Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities
| |||||||||
How to ask a question
| |||||||||
|
| ||||||||
After reading the above, you may
. Your question will be added at the bottom of the page. | |||||||||
How to answer a question
|
| ||||||||
January 23
What is the greatest distance from east to west in Canada?
First, that article gives the positions of Canada's extreme points, but not the distances between them.
Second, the phrase "greatest distance from east to west" is not very well defined. Are we being asked for (1) the great-circle distance between the country's two most widely separated points, on the assumption that the path connecting them is something like east-west? Or (2) the length of the longest due east-west path (parallel of latitude) with its west end at the country's west side and its east end at the country's east side? Or (3) the length of the great circle joining the ends of that path? Or something else?
It appears to me that the two points for (1) will be the southwest corner of the Yukon Territory (near Mt. St. Elias), and Cape Race in Newfoundland. (Not Cape Spear, because the great circle path comes into Newfoundland from the northwest, and the coast from Cape Race to Cape Spear is fairly close to north-south in alignment.) Mt. St. Elias is at 60°18'N according to my atlas, and the north-south border is at 141°W, so the combination of those coordinates should be close to the border angle; and for Cape Race the atlas gives 46°40'N, 53°10'W. Then this distance calculator makes the distance 3,456 miles or 5,561 km.
For (2), the longest parallel in degrees is just near the Arctic Circle, from 61°18'W (Cape Dyer) to the 141°W Yukon border, for a length of 79°42', but as you go south the degrees get longer, essentially in proportion to the cosine of the latitude, so that's not going to be the right answer. There are three latitudes farther south that look like candidates: 53°25'N, with the parallel from 55°50'W in southeastern Labrador to 132°45'W in the Queen Charlotte Islands, or 76°55' long; 49°15'N, from Cape Freels in Newfoundland at 53°28'W to 126°1'W on Vancouver Island near Tofino, or 72°33'; and 48°39'N, from near Cape Bonavista in Newfoundland at 53°W to 124°49'W on Vancouver Island, or 71°49', traversing a long section of the US. Correcting for the latitude, I make it that the last of these is the longest, equivalent to 47.446° at the equator. That's about 3,275 miles or 5,272 km. But these figures will be somewhat inaccurate, even if I measured and calculated correctly, as I did not attempt to take into account the non-spherical shape of the earth.
For (3), using the same endpoints as the last calculation above and the distance calculature linked in (1), I get a great-circle distance of 3,160 miles or 5,085 km.
That was fun! --Anonymous, 10:32 UTC, January 23.
- Glad you enjoyed it. We'll send you a bill at the end of the month. :o) Halcatalyst 13:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Grin! --Anon.
Wouldn't the "greatest distance" go around the far side of the Earth, say 21,000 miles ? LOL. StuRat 16:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Nah, the question specified from east to west. hydnjo talk 18:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
That could be taken as the distance from the East Coast to the West Coast, with no direction specified. StuRat 19:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- The question also specified "in Canada". And my interpretations used words like "with its west end on the west coast" in order to cover the "far side of the Earth" objection. --Anonymous, 04:10 UTC, January 24.
Ex-patriot Figures
I was wondering if anyone had any statistics on the number of Americans currently living abroad, preferrably ordered from the country with the greatest number of Americans to the least. Even a top 10 or 20 list would be useful. Thanks for the help.
- can't help, but you'll get further if you look for expatriates. A lot of them are still probably patriotic Americans. I hate to recommend (gasp!) a book, but this sort of fact can probably be found in an up-to-date "Information Please Almanac" or "World Almanac and Book of Facts". There may also be online versions...? Grutness...wha? 04:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- If you're writing a report, you need to spell the word "expatriate". (Might help you look for figures, too). - Nunh-huh 05:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
You might also check relevant U.S. gov departments such as Immigration and Naturalization or State. Marskell 07:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Patience of medici
what is the patience of medici and how it works?
Here's some URL I found:
and an old one which isn't accessible anymore:
referenced in this google's cache:
and a part of the last one maybe:
"His magic studies caused lively interest the kingly persons, and Mary Medici was one of the admirers. To the experts of card games is known the patience of Medici - surprising magic patience,whose secret passed to it from the Di. There is nothing surprising in the..."
(retrieved from various metasearch)
thanks for any answer. greg. 83.214.15.209 02:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- This isn't an answer as such, but it may give some clues... patience (known in some countries as solitaire) is a form of card game played by one person. So far so good, but... there are numerous connections between the Medicis and the use of the Tarot deck, so I suspect that that is used rather than the standard 52-card deck used today (and which at least partly developed from it). Grutness...wha? 05:08, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Genghis Khan
Hi, This is my first time so I'm not sure how this works. I had surgery so it's been very hard for me to find the answers to these three questions that are needed on 01/23/06. Can you please help? The questions are as follows: 1. Khan's empire at the time of his death extended across Asia, from the Pacific Ocean to the Caspian Sea - Name one civilization conqered by the Khan as an example of that empire. 2. His descendants extended the empire and maintained power in the region for several hundred years - This period is called the Pax Mongolica by modern historians. Describe that period. 3. His grandson, Kubilai Khan - Name one event in his reign beyond having lots of descendants and establishing the Yuan Dynasty. *I hope you will respond and thanks for your help. Sonja Sharpe
- Look at our Ghengis Khan, Kublai Khan, and Pax Mongolica articles. StuRat 05:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- If they don't help, Homework might. -- Chuq 13:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
What does 'habits of inquiry' mean ?
"Habits of inquiry" till the patterns of behavior you develop to learn things, especially in school. They might include asking questions and praticipating in class discussion, using the library, and even performing experiments. Halcatalyst 13:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC) 83.214.15.209 05:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
!!!
THIS IS NOT exactly WHAT I WROTE. Some kid with time on his hands is doing custom editing here. No skin off my teeth, but if some administrator knows how to spank 83.214.15.209, I won't consider it child abuse. Halcatalyst 16:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Asian female philosophers
I would like to know more about particular Asian female philosophers - sort of the Asian versions of Simone Weil and Simone de Beauvoir - leading figures in their fields who created fields of enquiry or wrote interesting books and completely dedicated themselves to their work. Tahnk you very much, --EuropracBHIT 09:07, 23 January 2006 (UTC).
- Perhaps not quite what you're looking for but Murasaki Shikibu is at least partly credited with inventing the novel. Marskell 14:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- If the question about literature in general, look at Mirabai, Arundhati Roy, Mahadevi Varma, Shobha De, Jhumpa Lahiri, Amrita Pritam, Anita Desai, Kamala Das, etc. deeptrivia (talk) 00:37, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction
Was there any direct effect upon Reconstruction Period with the impeachment of Andrew Johnson?
- See Andrew Johnson, specifically the section on his impeachment. --Kainaw (talk) 19:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Obtaining copies of British naturalisation papers
Can you please tell me how one can get copies of British naturalisation papers of people who arrived in England during the 1890s. Thank you.
- It tells you here. Lots of other info too. --BluePlatypus 19:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Economic expansionism
Was economic expansionism an ideology of sorts, similar to imperialism? Or was it merely a historical process that was, ideologically, just a subset of manifest destiny. Lastly, can economic expansionism ever be considered imperialistic in any way? Thank you--Urthogie 19:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- That depends. Marxism maintains that capitalism has an inherent difference between wage and cost that can only be satisfied, without revolution, by continual economic expansion, and such expansion requires territorial control and subjugation. Therefore, according to Marxists, all capitalism is inherently imperialist and economic expansion is an ideology. Even without Marxist theory, economic expansionism inevitably seems to enunciate a set of ideological principles as a second order of business, and generally these are imperialist, whether we're talking about Manifest Destiny or the great Southern Empire that the Confederate States of America anticipated or, arguably, the Monroe Doctrine (which was purportedly a denial of colonialism but has been alledged to be a colonialist contesting of another colonialism, substituting economic imperialism for state imperialism). However, economic expansion is not knowingly imperial. It is the need to grow and is an impulse. The ideology comes later. Geogre 22:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The Matrix trilogy
What is the significance of the sunglasses? It seems like most of the main characters are wearing them, even when fighting, and they rarely come off accidentally.
On a side note, how do Morpheus's sunglasses stay on? They have no arms to loop around the ears.
- For the most part, they simply increase the mystery around the main characters, the agents etc. They also help viewers distinguish bluepills from redpills and in the Agents' cases, they also make the agents look like the men in black. Agent Smith's sunglasses also gradually change in form as he becomes more of a rogue program to look less like those of other agents and more like Neo. (Why do I know loads about sunglasses in the Matrix and nothing about useful stuff? :) )smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Morpheus's sunglasses are "pince-nez" (French for "pinch nose") glasses, meaning they stay on by pinching the bridge of the nose. The good guys (Neo, Morpheus, etc.) wear round or curved sunglasses. The baddies (Agents, Cypher, The Twins) wear sunglasses with corners. When Smith returns in Reloaded his sunglasses are the same shape as Neo's, but with sharp corners like an Agent's. --Canley 01:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- They're also good product placement. --Robert Merkel 03:11, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- To be good product placement, the brand name must be clearly visible. StuRat 14:50, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Plus they help to hide Keanu Reeves' perpetually glazed, mindless and expressionless eyes. And sunglasses look cool. Proto t c 11:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Who said this quote?
I know that in the song "Your Ex-Lover is Dead," the Stars use the following quote: "When there's nothing left to burn, you have to set yourself on fire." Who originally said this quote? I know it's been around for years, and it's one of my favorite quotes, but I would very much like to know who said it first.
