Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2007 January 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Humanities desk
< January 9 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 11 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


Contents


[edit] January 10

[edit] Difference between tantric art and Kama sutra

Whats the underlying difference between the Kama Sutra and Tantric Yoga and other means of Spiritual enlightenment. Why is the KS included in many curricula of the western universities. 21:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)~~ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kjvenus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log). Flamarande 00:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Read Kama Sutra and Tantra. They are not the same thing - or even similar things. --Kainaw (talk) 08:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Slaves

What state had the most during the 1800's? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.233.187.133 (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

If by "state" you mean "US state", in 1860 it was Virginia according to the US census. Remember that Virginia at that time included West Virginia. [1].
If by "state" you mean "nation-state", I would guess Russia by a large percentage. Russian serfs weren't exactly analogous to American black slaves (they were tied to the land, not the specific owner - if the land changed hands, so did they), but they could be whipped, beaten, raped, killed, etc. by their overseers or owners without repercussion or reason, and could not leave the land they were tied to. There were 25 million serfs in Russia when they were freed in 1875 as compared to 4 million American slaves in 1860. (Edited.) --Charlene 22:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, Charlene, Russian serfs could be sold and moved around in just the same fashion as American slaves, as you will discover if you read Nikolai Gogol's novel, Dead Souls. However, conditions in the nineteenth century were not quite as grim as you depict, and landords did not have a legal right to kill or otherwise abuse their serfs. Emancipation, incidentally, came in 1861 under Tsar Alexander II, not 1875, but the free communes were left burdened by heavy redemption payments. Clio the Muse 23:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. Most of the information I have about Russian (well, Ukrainian) serfdom comes from family records. My maternal ancestors were all serfs, and there's quite a bit of evidence showing that they were tied to the land until 1875 - I assumed that was the year they were freed.
I have a photograph of one of my great-great etc. grandfathers - his back is covered in welts and one of his arms has been torn off. He was caught stealing an apple. --Charlene 14:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
According to [2], in 1860, Virginia had the most (490,865), but South Carolina had the highest percentage of the population (57%). Clarityfiend 22:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the information. It really helped me out. 20:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crime rates by political party

Are there any verifiable statistics of whether registered Democrats or registered Republicans are arrested more often? TruthInMedia 23:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

You mean in general, or when they commit crimes? Edison 00:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Probably not. Party affiliation is not among the standard data collected one a person is arrested, and unless it was germane to the investigation, it is unlikely that the police would make any attempt to discover it. It is possible that you could make a guess of some kind based on the intersections of various kinds of demographic data, but this would be a very, very rough estimate. Carom 04:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
It is quite likely that a very large proportion of American criminals are not registered voters at all. BTW, the voter rolls are public information in the US, so I don't see why a study couldn't be done.--Pharos 06:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I think there would be a number of difficulties with such a study, although you're probably right: it could be done. Carom 14:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm actually not too sure about there being many difficulties. If you have a name and address (which arrest records or trial records, if you prefer, should list), then it's very easy to look up party affiliation (or lack thereof). I've done this sort of research myself (not for criminals, though!); it's a fairly easy process as it's all computerized nowadays.--Pharos 10:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair point. What about scale? It's been a while since I studied statistics, but I'm having trouble imagining a model that would produce usable results from a sample (without introducing too much selection bias), and it would be a virtually impossible task to do a one-to-one comparison for every person who was arrested in a given year. Do you have a model in mind that would produce usable results from a (relatively) small sample? Carom 00:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, I'm not an expert on this sort of thing, but I would presume one would pick an "average" crime day and tally up the individuals arrested. I had a tough time finding a good source for the number of arrests in the US, but the number of drug-related arrests is under 2 million a year, and this is probably a substantial portion of the whole. That's about 5,500 a day. Political campaigns routinely verify nominating petitions which are several times longer. The biggest problem in such a study would not be the numbers at all, but the trouble of getting data out of 50 states, which might require extensive travel; it would be much easier to try to do a study in a "representative" state.--Pharos 01:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

