legal "blood feud" as opposed to the extralegal (or "pre-legal") ones it already discusses. Rmhermen 15:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Note that I don't see the origin of people killing other people as an outgrowth of religion but rather the structure that gives rise to the legal stystem. Rmhermen 15:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Another question: I'm about 90% of the way through a reorganisation of the ethics section. Would you like to proof-read it first? Or shall I be bold, publish and be damned?! Caravaca 15:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Be bold. Rmhermen 15:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Lazy test page for the history of capital punishment

See: /CP


[edit] RE: Capital punishment 'restitution' point

Thanks for your reply the part that has been distorted did read 'A recent US study found that 41% of the public voted in favour of capital punishment, whilst a higher percentage of 44% voted against the death penalty when voters were offered alternative sentences. The most popular alternative to capital punishment being "life without parole" and some form of restitution to the families of victims.[1] The present version makes little sense in terms of the 'restitution' point. I hope that clarifies. Thanks - Solar 21:24, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Educational software scandal

I caught one of your edits and scanned the rest. They brought to mind a recent news story which might interest you. Former First Lady of the U.S. Barbara Bush recently made a large donation to a project educating children displaced by Hurricane Katrina. It was later discovered that the gift stipulated a large portion be spent on educational software produced by a company run by Neil Bush, her son. I suspect that are other example of the dark side of educational software. Cheers, -Will Beback 10:05, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Unethical accounting practices

Why are you moving articles out of this +cat? SirIsaacBrock 13:39, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

You have requested a Cfd vote today, the vote is not done, I disagree with it. Please do not remove any article from the +cat until the voting is done or editors will have to put them all back. SirIsaacBrock 13:49, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for your timely response, let's discuss at Category talk:Unethical accounting practices SirIsaacBrock 18:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anti corporate activism

I'm not sure if this was your intention, however, some of the former members of the categories you attempted to subsume into 'anti-corporate activism' have been removed from the category, and have since been homeless as far as categorization according to corporate scandal.

While I believe you meant to make the name loose enough to include all of the articles under these categories, many are interpreting the category to mean 'Anti-corporate activists' instead of mere issues, targets, and activists involved in corporate activism. FYI.

See Talk:Halliburton, for example.

Yeago 03:21, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Gucci big.jpg

Hello Caravaca, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Gucci big.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:Caravaca/marketing ethics. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 12:24, 19 May 2007 (UTC)