- I thought it was the singer's father? At least I'm pretty sure he read the line. --Tothebarricades 06:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Aye, Torquil Campbell's father uttered these famous words. http://www.bbc.co.uk/6music/whatson/aotd/aotd_stars_fire.shtml --195.194.74.92 15:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Boyfriend Advice
I don't have any older brothers or sisters, so I figured I should ask here, so I have something to tell my little sisters. How can I tell if the guy I like likes me back? We always say hi to each other, and we talk all during the classes I have with him. He doesn't have a girlfriend, and we are friends. We flirt casually, but our lockers are right next to each other. I don't want to ask him out and have him say no, because that would be so awkward. Should I or shouldn't I ask him? If this helps at all, I live in the southwest. Are guys different around the country?
- It's impossible to tell from a description like that how somebody feels about you - remember, you're hardly an unbiased observer. He *might* be interested in going out with you (and be too awkward to figure out how to ask himself, which is a relatively common phenomenon amongst teenage boys) but then again he might be happy to flirt with you because he think there's no chance of a relationship.
- In any case, relationships are always awkward, and rejection is always unpleasant, but unless you ask you'll never know. Only you can make a decision as to whether you want to ask this specific boy out, but, tell me, are you never going to ask *anyone* out because it would be "too awkward"?
- If you do decide to ask him out, put a little bit of thought into doing so; for instance, have some thought as to where you might like to ask him out on a date (what kind of movies does he like, for instance?), and whatever you do ask him in private; don't ask a male about *anything* related to their emotions in front of their friends, particularly their male friends (and, yes, this applies to the "sensitive" ones too...). And finally, though it may be hard, have a bit of a think about what you'll do if he says "no"; you may feel like it, but running off with tears running down your cheeks is probably going to make reestablishing a friendship much harder than remaining calm. If you want to have a cry, don't do so in front of him!
- Oh, and teenage boys are essentially the same everywhere - they have hormones running like crazy through their bodies and their brains are trying and failing to catch up...
- Good luck and I hope it works out for you whatever you decide to do. And please note, my only qualifications for giving this advice is that I was a teenage boy once... --Robert Merkel 03:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
It sure sounds to me like he likes you. StuRat 06:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
It might also make a difference what type of guy is he. Is he outgoing with lots of friends who invite him to all the parties and play on the football team with him? Has he had lots of girlfriends in the past? If this is the case, he would ask you out by now if he were interested, and all you can do is turn up the flirting a notch or two and hope for the best. On the other hand, is he shy? More inclined toward writing for the school paper or writing songs on his guitar? Has he had very few (or no) girlfriends? Then it might be best for you to just ask him out, as Robert outlined above. Good luck! — BrianSmithson 19:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- You might be interested in a question called Dating question above. Black Carrot 13:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Naturalized Epistemology
Hi, Can someone explain to me what exaclty is the 'anti-psychologism' of Kant Frege and Hegel? and what does the whole naturalized epistemology vs. the other epistemology which I don't know what is called, is about? because I don't udnerstand really what each says and how it contradicts the other one.--Cosmic girl 21:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Assuming you've seen our article on anti-psychologism, perhaps I can paraphrase it. The theory says that logical truth does not depend on the content of human ideas. So a proponent of anti-psychologism would expect an alien with no knowledge of human culture to agree with the logic of a statement such as "All crows are either black, or they are not black". The opposing viewpoint is that these truths are partly human constructs.
- [1] has a useful introduction to epistemology, which discusses various theories. Warofdreams talk 12:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I see... Anti-psychologism sounds pretty rational to me ...so why then is Kant considered an idealist? and how come Ayn Rand despised him so much when by that I can see he was pretty rational? at least in his epystemology. so I assume that naturalized epistemology says that logic is a human construct? since NE is supposed to be the opposite of anti-psychologism...but to me it sounds by their names like they should be the opposite, I mean, NE should mean that logic has a basis in reality and not culture, and anti-ps. should be the opposite of that, just judging by their names, but I'm wrong and now even more conffused.--Cosmic girl 19:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- As our article on naturalized epistemology says, it covers a range of viewpoints, but all essentially say that logic is derived in part from empirical science and is not something with which people are born with an understanding of. So it is a counterpart to anti-psychologism, if not exactly its opposite. Kant is an idealist in the sense given at the top of the idealism article, that "Epistemological idealists might insist that the only things which can be directly known for certain are ideas." I'm not familiar with Rand's views on the subject, but it seems they were expressed in Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, and there's a substantial article at objectivist epistemology dealing with Rand's views. Warofdreams talk 15:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
And what would be my philosophy if I thought that in fact we can only know ideas but still think that that isn't a useful position practically? I mean, I think we work best under the Naturalized Epistemology supposition, but the other one might as well be true. is there any name for that?--Cosmic girl 18:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Evolutionary Creationism and Deism
Because of the debate between creation and evolution, some people say that God first created the earliest and simplest life forms, and then, he slowly allowed or influenced them to evolve into more complex ones like us.This is called evolutionary creationism.But the problem with this belief is that then, you have explain why if God(or a god) decided to create life, he would create it that way.I wonder, is there a possible reason why God would do that?If so, can somebody tell me? Another strange belief is deism.Deism is a philosophy wich says that God created the world, but after he created that, he left it strictly alone.It says that God exists, but he doesn't do anything to change,influence or intervene in the world.Deists compare God to a watchmaker, who after he creates it, lets it function by itself.But the problem with deism, again, is why.Why would God(or a god) create a universe and then just leave it alone?In Wikipedia, it said that deists believe that it's because the best of all possible worlds has been created.Is that saying that deists believe that the world is perfect?Of course, it's obviously not!Also, that doesn't explain why God decided to create the world in the first place.So would God(if he exists) really create the world and leave it alone?
- Well, for the first bit: that's the conundrum religious people get into if they claim to be able to explain the actions of their God. Since they will always end up with things they can't explain, they always end up with the contradiction of seeming to know exactly what God was thinking in one case, while shrugging and saying "The lord works in mysterious ways" in another. So you really need to adress a more fundamental theological question first: What makes you think humans are capable of fathoming the will of god/the gods? I don't see how Deism is either better or worse than other faiths in that respect. --BluePlatypus 23:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with BluePlatypus , and I also think that the best way we have to aproach or guess truth is science, and I also think that we have to be brave and dare to think and reason and never give up, no matter how irrational some things seem sometimes. --Cosmic girl 19:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- You're both being terribly dismissive of some very intelligent folks. The Deism under discussion is the late form, with the "clockmaker God." The answer to the "problem" is that such a Creator is not the Abrahamic one; it is a disengaged deity that merely enjoyed the engineering. The other answer, if one did wish to have an Abrahamic vision of the deity and try to force it into this Deism, is that God turned from the natural to the spiritual creation when it was done. The article is, I think, terribly wrong, and I do plan to fix it, eventually. "Deism" refers to several different things. This sort is the Voltaire version, and the idea is that another created world would be worse. It isn't that this is a wonderful world, but rather that no world could be made better, that every evil is a balance with a good. Geogre 22:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- That's right. The kind of deism Geogre is talking about is strictly the 18th century kind: of the Enlightenment and heavily influenced by Newtonian science and therefore both empirical and rational (the universe [and we] are no more than machines). Let's just say that any deism (intelligent design???) of the 21st century ought to recognize it cannot be Abrahamic (i.e., Jewish, Christian, or Islamic) and that deism fundamentally implies NOT theism = "there is no god interested in you". Halcatalyst 22:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've been a little ticked that the Deism article doesn't take in the Lord Herbert of Cherbury sort or the earlier 18th c. "natural religion" sort. One strand of the thought wanted to survey all world religions, found out what was in common to them all, and then assume that such was the "primitive" and universally true religion (the founding assumption being that the true God communicates to the innate soul and that society and education pervert this and all established churches try to deny it). Another sort wanted to find that religion that could be deduced from the empirical world. Voltaire's version is of that sort, and it's related to some other post-Newtonian religions innovations (like the form of hylozoism that took life from all sense of privilege and saw it as just another natural phenomenon). These late 18th c. deists were fairly profoundly trying not to be Christian. Geogre 11:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- That's right. The kind of deism Geogre is talking about is strictly the 18th century kind: of the Enlightenment and heavily influenced by Newtonian science and therefore both empirical and rational (the universe [and we] are no more than machines). Let's just say that any deism (intelligent design???) of the 21st century ought to recognize it cannot be Abrahamic (i.e., Jewish, Christian, or Islamic) and that deism fundamentally implies NOT theism = "there is no god interested in you". Halcatalyst 22:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I never said anything against Deism guys, I just said I find science a better tool than aimless speculation, speculation is great, but let's just not make it irrational or aimless even if the univrese turns out to be that way (which I doubt) because we get nothing out of that but a confussed mind... maybe Deism turns out to be true, but like Halcatalyst said, even deism has evolved, so we can expect it to evolve even more I guess... and yes, I suspect good and evil are balanced but does that mean we can't work for the betterment of our world? it seems to me that you are saying that as the world is already the best it can be let's do nothing, actually I think that our human condition can be improved and a belief in God is to ignore our own strengths...--Cosmic girl 23:11, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. StuRat 13:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Going back to the question... You can't second guess god. That's pretty much the point. But one good reason is that God cares about process over destinations. If god just wanted some folk to worship him, why didn't he just toss people in directly to heaven, without all that silly life business? If all living things eventually die, why not just start them off dead? Why have history, when He could have just painstakingly assembled the world and started it off at a timescale of 5 minutes ago? Because, plausibly, there is some meaning to the idea of experience, choice, and change, and creativity exhibited in life existing outside of God. God wants to be a teacher, perhaps, instead of an operator, a lawmaker instead of a tyrant, a trainer instead of a straitjacket. And besides, why not? God is surely patient enough to wait for evolution to happen.