In a recent spat, with Republicans denying the vote to serving prisoners, a Democrat argument to prevent the action was to argue that 90% of prisoners would vote Democrat, and so disenfranchising them was equivalent to preventing Democrat voters from voting. Displacing Prisoners DDB 06:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This is not a "recent spat"; it's actually a perennial (if somewhat low-profile) issue in the US. I don't think serving prisoners can vote anywhere in the country, and I don't think they ever could. In most states, the rights of ex-offenders are also restricted to varying degrees. There have been a number of left-of-center advocacy groups pushing for greater rights mostly for ex-offenders, and it's probably true that the ex-offender demographic would skew Democratic, but I would still think most would be unlikely to be interested in politics.--Pharos 07:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Are prisoners affected by the choice of government? Yes. Should they have a say? Yes. Seems logical to me. Stevage 00:05, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
The countervailing argument would be that, having committed crimes against society, prisoners have forfeited the right to have a say in how that society is managed. --Richardrj talk email 05:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Not all crimes are "crimes against society". Self-harm, for instance. Stevage 01:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
In what way do you regard self-harm as a crime? How many people have been imprisoned (as opposed to hospitalised) for harming themselves? --Richardrj talk email 10:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking of "crimes" like taking certain drugs, attempted suicide, not wearing a seatbelt etc. Though you raise an interesting point: if people are denied the right to vote due to having committed a crime, why are they only denied that right if the result of the conviction was imprisonment? Presumably a criminal whose sentence was a fine, community service etc would still be able to vote. Sounds even more arbitrary. Stevage 01:50, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Of course it's arbitrary. Laws tend to be. Why should someone with 0.9 ounces of pot be cited like a traffic ticket in some states, while 1.0 ounces could be a felony? Why is driving 18 miles above the speed limit punished much less severely than driving 20 miles above the speed limit? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 02:43, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Syrian Traditions

Are there any specific childhood rites of passage for birthdays or lost teeth in Syria? 65.40.194.157 00:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hatshepsut's Death

How did Hatshepsut, the female pharoah, die, and when did she die? 24.5.80.116 00:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

From the article on this very site: "no record of her cause of death has survived, although both natural causes and murder have been proposed". You could consider looking at the article first, if you feel like it. NIRVANA2764 00:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
See the page on Hatshepsut. She disappears from the historical record in 1458 B.C., though no specific cause of death ever seems to have been recorded. Clio the Muse 00:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
The history of how people have regarded Hatshepsut is actually rather interesting. Until the 20th century she was regarded by modern historians as sort of an evil stepmother who stole the kingship from her stepson, Thutmose III and whose works were destroyed by Thutmose when he ascended the throne, possibly after having her killed.
Modern historians have some doubts, though; there is evidence that Hatshepsut and Thutmose III actually co-ruled. According to this theory, Hatshepsut handled internal matters (such as the building of temples, obelisks, and other religious edifices) and Thutmose handed external matters (such as war and diplomacy). One piece of evidence for this is that Hatshepsut's statues and other works were only destroyed 20 years after her death, during a time when Thutmose was having problems holding on to power and needed to establish his own right to the throne.
Hatshepsut would likely have been relatively old when she died. There's no direct evidence of her cause of death, of course, but it would not be at all unusual for a woman in her 40s in ancient Egypt to have died of natural causes. Most people (and especially women, given the dangers of childbirth) didn't live past 30; Hatshepsut likely lived to 45 at the very least. --Charlene 15:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carl W. Buechner