</theological soundbite of the day>--Fangz 02:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Absolutely valid position. Intelligent Design goes not to Deism but to orthodoxy. The idea that the creation of the world's 7 days in Genesis might be 7 billion years goes to orthodox, non-Deist, thinkers. However, this is not really what Voltaire and his deists were going on about. They specifically wanted a rational and non-interventionist and dispassionate God, which is not a Christian, Jewish, or Islamic God. Geogre 11:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Another belief similar to the "watchmaker" idea is that "God is dead". That is, God created the universe but at some point ceased to exist. A variation might just have him being "elsewhere" and not concerned with Earth at the moment. Both of these beliefs require God not be omnipotent, of course. They have the advantage of explaining the apparent lack of strong evidence for current direct intervention by God, despite having references in many holy books to frequent direct intervention in people's affairs by God in the past. Skeptics, of course, would just say that those "miracles" were tricks which couldn't hold up to modern scientific scrutiny. One biblical story in particular seems to support this view. Moses supposedly confronted the Pharaoh's priest and both had their staffs turn into snakes, with Moses's snake consuming the others. Now, if one supposes that Moses was able to change his staff into a snake by direct action of God, this brings up the question of how the Pharaoh's priest changed his staff into snakes. Either his god did it (which contradicts the monotheism presented by the Bible) or it was just a "magic trick" (say with hidden snakes up his sleeve). If his was a magic trick, then why couldn't Moses's snake be the same ? StuRat 13:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, of course, it could be. But maybe it wasn't. Maybe there is one god, and he/she/it intervenes whenever he/she/it wills it. Whether we like it or not, and whether we notice it or not. Halcatalyst 15:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I think that God , to be God (the ultimate, because the watchmaker god may also need a ground of being)has to exist and not exist at the same time, thus have a complete diferent and unfathomable kind of existence...so that means we shouldn't bother about metaphysics too much anyway, I mean it's cool to bother about it and try to understand God, but I really think humanity needs to mature and not kill each other because they have a slightly diferent conception of God!, we should just be mature and thank our oldest brothers which are scientists and try to be like them and contribute to the betterment of life and just be tolerant because we can't claim to know anything, we can only claim to be brave enough to investigate.--Cosmic girl 18:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Agree 100% with "a complete diferent and unfathomable kind of existence." One could say that God... no, let's not say God... THAT WHICH IS, or maybe just IS, or maybe no-name, whatever... is (what is the meaning of is?) not only nothing (via negativa) but beyond nothing. Ganz andere (totally other) and also Ground of Being (GOB). Halcatalyst 23:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Harris County
Can you(or anybody) please give me a map of Harris County in Texas, with all the city limits and city borders shown on it?(Post it on Wikipedia)
- Go to www.google.com, pick Images, and type:
- "Harris county, Texas" map
- and you will find many maps. StuRat 05:58, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Date of birth
Do anyone know when ariyan A. johnson was born. she played on the steve heavry shoe
- What? Sir/Madam, can you please write more clearly? Let's see, did you say, "Does anyone know when Ariyan A. Johnson was born? She played on The Steve Harvey Show."? If so, the best I can figure is that she was born about 1976. Why? Because, in the film Just Another Girl on the I.R.T. (1993), she plays a 17-year-old. Of course, knowing the film industry a little too well, the fact that she played a 17-year-old isn't saying much.
- The visitor would do well to go to IMDB and looking up the television show. He can then go to the cast list and check the biographies of the actresses. The birthday should be listed there. I don't think Wikipedia has an article on that actress, and her presence may be a little small for a biography at this point. Geogre 15:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
January 24
Time
Is there any evidence that time exists and is not just a misconception that our minds have created for us?
--24.29.92.197 00:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- See the article Time. Halcatalyst 01:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Good question. I remember things that I believe to have occured in the past, and my present sensory experiences seem to agree with them, but really there's no way I can be certain that the past actually existed, because I have no way of experiencing it directly. I highly recommend Bertrand Russell's The Problems of Philosophy for a deeper look at this issue. —Keenan Pepper 01:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- You wouldn't know it from the article on memory (written from a psychologist's point of view), but most brain scientists hold that memory is reconstructed through neural associations. Neurons give "hints" to one another to fire or not. The foundation of human memory is not discrete, like bits in a computer. That's the real reason we can't experience the past directly: It no longer exists for us. The brain operates only in the present. Halcatalyst 03:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- The movie What the Bleep Do We Know!? had an interesting section related to this, namely that the human brain doesn't distinguish between memories of things and visually seeing them. You'll have to watch the movie for a better explanation, as I any explanation I give wouldn't do it justice. {{subst:WAvegetarian/sig}} 04:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- You wouldn't know it from the article on memory (written from a psychologist's point of view), but most brain scientists hold that memory is reconstructed through neural associations. Neurons give "hints" to one another to fire or not. The foundation of human memory is not discrete, like bits in a computer. That's the real reason we can't experience the past directly: It no longer exists for us. The brain operates only in the present. Halcatalyst 03:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, I hated that movie so much. The quacks and pseudoscience were endurable, but the worst part was when they chopped up the interviews of real physicists to misrepresent their views. It was just awful. —Keenan Pepper 05:10, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Quacks? Psuedoscience? Are you perchance suggesting that housewife wasn't really channelling a 35,000 year old warrior spirit who came from the continent of Lemuria and conquered the city of Atlantis? Pfft. I suppose you think it was more likely that she was just, I dunno, making it all up for fame and money or something. As if! ;) --Noodhoog 12:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
If you question the existence of time, why not question the existence of the universe ? Perhaps it's all just somebody's dream. Still, even a dream implies that things are changing during the course of the dream, which, of course, requires time. 06:10, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- "Is there no change of death in paradise?" Wallace Stevens wanted to know.
- Does ripe fruit never fall? Or do the boughs
- Hang always heavy in that perfect sky,
- Unchanging, yet so like our perishing earth,
- With rivers like our own that seek for seas
- They never find, the same receding shores
- That never touch with inarticulate pang?
- Halcatalyst 14:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- That gave me goosebumps! I need to read more Wallace Stevens. —Keenan Pepper 17:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, hey, nobody's stopping you! ;P In the combination of language and ideas I've found no peer to Stevens. He wanted to... not find... not just believe in... not create, exactly... but by means of words to co-create reality, what he called the "supreme fiction." He knew it had to be ordered, somehow.
- Oh! Blessed rage for order, pale Ramon,
- The maker's rage to order words of the sea,
- Words of the fragrant portals, dimly-starred,
- And of ourselves and of our origins,
- In ghostlier demarcations, keener sounds.
- From "The Idea of Order at Key West," found at [2]
- Well, hey, nobody's stopping you! ;P In the combination of language and ideas I've found no peer to Stevens. He wanted to... not find... not just believe in... not create, exactly... but by means of words to co-create reality, what he called the "supreme fiction." He knew it had to be ordered, somehow.
- A few of his best-known poems, including "Sunday Morning" (quoted in the next-to-last passage above), "Anecdote of the Jar,""The Emperor of Ice-Cream," Peter Quince at the Clavier, "The Snow Man," and "Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird" are found at web-books.com.
- Halcatalyst 22:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- A few of his best-known poems, including "Sunday Morning" (quoted in the next-to-last passage above), "Anecdote of the Jar,""The Emperor of Ice-Cream," Peter Quince at the Clavier, "The Snow Man," and "Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird" are found at web-books.com.
- Stevens is absolutely sui generis, and none of the people who imitated him have even succeeded in aping him, IMO. (I once had a student write of "The Anecdote of the Jar," "The white man had not yet settled east Tennessee in 1924.") Stevens was quite hostile to Christianity, and I've always thought that was strange, and he himself had a bit of an inferiority complex according to some anecdotes from Donald Hall. Magnificent poet, though, and the only methadone for the morphine of Stevens that I've found has been A. R. Ammons. Geogre 11:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, he was hostile to Christianity, but he
- often heavily uses its major symbols, e.g., the day is
- Stilled for the passing of her dreaming feet
- Over the seas, to silent Palestine,
- Dominion of the blood and sepulchre.
- ("Sunday Morning")
- retells and interprets stories from the Bible ("Peter Quince at the Clavier"),
- and even alludes to patristic fathers (Jerome), "Notes Toward a Supreme Fiction," III.1),
- always asking, "What am I to believe?" (ibid., III.viii).
- To me, his quest was always religious, never atheistic; he was always a pilgrim, a seeker, skeptical though he may have been. Halcatalyst 12:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, he was hostile to Christianity, but he
- Indeed, those between the wars (i.e. Modernism) were constantly seeking Order, whether in Marxism or Fascism, and those immediately after the war rejected the quest for Order in favor of the individual (from the early Sartre and Camus on to the 1950's and Beat poetry and its desire for a mystical persona to the 1960's retreat to Confessional poetry).
- However, on the subject of the question, the reader could consider Henri Bergson in addition to the usual run of names (Augustine of Hippo et al.). Geogre 13:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Freud and Lenau
In The Interpretation of Dreams, Sigmund Freud makes a reference to a poem by Nikolaus Lenau "which puts infanticide and the prevention of children on the same plane." What is this work? And, what other figures have put forward the same argument? --Tothebarricades 05:50, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Here's an extensive list of the texts of Lenau's lyrics and other works (in German) on the Web. --Halcatalyst 20:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- According to the Joyce Crick translation of Dreams, the most likely poem Freud was referring to is "Das tote Glück" ("Dead Happiness"), though, as the footnote says, "seems to be about infanticide; it could imply abortion, but not contraception." --Fastfission 03:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
California Highway Patrol Jurisdiction
Can the CHP pull me over on a side street? They did.... Was it legal? What is their jurisdiction?
- The agency has specific jurisdiction over all California state routes, U.S. Highways and Interstate highways, and also serves as a statewide patrol force, especially in unincorporated and lightly populated areas of the state. --from California Highway Patrol#Highway Patrol Duties --jh51681 06:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- (after edit conflict) Was the place that you got pulled over anything like what is described in the first sentence of the "Highway patrol duties" section of the California Highway Patrol article? If so, I'd say, yes, they were more than likely within their jurisdiction. And think about it from their point of view. If they weren't in their jurisdiction then why waste their time giving you a ticket that they know will be thrown out of court when the judge finds out that they were overstepping their bounds? I'd consult a lawyer if I were you though since I'm just some idiot on the internet. Dismas|(talk) 06:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Is Joe Torres dead?
Given that the article says he is, but doesn't give a source, is he? Alphax τεχ 14:13, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Try Google... [3] --Kainaw (talk) 15:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Alright, but is there are citable source which confirms this, eg. Social Security or an obituary? Alphax τεχ 09:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
life slave
a realitive of mine save the life of a young chinese woamen during ww1 she was cut and bleeding he patched her and saved her life. i often heard her call him master when they thought they were alone so one of the last times i saw them i asked her she was much easier to talk to then he was he saved my life he is my master. when you save some ones life there life is yours he saved my life when i was seven he was seventeen he would not take me then though i wanted to prove my worth he finaly consented to me being his mate after i had blosemed the first time. but i have always done my best to keep master happy. just how popular was this life slave and how deeply imbeded was it and was it like she said till her master dies and beyound. for she killed her self once her master was buried and all things taken care of
- Your writing is very hard to read. You need to learn to use capitalization properly and learn proper sentence structure so we can understand you. StuRat 14:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- I can't find a question mark in that whole block of text, so I'm assuming there's no question. —Keenan Pepper 17:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Is the idea of a "Life Slave" that this person has encountered personally have antecedents anywhere? I guess that would be the question. Marskell 17:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- I've heard of this concept before, but thought it was fictional, not real. StuRat 12:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Let me take a shot at rewriting it in actual English:
A relative of mine saved the life of a young Chinese girl during WW1. She was cut and bleeding and he patched her up and saved her life. I often heard her call him "master" when she thought they were alone. Then, one of the last times I saw them, I asked her about this. She was much easier to talk to then and said "He saved my life so he is my master. When you save someone's life their life is yours. He saved my life when I was seven and he was seventeen. He would not take me then, even though I wanted to prove my worth. He finally consented to me being his mate after I had blossomed the first time. But I have always done my best to keep master happy."
Just how common was this life-slave practice and how deeply imbedded was it ? And was it like she said: "'til her master dies and beyond" ? (She killed herself once her master was buried and all his affairs were taken care of.)
- Tha Stu! I think the condition of that woman was not slavery nor sexploitation, as she thought it was mere justice to stay with the guy that saved her life when she was 7. Also, devotion from a woman to her husband is not uncommon.
- Think of the way of life amongst chinese people and of the lack of good translation for a chinese word (dharma, obligation, and also, why not, slavery) "Slavery is a condition in which one person, known as a Slave, is under the control of another" (Slave trade). --DLL 19:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I would think it obvious that if you look at things chronologically the earliest occurrence of this was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. Confusing Manifestation 13:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Canada elections
How come the Conservative Party is in charge? I am an American and slightly confused, it seems to me that the NDP and the Liberals together have more seats than the Conservatives so why don't they work together? arent they both left parties?
- See Canadian federal election, 2006. It has plenty of info on the issues and parties involved. --Kainaw (talk) 15:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
While a Liberal/NDP coalition or deal would be possible, it is parliamentary tradition that the party that gets the largest number of seats gets the first crack at forming a government. The Conservatives will have to deal with the other three parties to get legisaltion passed. If the Liberals and NDP formed a coalition or made an agreement for the NDP to support the Liberals, they still would not have enough votes for a majority, so the Liberals would have to make deals with the Conservatives (who would be very pissed off) or the Bloc Quebecois (who are very opposed to the Liberals), which would be very unlikely. Ground Zero | t 15:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- As the poster infra notes in passing, the Bloc is generally a left-of-center entity, and, so whilst there is surely tension betwixt the LP and BQ as parties, there is less tension on an ideological level, and, so, an LP-BQ-NDP coalition, although surely impractical and wholly unlikely, would not be entirely unrealistic. One observes, for example, that the BQ platform for the recent election lends support to, inter al., the expansion of federal funding of university education, the imposition of a surfeit tax on oil company profits, and the implementation of any anti-terror laws carefully, in view of civil liberties concerns; in broad terms, each of these planks may well be found in the platforms of the NDP and LP. Joe 03:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Canada's parliament has three parts: the Crown (currently Queen Elizabeth II), represented by the Governor General, an appointed Senate and an elected House of Commons.
Canada's branches of government relate to each other by an unwritten constitutional convention that differs from the US where the powers of the various branches of government are written in to a consitution.
By convention, the Governor General is able to exercise the reserve powers of the Queen, but does so within the context of a strict set of traditions. One of the main jobs of the Governor General is to ensure that the country always has a Prime Minister. By tradition the Governor General asks the leader of the party winning the most seats in the election to try and form a government. The leader then becomes the Prime Minister (once he is sworn in) and the party starts to govern. If the ruling party is defeated in the House of Commons on a confidence vote, the Prime Minister by tradition asks the Governor General to dissolve the House and a general election is called.
In 1925 the Governor General ignored tradition and the Prime Minister and asked the party with the next highest number of seats to form a government after the first party was defeated in a confidence vote. Although this was technically within the Governor General's reserve powers, it was outside of tradition and created a constitutional crisis. This second Prime Minister and his government lasted only a few days.
So, the Governor General, in theory could by-pass the Conservatives and ask the Liberals to form a government with the NDP and Bloc (who are both leftest), but this would cause a constitutional crisis and most likely the Liberals would not accept as the Canadian public would punish them severely in any ensuing election for not following tradition. The Queen would also most likely be asked in this case to fire the Governor General (whether she would or not is uncertain, however she would be quite annoyed no doubt by the situation). In the worst-case, it would potentially cause civil war.
As an interesting side note, the Governor General is also the commander in chief of the Canadian military.
- The above is rather misleading. The important point is that the parliamentary system was not designed to require political parties in the first place. The Governor General (GG) selects as prime minister (PM) a person likely to be able to form a government (i.e. a cabinet) that will to command the support of a majority of the Commons. If there are parties, then that's going to be a party leader, but it doesn't have to be the leader of the party with the most seats. However, by tradition they do get the first try.
- In 1926, PM King lost a confidence vote, showing that his government was no longer able to command majority support, and asked for a general election. The GG, Byng, was doing his job when he refused this. The PM serves at the convenience of Parliament, not the other way around; and if Parliament was ready to accept a Meighen government, then it was Byng's job to make Meighen PM. As it turned out, Meighen wasn't able to make a lasting government either; but that doesn't prove it was wrong for him to have the chance. What would have been a real constitutional crisis would have been if he hadn't been allowed to.
- In Ontario, a similar situation played out in the provincial legislature in 1985. At the provincial level we say Lieutenant Governor (LG) instead of GG and Premier instead of PM, but the system is the same. In the 1985 election the provincial Progressive Conservatives (PC), Liberals, and New Democrats (NDP) finished with 52, 48, and 25 seats respectively. The premier going into the election was Frank Miller of the PCs, and he tried to form a government, but was defeated on a vote of no confidence at the first opportunity. The Liberals made a deal with the NDP for support; the LG named the Liberal leader, David Peterson, as premier; and Peterson's government lasted. No civil wars, no crises, just a government that could command the support of a majority of the legislature. Of course, Miller didn't make the mistake of asking for a new election.
- So returning to the new federal Parliament, Paul Martin could have tried to stay on as Prime Minister if he thought he could command the support of a majority of the Commons -- but the Liberals and NDP would not make up a majority. He'd need the firm backing of the BQ or the Conservatives, neither of which is imaginable. The other parties will be more willing to support the Conservatives, since they do have the most seats and someone has to govern, so Harper becomes PM.
- --Anonymous, 11:52 UTC, January 25.
- As a side-note the most famous example of a Prime Minister being appointed who didn't lead the largest party, in fact didn't lead any party, was Winston Churchill. DJ Clayworth 19:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
American Politics - The President's Cabinet.
Is there any information available on whether or not an American President has been less successful or more successful in relation to whether or not his appointed cabinet members are his friends/associates?
- Doris Kearns Goodwin recently wrote a well-reviewed book arguing that Lincoln owed much of his success to choosing not cronies but political rivals for his cabinet.--Pharos 17:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and the current President Bush has been criticised for filling his cabinet with "yes men" (and women). Perhaps the only voice of reason in his first term was Colin Powell, and now he's gone, too. StuRat 23:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
China's population 2004
I cannot seem to find China's or France's Population in 2004. Also, in January 17th, 2005 what was the Japanese exchange rate to American dollars? --12.215.176.30 20:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC) Thank you very much!