Hello, I am looking for any information about the author Carl W. Buechner. He is credited with many famous quotes such as "They may forget what you said, but they will never forget how you made them feel." I have been unable to find any information as to a source for any of his quotes or any information on the man himself. thank you, 71.217.66.81 03:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Have you tried Wikiquote? The site is at http://en.wikiquote.org/ Dismas|(talk) 06:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
There was a South African painter named Carl Büchner. Don't know if it's him, though.--Pharos 08:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Stumpers-L says "Buechner is a Presbyterian Minister and author born in 1926" that is about all I can dig up on the quote. Frederick Buechner matches that description and his father was named Carl. Most of Frederick's books can be searched inside on amazon if you have an amazon account, perhaps it is Speak What We Feel: Not What We Ought to Say. He's actually still alive you could phone him up and ask him (I don't have his number). meltBanana 16:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Rogal, Samuel J. (1987). A Chronological Outline of American Literature.  lists this author as "Carl Frederick Buechner". Also, i see many of the quote sites giving: "People are disturbed not by things but by the view they take of them.They may forget what you said...", the first sentence of which is from Epictetus, Handbook 5.[3] Anyone have access to a copy of this, maybe the remainder of the quote follows.—eric 16:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
It's possible that this quote was simply miscredited to this man. After a search on Google, this is the closest I have come to finding an identity of the author. But the other reason I think this may have been miscredited, is because Maya Angelou is apparently quoted as having said the same thing, and she was born around the same time.Jjmckool 19:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Israeli foreign policy

I wish to know about the current position Israel holds with regards to Germany, and vice versa considering thier histiry during WWII (I realize Israel did not exist in its current form then.) But the implications of the Nazi war effort could have current ramefications on the Israeli german relations Thank you81.144.161.223 09:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Have a look at the page on Germany-Israel relations, which may help to give you some insight. Clio the Muse 09:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Interestingly, but perhaps not surprisingly when you think about it, since Israel's inception, Germany (the FRG--West Germany before unification) has actually probably been one of Israel's staunchest allies, second only to the US.
This question simply cannot be responded to adequately without making mention of the central role and definitely the most enormous of controversies among the world Jewish community, and more particularly in response to this question, in Israeli politics, with regard to relations to post war Germany. This has been the tortuously difficult issue of War Reparations. It's an extremely touchy issue, one very difficult to come to terms with to a great many Jews and Israelis. On the one hand, there are the "pragmatics" who accept reparations for Holocaust attrocities as at least some sort of valid compensation for the horrific wrongs of the Holocaust, and recognizing that these reparations can be put to good use in helping to build a Jewis homeland. On the other hand, there are those whose conscience simply cannot allow them to accept German "compensation", as from their point of view, to accept cash as compenstation for the lives of human beings is nothing less than repugnant. I've tried to find the source of this quote, but I can't, (any help would be appreciated!) Nonetheless, though I'm unsure of the source, the quote is ingrained in my mind (though the wording may be a bit off as well): "We never asked for the sting, and likewise, we have no interest in the honey". To throw in my two cents, though there's nothing quite as tempting as accepting large sums of free cash, especially when that cash is so vitally needed for a strugling, fledgling state, perhaps my dedication to principle is foolish, but myself and my family have never accepted any such compensation. The idea of accepting cash compensation for the gassing and cremation of one's loved ones is simply repugnant. Loomis 01:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Some pertinent background may be gathered from the page on the Claims Conference, an international body created especially to deal with the reparations from Germany to the Jewish people. Aside from cases of reluctance or refusal to receive "blood money" by survivors of those killed, as noted by Loomis, some reparations are directly for personal losses, e.g. having served as slave laborers (to used the British English term; US English calls this "forced labor"). These payments are a significant supplement to the reduced incomes of aging Holocaust survivors, notably in Israel and the former USSR. Hundreds of thousands of these people, now in their 70s and 80s, are destitute or nearly so; many are broken in physical and emotional health as a direct or cumulative result of their sufferings under the Nazi regime, and partly through the sufferings incurred by loss of first-degree family members (parents, spouse, children). The above assertion by Loomis represents a personal, subjective assessment not to be generalized to the greater population.-- Deborahjay 23:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
As for reparations administered through the Claims Conference for victims for whom no known survivors can be identified: some funds continue to be channeled to public and private bodies, such as Yad Vashem, the Ghetto Fighters' House and other international-level musuems and archives, for the purpose of commemoration and anti-genocide education. -- Deborahjay 23:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe that the bulk of my "assertion" was that the whole issue of German War reparations is a "tortuously difficult" one for Jews to deal with. The subjectivity of my "two-cents" is self-evident. German War reparations were indeed a vital source of funding for the fledgling Jewish State. I believe I mentioned that as well. It's a subject my own conscience struggles with. Nonetheless, any position on the matter is a "subjective asessment not to be generalized to the greater population." I'm truly at a loss as to why Deborahjay is apparently so disturbed by what was to the best of my abilities an honest and sincere summation of the heart-wrenching difficulty Jews and Israelis have been faced with regarding this issue. Loomis 18:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
If you are ever elected President of Israel you are free to give the money back. Flamarande 22:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Flamarande, as is so very often the case, I have absolutely no idea what your point is. German war reparations are, as I represented, a very controversial, very difficult issue for Jews to grapple with. I understand the merits of both sides of the argument. If you have a serious point to make, please, by all means elaborate on it. However if your comment was nothing but a disrespectfully flippant remark on a very serious, very difficult issue Jews have been grappling with for nearly sixty years, I'd appreciate it if you'd show at least a minimum of respect. Loomis 07:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Racial abuse in the work place

I have a question. I worked for acompany here in wheeling Wva.Or should I say "south wheeling." I was exposed to a veriety of verbal abusive comments by one of the owners of the conpany. For example He told me my brush I used to to remove loose materials from the surface to be painted."looked like my halfbreed daughters hair".AS if to say she had bad or messy hair .HE never met or seen my daughter.he made the comment,in my oppinion because she is byracial and he knew of her.I informed my so called represenitive of the abuse he said "if you want to work to ignore it" I endured the abuse a month or two.Nothing would be done by [my union representative].I quit to remove my self from the abuse.After a month of"being punished" I was placed with a [another] company.Working there was great.As always it was feast or famine,being in the union.And was eventialy layed-off with others.Due to lack of work.[My union representative] then placed me with [another company].My American Indian heritige shows well with my skin color and facial features.So, what happend there was from the first day on the job site,a person was constintly calling me "Cheif or Tonto."After two weeks of [my union representative] not representing or even trying. I informed the owner of the company's son.To stop calling me racial names he replied "o-k cheif."So I asked him would he liked it if I called him "dirtball hippie"? Because of his long dirty looking dred-locks that he has.So he called his father and said I made threats against his father.I was told to not come back to the jobsite by phone that night by [my union representative]. I realize [he] is in a political position with these companies.Is it fair to overlook these situations to keep these employers union emplorers?I have since withdrew from the union for these situations? I realize you may represent the union and I may not receive a reply.If not I thank you for my input.And I will look elsewhere for answers. Nicholas D Jones.

You should seek the advise of a lawyer. We cannot provide legal advise here. Hipocrite - «Talk» 15:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Edited to remove employer and union representative names.—eric 15:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Your story saddens me, and I sympathize with you. It sounds to me as if your union representative is either not good at his job (to defend you and represent your interests) or is himself/herself racist. In cases like these, it is always best to have written evidence. For example, if such a thing should happen again, it would be best to send a letter of complaint, by certified mail, to your union rep and your employer. Keep a copy of the letter, with addresses printed at the top, and your receipt for the certified letter, including the addresses. Keep copies of their responses. In your first letter, politely request that the racial abuse stop. If this letter doesn't have the right results, send another letter stating that you will have to consider legal action if they do not respect your legal rights. Then you would have evidence to present in court, if it came to that. Since you probably don't have those things, you should contact any people you worked with who would be willing to testify as your witness. I know that this may not be easy. I agree that it might help to talk to a lawyer, since they know what your legal options are. To find a lawyer, you might try contacting the Native American Rights Fund. This page lists civil rights lawyers in West Virginia. Also this Wheeling firm apparently handles labor and employment law. Aside from finding a lawyer, you might contact the national headquarters of your union. Your first step could be to explain to them the situation and ask them to intervene with your union rep. If they are uncooperative, you might say that if they won't help you, you have no choice but to take your story to the media. You could contact the local newspaper in Wheeling and/or one of these labor movement publications. Still, it would be good to find a lawyer who you think is on your side and talk about strategy with him or her first. Please note that I do not have legal expertise and cannot guarantee that these strategies will work for you. Also, I am assuming that you do not want to return to this same employer, since these actions would probably cause them not to hire you back. Bringing your case to the local media might also discourage other employers in Wheeling from hiring you, but perhaps you should consider moving to a more tolerant place. Marco polo 18:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The world is being dominated by a pack of faithless idiots who bank purely on personality traits. Kindly give the place where u r from? 20:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)~~