- Try the following link [4]. It is from the US Census Bureau. Type in a year and get a list of country populations. It also lets you get projected future populations. --Kainaw (talk) 02:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Try the following link [5]. Enter the date range and currencies and you will get a table of historical exchange rates. --Kainaw (talk) 02:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
January 25
19th Century Eton College
I have a rather strange question, I believe. I would like as much information on the King’s Colledge of Our Lady of Eton beside Windsor (as the Wikipedia puts it) as it was about 150 to 200 years ago (1800’s, 19th century). That is, what it looked like, how it was run, what the rules were, what the classes were, what the decor was, what the uniforms were, what the the prevalent ideas of the time at the school were, etc., etc., etc. I am not British, nor have I been to Eton. In fact, I have only been to England once. But I am writing a book in which one of the characters goes to Eton in that time period. Believe me, I wouldn’t have that in the book if I could help it, but it is unavoidable. If you are a historian, an old student (obviously not 200 years old, but still...), a staff member, know others like those, or what have you, I am sure that any and all information you could give me would land me far ahead of where I am now. -24.17.154.203 06:12, 25 January 2006 (UTC) Assistance would be deeply appreciated. Deeply.
- As a starting point, have you read Tom Brown's Schooldays? it may be about Rugby rather than Eton, but it's a very famous novel written by a public school alumnus in the period you seek. Beyond that, there must be innumerable written accounts of Eton (seeing the prominence of its alumni). Have you considered contact the college itself with your request? They must have a historian who could point you in the right direction. --Robert Merkel 04:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, but I don't have a historian (I have no agent, either...). I could contact the college, but goodness! that takes guts I don't have. I guess I could ask someone else to, but, you know, I just am not that forward. Isn't it easier to float in anonymity, here on the Wikipedia, with no one knowing or caring who you are? I know, that's a — uh — "lily-livered" thing to say, but anyway, no, I haven't read Tom Brown's Schooldays. I'll look into other books too. Any other help would, well, help. Anyone?
Ford Focus Commercial -- Music
Does anyone know the instrumental music playing on a current U.S. Ford Focus commercial? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.184.170.73 (talk) 22:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Give us more details! I've heard Vince Guaraldi's "Linus and Lucy" used in a Ford commercial, which is a sin against humanity. Deltabeignet 05:21, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Minor question on Saudi royalty
I have a minor question on Saudi royalty. Abdullah is king and, should he die, the crown prince what-his name becomes king. Is this right? I wasn't really clear on this point. --Blue387 07:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what "crown prince" means. Abdullah's half brother Sultan is the current crown prince. See King of Saudi Arabia for info on how the crown prince is selected. StuRat 11:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Relationship between newly married couples
How many hours per day would a newly married couple have sex between them on an average? (Why I am asking this is that, all these days I was thinking that on an average couples would have sex for half an hour to one hour. But my friend told me that most couples have sex for 3 to 4 hours a day on average). Is is true? I would also like to know how many hours would satisfy a woman.
- Everyone is different. But your friend is lying. And as for how many hours would satisfy a woman ... no woman is ever satisfied. Poisonous she-devils that they are. Proto t c 09:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- LOL, maybe they just want to cuddle ? I believe the frequency of sex will reduce in any relationship over time, both as the newness of the relationship wears off and due to age. That 3 to 4 hours figure might only last for the "honeymoon period". If they live long enough, sex may stop entirely at some point. This isn't necesarily the end of the relationship, just the end of it's sexual phase. StuRat 11:27, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know of any good research on this topic - it is rather specific, after all. I'd guess, however, that newly married couples may have sex anywhere from once a day to a couple of times a week. (People have a lot less sex than we tend to think, you see.) Translating that to hours a day: From 1 hour a day to .3 hours a day, say.
- Satisfying a woman is not a general question. Every woman, like every man, is different. Talk to the woman you're having sex with and find out what she likes. Nothing like communication and compromise to solve just about every problem in a relationship. --George 16:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
There's a great scene in the movie "Annie Hall" - the couple (Allen and Keaton) are shown in split screen, each of them visiting their own therapist. You see her saying "He's insatiable! He just wants sex all the time! Twice a week!". Then you see him saying "I think she's frigid! We hardly ever have sex - only twice a week!" Everyone is different, there is no standard. Grutness...wha? 06:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
ratio of entrepreneurs to working population of USA
What is the ratio of entrepreneurs to working population of USA and the world. Is there any website where the figure for various countries are available?
- "Entrepreneur" is a rather vague word, which could mean the founders of Google but could also extend down to a sidewalk hot-dog vendor who owns his own cart. Without a clear definition, coming up with stats would be difficult. Also, I disagree with your characterization of entrepreneurs as nonworkers. Most of them work very hard. StuRat 11:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't read any such characterization in the question. Entrepreneurs are a subset of all working people. He/she was asking what proportion they are to the whole set. JackofOz 11:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, you could read it that way. StuRat 12:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- With respect, your retraction does not go far enough, StuRat. I think it is the only reasonable way to read it. If I asked "What is the ratio of children to human beings", could one infer I thought children were not humans? Of course not. The question was not about the ratio of entrepreneurs to the entire population of the USA, but only to the working population of the USA. Entrepreneurs are a subset of both populations. Any characterizations were your own invention. JackofOz 00:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- It wasn't a retraction. And no, it could have been meant either way. The terms "managers" and "workers" are sometimes used in a mutually exclusive way, for example. Only the author can clarify what they meant. I also notice you seem to delight in attacking people, for, in this case, at worst a minor misunderstanding of the question. StuRat 01:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- You told the author they had characterized entrepreneurs as nonworkers, when they did no such thing. If you had asked the author whether this was in their mind, I would have had no problem with that. But you didn't ask, you asserted, and you took exception to what you could only have assumed they were thinking. That's why I challenged you. You now admit that only the author can clarify what they meant - but your original answer to the question took the position of knowing what they meant without ever bothering to check with them. It's one thing to read between the lines, it's quite another to assume that as a fact and then criticise the writer for that interpretation, which may have been a million miles from what they were thinking. Your words or anybody else's are not immune from query, and if your statements have merit, they will be able to withstand challenges and queries. I don't resile from the statement that "Any characterizations were your own invention". That was a challenge to your words, not a personal attack on you. I'm sorry if you felt personally attacked; that was certainly not my intention. I reject the claim that I "delight in attacking people". I have no qualms in challenging statements that I disagree with, and I expect the same in return (and get it). Cheers JackofOz 03:24, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- If my interpretation was incorrect, that's up to the author to say, as you have no more insight into what they meant than I do. And you do seem to spend far more time criticizing other people's responses than actually responding to questions. StuRat 04:32, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't take the position of claiming to know what was in the questioner's mind; you did that, and in so doing, attributed to them words they never used. That was what I objected to. And I'd do it again, willingly. You'd do the same to me, I'm sure.
- A lot of WP editors do nothing but correct the spelling and grammar of other people's work, and nobody has a problem with that. Contrary to appearances, I don't trawl around looking for the next thing to criticise. I'm far too busy elsewhere for that. But lately, there have been a lot of people saying things on the ref desk that I just happen to disagree with, so I'm monitoring it a bit more closely than usual. Maybe my planets of communication are retrograde at the moment, or whatever. WP is all about debate, disagreement, discussion, negotiation, to arrive at something we can all agree on. These principles apply just as much in the ref desk as they apply to our articles. People come here seeking answers, and we have a duty not to mislead them, or even be discourteous to them. We can all play our part in ensuring such an outcome, and I play mine in my unique way. Can my approach be improved? Of course. Is this true of just about everybody else? Of course.
- Anyway, thanks for toning down your earlier accusation that I "delighted in atacking people" (which was objectionable and inaccurate) to "criticising other people's responses" (which I can live with). JackofOz 06:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps I toned it down too much. I meant to say you engage in overwhelmingly negative criticism, with very little positive to say to anyone. This is what I object to. Specifically, in addition to your widespread negative criticism of me, you also had negative comments for BluePlatypus under Science, Language and Miscellaneous, causing him to accuse you of making personal attacks against him. You also had negative comments for Kainaw and Freshgavin in Science, Zafirofbloe05 in Language, and both DirkvdM and Yeltensic in Miscellaneous. This seems to be going a bit overboard to me. StuRat 11:45, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- There were about 23 million businesses in the US in 2002, and presumably about that number of business owners. That's I think something more than 10% of the working population.--Pharos 16:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Let's not forget that a lot of people do both - i.e. they run a business and also do unrelated paid work. DJ Clayworth 19:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Movie about college grads
A few years ago I saw a movie about a group of friends who were graduating from college and feeling lost trying to figure out what to do with their lives. I'm trying to figure out what movie it was. It seemed like it was made in the 80s or early 90s. I remember it having John Cusack in it, but I've searched his filmography and can't find it so maybe I'm wrong. I know it had this other actor whose name I don't know but who looks like Craig Kilborn and was in quite a few cheesy 80s movies. In this movie he played a guy who had been in college for something like 7 years. So...any ideas? Thanks, Adam Konner 07:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- St. Elmo's Fire? If that wasn't it, you may want to look over the films that the Brat pack filmed. If it came out in the 80's then there's a fairly good chance that it had one of the members of the pack in it. Dismas|(talk) 09:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Could you be thinking about The Big Chill (1983)? --Halcatalyst 17:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Question about Dutch culture
Is it okay in the Netherlands to gift someone a DVD after watching it (i.e., after taking off its plastic cover) ? deeptrivia (talk) 09:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I would say: depends. If it's a DVD I really like, but is really hard to obtain, and you have it, and you give it to me (even though you like it), I would say: okay. If it's a DVD you received as a gift, watched one time and really didn't like, then I would say I would not find that especially. Merely giving someone something because you're too stingy (Yeah, I know the Dutch are the ones who are supposed to be stingy) to buy a real present and hence give something away that you don't care about anyway is not so cool. I rarely, if ever, give people used stuff, or re-give presents. Berteun 11:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- It's probably in as bad taste in the Netherlands as it is anywhere else on the planet Earth. You can certainly give a used DVD to a friend, but to call it a gift (Christmas, birthday, etc.) seems quite gauche. --Nelson Ricardo 11:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I would think it would be more acceptable for a DVD than other items, since the quality of the movie should not be reduced by playing it. Also, assuming it's in excellent condition, the fact that it's "used" may not be apparent. They might think you just removed the wrapper to make it easier for them. For some new gifts, I intentionally open them beforehand; to check for missing parts, assemble them, test them, or burn off that horrid residue that fills a house with a burning smell the first time a new cooking appliance is used (why can't they eliminate that at the factory ?). StuRat 12:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, if I got a DVD with the shrinkwrap removed as a present, I'd just assume they'd removed the shrinkwrap to get rid of the price-sticker or something. As long as there's no visible wear, I wouldn't notice or mind. --BluePlatypus 16:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! I guess I'll watch it before gifting. deeptrivia (talk) 05:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Origin of an Islamic story.
I heard the following Islamic anecdote, or legend perhaps. A man goes travelling, but knowing his wife is pregnant, he says to God (or Allah): please take care of the baby. After he returns he finds out that his wife died and has been buried. He goes to the burial ground and digs her up, and finds the baby alive and the mother only partially. He then hears a voice that tells him that that which he trusted to God, God gave him back. But as he only asked for the baby and not the mother, the mother died.
After some Googling, I've found a German article [6], a review of the book ‘Der Schrecken Gottes’ (The terror of God) which mentions that it is ascribed to Umar ibn al-Khattab. Umar is a prominent Islamic figure, yet, I could not find the legend in other places (the review says it's in the reviewed book, but as I'm not living in Germany German bookstores and/or libraries do not abound, so I cannot check it). The story intrigues me though, so, if someone knows it, or knows the details, it's origin, or is able to find a webpage, I would be thankful.
- Maybe that explains why Muslims must pray 5 times a day...if they fail to ask Allah to protect anyone they know Allah will punish them by killing that person. Also, note the male bias in this story. There is no mention that his wife needed to pray to Allah to preserve his life. The subtle implication is that a man's prayers to Allah are more important than a woman's prayers. StuRat 12:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I don't see that implication. Please try and keep away from expressing personal opinions about the shortcomings of a religion. Proto t c 12:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I provide balance by expressing comments about the shortcomings of all religions equally, LOL. StuRat 12:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- That does not make your comments less inflammatory. Let's avoid stirring up people's irrational sides, especially when this is not in a response to a direct question, shall we? --Ornil 17:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- The baby is more important in every culture and religion and animal species too. Do not try to find faults - in our acception of the term - where the story only talks about faith and life. --DLL 18:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Sooooo... is anyone actually going to answer the posted question? =/ —Keenan Pepper 01:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Population of Derbyshire in England in the 1900s and 1910s
Can anyone please tell me what was the total population of Derbyshire in England in the 1900s and the 1910s? Thank you.
- That should be available via the census. Wikipedia does not assemble census data, but the UK government has most of its historical census data online and certainly in print form. If you are in the UK, any central library should be able to get you the census from 1900 or 1910, and then you need to merely look at the various county populations. Geogre 20:31, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Try [[7]]. Jameswilson 00:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the answer. It was most helpful.
- The 1901 population was 620,322, according to an old Encyclopedia Britannica. Grutness...wha? 06:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Roosma, Märt
I am seeking any information available on the artist Mart Roosma. I believe he worked mainly in watercolor. I have located one piece done by him in the mid 40s. I believe he was Estonian, but I'm not certain. Any and all information available would be greatly apprecaited. Also, I would need for it to be presented in English.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Mary M. Hunsicker Valley Center, CA USA
- Google doesn't seem to be a great help in this case. The first link found [8] contains a passing mention of the man, and suggests he did portraits. The second link is the third link [9] and is a shop, offering one of his paintings (this painting) for 350 euro's.
- Other than that, Google is silent. Sorry. -- Ec5618 09:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
whats the difference between nirvana & moksha in hinduism ?
thats it Hhnnrr 20:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- See nirvana and moksha. --Kainaw (talk) 21:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
i have , but they seem very similar to me and i was wondering if someone who has a good understanding of hinduism could give me the differnce in a summarized manner .. thank you , but i still need help
- Sure. Moksha is a relase/separation from the cycle of life-death-reincarnation-life-death... In other words, an immortal. To my knowledge, all of the gods in Hinduism have achieved Moksha and are immortal. Of course, there has to be stories about some god who did something wrong and was sent back into the cycle of life. Nirvana on the other hand is one step further to nothingness. People who try to relate it to Heaven have trouble understanding this. It is not Heaven - that would be Moksha. It is beyond that. It is a state of non-existence. So, it is an escape from everything. --Kainaw (talk) 01:50, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think nirvana is realization of non-dual reality, or in other words absorbtion into everything, rather than escape from everything.
- It literally means to extinguish, as in to extinguish one's existence. Some have claimed that it means to extinguish one's existence in our current realm of being and move on one's true self - so it isn't like you won't exist at all. Others claim it means not existing anywhere, which is the true self. In the heavily Christian influenced western culture the new age meaning has been reduced to being like really in touch with the whole world and everything, man. --Kainaw (talk) 03:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Parliament in the UK
What is the class/social background of current British MPs? The only data I can find is ancient.
- "Class" is a bit of a wishy-washy term, but to give you some idea, a third of MPs went to private schools. Astonishingly, Tories are more likely to be toffs. Mark1 23:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, a Torie is a British Conservative Party member (named after Quenn Victoria), but could you help a poor American out with "toffs", please ? StuRat 23:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- It's a slang term meaning "A member of the upper classes, especially one who is elegantly dressed". And it's Tory, not Torie. Cheers JackofOz 00:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, a Torie is a British Conservative Party member (named after Quenn Victoria), but could you help a poor American out with "toffs", please ? StuRat 23:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Toffs just means the upper classes (by birth and schooling) (as I think you guessed!}. They call the rest of us 'oiks'. BTW, I think the word Tory comes from somewhere else - something Irish? Jameswilson 00:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- See British Whig Party#Name and Tory#History - basically, both are outlaws. Accurate! Sam Korn (smoddy) 00:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)]
- ...and neither name has anything to do with Victoria! Grutness...wha? 06:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- See British Whig Party#Name and Tory#History - basically, both are outlaws. Accurate! Sam Korn (smoddy) 00:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)]
- The source of the article referenced by Mark1 is "The Educational Backgrounds of Members of the House of Commons and House of Lords" (PDF) by the Sutton Trust, 2005. According to this, about 18% of New Labourers and 59% of Tories went to private schools. --Heron 22:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
January 26
Opera performances in December 1938 in Paris France.
How can I find if there were any performances in the Paris Opera house in late December of 1938? Also, if there was, how can I find the dates, and the primary performer's names? I am not looking for a specific opera at that time, any will do, as long as it was performed in the Paris Opera House. Any assistance will be greatly appreciated.
- Looking around the best I could find is the Henri Tomasi ballet Les Santons which premiered there November 18, 1938. If you want any more detail, you should probably just go to your local library and see if it has a history of the Paris Opera.--Pharos 04:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- A standard method would be to go to a research library and peruse the microfiche archives of a Paris newspaper, such as Le Figaro. This would of course require you to understand French. Good luck with your novel or script :) --Robert Merkel 04:41, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
vatican
I heard about a conection of the vatican and the masons in the History channel...does anyone know anything? --Cosmic girl 01:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- [In 1984], the pope imposed excommunication on Catholics who were Masons. An anti-Mason web site which quotes from the New Catholic Enclyclopedia is vitriolic against them. I warn you that this site represents extreme right-wing political and religious views. Our article on the Vatican doesn't say anything about the Masons, but if you follow up, the links from both places might lead you somewhere. But be careful they don't lead you where you don't want to go :P. Freemasonry is another product of the 18th century Enlightenment. Many Catholics, including Mozart, were members. One of the popes shortly after Mozart's time condemned the... what shall we call it... movement. Halcatalyst 03:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- The Masonic movement has its own religious rites (Scottish rite masonry) and it is a secret society. The Catholic Church has been hostile to both secret religious rites (for obvious reasons) and secret societies (as they purportedly sought to infiltrate the avenues of power). Masons have been under excommunication in Catholic nations for centuries. In the 19th century, the Masonic movement was at its greatest power, probably, with virtually all of the highest politicians in Protestant nations belonging. Any other connection, such as the Masons being inheritors of the Templars and the like, is speculative and fodder for febrile conspiracy theorists. Geogre 13:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank you :D , but what I actually heard at the end of the documentary which I would've wanted to see, was that this guy ( he was bald and had a mustache and was about in his late 40's) got killed because he knew too much about the nexus of the vatican and the masons that's quite literally what I heard.and it made me really curious haha.(like everything basically :|) --Cosmic girl 15:43, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- The show was probably about Roberto Calvi's strange death in 1982. You can read all about Vatican implication in the article and follow up on the Masonic connections all you like. There are plenty, because it's about big money and, supposedly, conspiracies to take over the world. Halcatalyst 17:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Also have a look at our article on Lucian Pulvermacher. He masquerades as "Pope Pius XIII", but is considered an anti-pope. He claims that John XXIII (reigned 1958-63) was a freemason, therefore his election was invalid, and therefore all subsequent popes including Benedict XVI are invalidly elected popes. He was reported as having died a few weeks ago, but that claim is disputed. JackofOz 00:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Upcoming elections in nigeria
Dear sir/madam, I need to know exactly when is the date for the upcoming elections in nigeria. And is the PDP going to put candidates to be elected? Please have you answer sent to <email removed> Respectfully Amr Saad --84.18.72.186 06:47, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Elections ae scheduled for 2007. Information about the Politics of Nigeria is easily available. Whether the PDP puts up candidates remains to be seen, of course. Halcatalyst 14:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Nato Doctrine
What is the current NATO doctrine since 1991 I believe? It's not in the article, would be good to list the evolution of its doctrines, however. 83.5.226.238 07:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think NATO has a clear post-cold war doctrine. Some possible uses are intervetion in countries which have invaded others, are engaging in genocide, or are supporting terrorism. I also think it may need to take action against Iran when the UN refuses to act to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons (due to Russian and/or Chinese vetos in the Security Council). The US is stretched too thin right now to invade Iran on it's own, and bombing alone may not be effective, as Iran is building their uranium and/or plutonium refining capacity deep underground to make it bomb-proof.