(Per the history, the preceding remark comes to you from Kjvenus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log).) Marco polo 20:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Your workplace may be in violation of federal and state civil-rights laws. Consider contacting the West Virginia Human Rights Commission. -- Mwalcoff 23:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The most important thing is to have proof, otherwise it's just your word against theirs. I suggest you buy a pocket sized voice activated recording device and keep it in your shirt pocket. If you can record you asking politely for them not to call you "Chief", or the like, and them continuing to do so, that would allow you to win either in the courts, union arbitration, or in the media. Meanwhile, until you get this proof, you may very well need to just live with it. Also, Wheeling, West Virginia (92.72% Caucasian) is "redneck country" (sorry if I insulted anyone), so you might do a lot better in a large northern city, with a multicultural mix. From your location, perhaps Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (67.63% Caucasian) would be the closest. Pittsburgh is only an hour's drive away, so you could even commute. StuRat 21:55, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The person certainly should not have to "just live with it" and absolutely should not have to move to another city. The conduct she is describing almost undoubtedly violates the law, and the state human-rights commission should be able to help him or her. -- Mwalcoff 01:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely, but he will first need proof. StuRat 02:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2nd most decorated

I had always heard that Neville Brand was the 2nd most decorated WWII vet. I read in his bio that he is the 4th. Who is 2nd?129.112.109.252 20:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the article Neville Brand states that the #4 claim is incorrect, but no source is given. Your same question was asked here, and no one came up with an answer (one respondent did claim, "Brand denied that he was the 4th most decorated soldier years before his death, but you will still see people refer to it in old articles on movies"). Wareh 21:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
see Agustin Ramos Calero. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
But this .pdf file says it was Llewellyn M. Chilson, for whom we don't have an article. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
And this says it was Maurice L. Britt. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
And this says it was Onclo Airhart. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
This Google search comes up with a lot more choices. No point in my continuing to list them here. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I have an article about Nguyen Huu Tho

Matrixseal 20:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)Vietnamese political leader (b. July 10, 1910, Cho Lon, near Saigon [now Ho Chi Minh City], Vietnam--d. Dec. 24, 1996, Ho Chi Minh City), was the leader of the communists' political efforts in South Vietnam during the Vietnam War and following the war served in the government of the reunified country. Tho studied law in Paris in the 1930s and returned to Saigon to practice. He was imprisoned... [could you add this as a hyperlink on the battle of Ia Drang Valley on commander of the Vietnamese] Much Appreciated :)

Welcome to Wikipedia! We already have an article about Nguyen Huu Tho. You should be able to edit the article yourself if there is anything you want to add. Just click on the "edit this page" tab near the top of the page. --Grace 21:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rutland

In the naming section of our Rutland article, when discussing possibilities as far as the derivation of the name, the article says possibly derived from being a retreat of the Leicestershire RatCE. What "Leicestershire RatCE" mean? User:Zoe|(talk) 22:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

That text was added by User:Rodw on 1 October 2006. I suspect it is a typo. You might leave a query on his Talk page and ask him to correct it if it is. Marco polo 22:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I did so, thanks.  :) User:Zoe|(talk) 22:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Now removed.— Rod talk 23:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)