- In my opinion, a military alliance of the "good countries" is needed. The UN is not effective due to the veto power given to countries which don't much care about genocide, etc. China, for example, has oil interests in Sudan so would veto any attempt to stop the genocide in the Darfur region. Russia has business interests in Iran and might veto any attempt at sanctions against Iran and would almost certainly veto any military action that could be taken against Iran.
- I also think NATO should be broadly expanded to go beyond the "North Atlantic" (countries like Turkey are already a stretch under that definition). Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and many new countries in the Americas could be included. I would avoid including any which support terrorism (which pretty much leaves out most of the Middle East) and any ruled by dictators (China, Cuba, many in Africa, etc.). StuRat 15:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- You're not trying to imply that there are countries with right of veto on the Security Council that might overlook a country's human rights abuses because it favour them politically, or worse, supply them with oil are you? Horror of horrors! </sarcasm> DJ Clayworth 19:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- We shall see soon. I suspect that Iran will be referred to the UN Security Council within a few weeks, at which time it will cut oil production to "punish" the world. The US, England, and France will most likely support sanctions against Iran, despite this, but perhaps not Russia and/or China. Iran certainly has a long record of human rights abuses, but the issue at this time is their nuclear ambitions. StuRat 20:32, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- I believe you are referring to an annoucement of policy made by Bill Clinton and supported by NATO at its general meeting in 1993-4 or thereabouts. I believe the policy regarded military interventions in Europe being NATO's sphere of influence and was applied both in the Bosniac and Kosovar conflicts. See our article on Bill Clinton, Foreign Policy section, and see if that helps. Geogre 16:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Maps of Counties with City Limits
Can you(or anybody) please give me the links to websites which contains maps of these following counties, WHICH SHOW the borders and limits of the incorporated cities and towns in them:
Harris County, Texas Fairfax County, Virginia Prince Georges County, Maryland Montgomery County, Maryland Loudoun County, Virginia
(Post them on Wikipedia.)
- When I was asked about Harris County, Texas I replied by showing you how to do the search yourself using Google. We aren't your slaves here, you know. You should be able to do this type of search for yourself. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Harris_County for a reminder on how to do the search. StuRat 11:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- The Census Bureau's [factfinder.census.gov FactFinder] is good for this. You can do a reference-map search for the counties, then use the "boundaries" tap to make the map show "places." Unfortunately, the maps won't disciminate between incorporated municipalities and census designated places, so you'll have to look up each "place" mentioned on the map to see whether it has its own government. -- Mwalcoff 22:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Townships in the USA
In the USA, what is a civil township?Is the township the same kind of political entity as incorporated cities,town,villages, and boroughs?Are townships political entities that only exist within counties? (Let's just talk about townships in the Midwest and Southeast.)
- See civil township. -- AJR | Talk 14:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Townships differ among the states. Some states don't have townships. In some states, townships have similar powers to cities and villages. In other states, townships have few powers. States differ as to whether cities and villages are parts of townships (as in Indiana), separate from townships (as in Pennsylvania) or either-or as the case may be (as in Ohio).
- I've never heard of a township in any state crossing county lines or existing outside of a county. That's presumably because townships are created as subdivisions of counties.
- In Ohio, townships have fewer powers than cities and villages. They generally cannot pass their own ordinances, and they cannot enact an income tax. They can have a police department, but it ranks below the county sheriff's office. They can adopt zoning, but the county must approve any plans or changes. Now, townships can adopt "limited home rule," so some of the above may not be applicable everywhere. -- Mwalcoff 22:44, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
German Casualties in World War II
Dear Wikipedia,
Where can I find information about the distribution of German casualties in the WWII by front: How many people/arms did they loose in Russia, in North Africa, in Europe, etc. ...
Thank you very much, Alex L.
- See WWII, and in specific, World War II casualties might be helpful. tiZom(the man) 14:47, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Roman torture and persecution
Is there any historical evidence for the torture and persecution of early Christians by the Romans? I have heard accounts of Nero feeding Christians to lions and other such disturbing acts, but i cannot find any historical proof behind this. Was the feeding of criminals to lions and tigers a common spectacle in roman provinces?
The little information I have found refers to Christians being persecuted because they believed in one God, and that they were fed to lions in the circus, and killed by gladiators for sport. I still cannot find any historical references to these events.
- Have a look at our article on martyrdom. Halcatalyst 17:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Roman events such as Venatio also detail this topic.
- Tertullian wrote (Apology, ch. 40) If the Tiber rises as high as the city walls, if the Nile does not send its waters up over the fields, if the heavens give no rain, if there is an earthquake, if there is famine or pestilence, straightway the cry is, "Away with the Christians to the lion!" He was probably exaggerating, but we know that damnatio ad bestias ('condemnation to the beasts') was a Roman method of execution, and Christians were certainly executed often enough. —Charles P._(Mirv) 17:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- There is plenty of evidence of actual persecution. See here. As for how often they were killed by wild animals, I don't know if anyone could say. Fighting (or being fought by) wild animals was a common form of gladitorial combat though, called Bestarii.--BluePlatypus 18:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Christians were persecuted, tortured, and killed by the Romans. The Romans were, in general, quite tolerant of other religions. They allowed Jews to practice their own monotheistic religion, after all. There were also many other religions and cults throughout the Roman Empire. The Romans even copied their religion from the Greeks. The difference with Christians is they taught that anyone who didn't believe in Jesus would burn in hell, and the Romans took that as quite an insult. So, it was essentially the Christian's intolerance toward the Romans which lead to Roman intolerance towards them.
- With all due respect, bullshit. Cite either a Christian or pagan source that even gives that reason, let alone calls it a major reason, for persecution. alteripse 21:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- This site supports my statement that Romans were generally tolerant of other beliefs and Christians were not:
- "Gibbon debunked the myth of Christian martyrdom by deconstructing official Church history that had been perpetuated for centuries. Because the Roman Church had a virtual monopoly on its own history, its own Latin interpretations were considered sacrosanct, and as a result the Church's writings had rarely been questioned before. For Gibbon, however, they were secondary sources: The same Latin documents translated by someone else. Gibbon eschewed these, and never referred to them in his own history. This is why Gibbon is referred to as the "first modern historian", and thus, his interpretations were deemed pagan."
- "According to Gibbon, Romans were far more tolerant of Christians than Christians were of one another, especially once Christianity gained the upper hand. Christians inflicted far greater casualties on Christians than were ever inflicted by the Roman Empire. Gibbon extrapolated that the number of Christians executed by other Christian factions far exceeded all the Christian martyrs who died during the three centuries of Christianity under Roman rule. This was in stark contrast to Orthodox Church history, which insisted that Christianity won the hearts and minds of people largely because of the inspirational example set by its martyrs. Gibbon proved that the early Church's custom of bestowing the title of martyr on all confessors of faith grossly inflated the actual numbers."
- Here is another source showing how tolerant the Romans were:
- "However, the evidence suggests that the routine policy of the Roman elite and imperial bureacracy was not persecution for the first two centuries of Christianity. In fact, to characterize the Roman response to Christianity far overstates the matter. By and large, members of the Roman elite ignored Christianity. If notice of Christianity was forced upon them, they tolerated it if they could."
- And later in the same source is the suggestion that Christians actually wanted to be martyrs:
- "This laissez-faire policy, however, might be irrelevant to a committed Christian. We have accounts of Christians who virtually assaulted Roman governors with their assertions of Christian identity."
After Christianity became the official religion of Rome, then the Christians went about persecuting others. This perhaps culminated in the Crusades or the Spanish Inquisition, many centuries later. StuRat 19:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
"Criminals destined for a fate without hope were nevertheless well fed in order to fatten the animals....A special effort had been made to bring these brave animals from abroad to serve as executioners for those condemned to death." - Apuleius, The Golden Ass (IV.13)
"Christian martyrs often suffered the same fate. Saturus, the priest of Perpetua and Felicitas, who died with them in the Carthage arena (AD 203), first was bound to a wild boar, which turned instead upon the venator, mortally wounding him. He then was tied to a bridge and exposed to a bear, which refused to leave his cell (cavea). Finally, he was exposed to a leopard, whose bite bathed Saturus in so much blood that the crowd, mocking baptism, taunted "Well washed! Well washed!" (Passio, XIX, XXI)."
- Once more, there has been something rather inaccurate offered. The reason the Romans persecuted the Christians had nothing to do with Hell. It had everything to do with why the 2nd Jewish Revolt occurred. After Augustus, there was an emperor cult. All Romans were required to venerate Augustus, Tiberius, Claudius, and the rest who had died as gods. The Romans were tolerant of other polytheistic religions. They ignored monotheistic religions, as long as those practitioners admitted the divinity of Caesar. For the Isis cult, this was not a problem. Mithraism had more trouble, and it was persecuted. The Jews would not allow a statue in the Temple. Christians would not sacrifice. The second factor was when noble Roman ladies were commanded to marry and produce little Romans. When these women had made a vow of chastity as nuns, they were put to death. Again, the condemned were always given a choice: sacrifice to the gods and live/marry and live, or don't and die. Geogre 20:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Correct. The Roman's didnt care about personal beliefs of afterlife such as hell or heaven.. They cared about other monotheism religions getting in the way of Roman religion and affairs.
- Not quite correct. Judaism was the one monotheistic religion permitted; the Romans respected it because it was ancient. However, the Romans crucified thousands of Jews for insurrection and other offenses. Christianity was a new religion aggressively seeking converts and proclaiming Christ was the savior-god, not Augustus. Christians were considered atheists who challenged the state religion. Like others who have challenged state religions, they were put to death whenever the authorities felt like it. Halcatalyst 19:49, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Painting by Robert Foster
I am trying to gain information on a painting by Robert Foster entitled "Resting by the Wayside". It depcits A horse, sadled, its rider dressed in a sottish kilt sitting on a log with dead game to his right.
Thanking you for your help in this matter.
Jim Walmsley
- Is it a Scottish kilt or a sottish kilt ? StuRat 19:06, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe a sottish kilt is what you get when you suitly emphazi a Scottish one. JackofOz 00:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
"Why do they call what a Scotsman wears a kilt ?"
"Because anyone who calls it a skirt gets kilt."
StuRat 19:06, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Good one. I like that answer better than the real one, to quote our Kilt article "The word kilt comes from the Scots word kilt meaning to tuck up the clothes around the body. The Scots word derives from the Old Norse kjilt, which means "pleated", from Viking settlers who wore a similar, non-tartan pleated garment." On the painting google tells me that it is a drawing by Thomas Berwick c.1790 & hangs in a gallery in Newcastle. [[10]]. AllanHainey 11:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
1940's big band music
Hi tj: I have a good suggestion concerning music of the 1930's & 40's big band revue.With many "ghost" big bands still playing today P B S two or three hour presantation could cover this as follows: (a)much film is available on the open market that could be used. (b)"ghost big bands could be used for the live effect. this could be done in 10 or 15 minutes for bands as Harry James,Tommey Dorsey,Jimmy Dorsey,Guy Lombardo which would give a two or three hour P B S presantation . This would complement & complete your musical presentation of the 50's,60's&70's which you did a fantastic job. Thank you musically John John J Czerwiecki 33 Graham Drive Chicopee Ma 01013-3605 413 594 6265 (Saving you from the spammers) --66.103.2.149 18:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- If you have a programming suggestion for the US Public Broadcasting System, might I suggest you send them to PBS at [11] ? StuRat 19:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Maryland front passenger seat laws
I've searched www.maryland.gov, and couldn't find the answer to this question. Is there a requirement to ride in the front passenger seat? I think I heard once that you had to be 12, 100 lbs, or 5'2", but that probably wasn't accurate. The only information I can find on google amounts to the child safety laws, which deal with car seats, and fines on children under 16 riding without seatbelts. Any help on this (seemingly impossible) question would be greatly appreciated! 68.49.175.198 18:04, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Try Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration. Under "About MVA", "Rules of the road" doesn't state anything on such a requirement except the following: Maryland law requires everyone seated in the front seat must have their seat belts fastened. If age 15 or younger, they must always wear a seat belt regardless of where they are seated. Children under 6 and those who weigh less than 40 pounds must be in a child safety seat. Any passenger in a car being driven by a person with a provisional driver’s license must also use a seatbelt or a child safety seat. --BluePlatypus 18:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Safety people recommend that children not ride in the front seat because they could be injured by airbags or be thrust into the windshield in a crash. But it might not be a law in the state. -- Mwalcoff 22:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, I guess what I'd been hearing was a reccomendation by some manufacturer. 68.49.175.198 16:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Berlin History
Where in Berlin was the famous crossing point from east to west from 1961-1989 --195.92.67.75 18:10, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Are you thinking of Checkpoint Charlie? It was on the Friedrichstraße. —Charles P._(Mirv) 18:15, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
literature
What is the 'foul fiend' mentioned in shakespeares king lear --195.92.67.75 18:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- That looks like a homework question. Read the passage. Geogre 20:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- "Dirty devil"? Halcatalyst 19:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
penguin books
As what have penguin proposed to rename Evelyn Waugh's novel 'vile bodies' --195.92.67.75 18:15, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- It is on Penguin's website as Vile Bodies. [12] --Kainaw (talk) 18:42, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Guy Fawkes
What was Guy Fawkes real first name --195.92.67.75 18:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- If Guy isn't really his first name, you can burn me in effigy. See Guy Fawkes. StuRat 21:28, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- According to one of our links, he was born as Guy, but in around 1596 he adopted the name "Guido" and used it for the rest of his life. JackofOz 00:36, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Which, it must be said, is just another form of "Guy". =P —Keenan Pepper 01:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- True, but GF must have had his reasons to prefer one over the other. I've often wondered why he used an Italian form when he lived in England. Maybe he was like me - I was born John, but I don't like that name so some years ago I adopted Jack. The names may be etymologically related, but to me they have very different connotations. JackofOz 02:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Probably because he was baptized as a protestant with the name of Guy and he adopted a more unambiguiosly catholic name of Guido from the staunchly catholic Italy. MeltBanana 14:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- A plausible theory. JackofOz 22:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
age of marriage in Quebec c. 1980
Does anyone know where I could begin to look for information on the change in the age of marriage following the election of the Parti Quebecois in the late 1970s? My understanding is that before that, it was absurdly young, maybe 12 years old for girls, and the PQ came in with a strong feminist platform and modernising instincts and raised it to 16 with parental consent and 18 without. Am I correct so far? But what I really want to know is how many girls were married after World War II at ages that would be illegally young now. I don't expect anyone to have the data at the tips of their fingers, no matter how wonderful Wikipedia is. But perhaps you can point me towards some named organisations or individuals who might know. Thanks.18:24, 26 January 2006 (UTC)BrainyBabe 18:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
civil harassment
There is a difference in the law regarding the usual procedures for a civil matter and those for a criminal matter. That is plain BUT...There is a third form of legal matter that is catagorized as "civil harassment" and apparently the procedures are different from the other two. I am trying to discover how to deal with a civil harassment matter, particularly how one knows what is the time to respond to a request by a plaintiff (complaint) for relief from the court from alleged harassment.(restraining order) I cannot locate anything in the California Code of Civil Procedure to elucidate this third system of law. It seems to be mostly civil but smacks of criminal too in a way. There are special forms by the judicial council with the prefix of CH ( CH-100 etc) but they do not offer many clues to procedures. Is this an emrging syatem with no set rules or is there some special set of rules written somewhere that apply to these types of matters? I think there are many such cases being heard each day. Maybe this is only in California.
- You are talking about something that is nationwide in USA and also in many western nations. If you have been served by some complaint, then you need to see a lawyer. If you cannot afford a lawyer, then ask the court about getting you a public defender. A person who tries to represent him or herself has a fool for a client. Civilians may file a variety of complaints, both civil and criminal. For example in a family dispute, one family member can have a court issue some decree for other family member(s) to stay away from them, and if they violate this, call the police to arrest whoever for violating the stay-away order. It varies from locality to locality how good or bad the police do on responding to these complaints. User:AlMac|(talk) 08:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Dhammapada
To what degree are the stories in the Dhammapada commentary by Buddhaghosa likely to be fictional?
[13]
‣ᓛᖁ.gif){kind=small}
ᑐ 18:54, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- According to the Theravada Buddhist view, each verse was originally spoken by Gautama Buddha. Exegesis of the verses are preserved in the classic and voluminous commentary composed by Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa in the fifth century C.E. The bulk of the commentary makes reference to the canonical works in the Tipitaka, especially to the most ancient discourses by Gautama Buddha preserved in the Sutta Pitaka. The commentary is reliable, in my view, and I'd recommend this impressive edition of The Dhammapada by Narada Thera. Usedbook 04:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. The stories at the site I found are rather longer than Narada Thera's translations; might they have been expanded upon by someone notable since Buddhaghosa? ‣ᓛᖁ
ᑐ 05:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. The stories at the site I found are rather longer than Narada Thera's translations; might they have been expanded upon by someone notable since Buddhaghosa? ‣ᓛᖁ
- Daw Mya Tin, "has simply culled the facts of the stories and [has] rewritten them briefly." It is not a word-for-word translation of the commentary. I'm thinking he simply returned to the original utterance of a particular Dhammapada verse in the Nikayas and extracted more context than Buddhaghosa thought was needed. Material of minuscule relevance to the Dharma may have been added to the oral tradition before the suttas were commited to writing. This is my view of all religious texts though, even for the Qur'an and the grandiose claims bestowed upon it. Usedbook 15:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
law
In may 1995 lord chief justice taylor granted whom permission to wear trousers and where --195.92.67.75 18:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- I presume this is in the U.K.?
bra size
Which letter denotes the largest bra cup size --195.92.67.75 19:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- That depends on the manufacturer. DD is the largest size in common use, I think. —Charles P._(Mirv) 19:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- While manufacturers have their own designation for sizes above DD (such as DDD or E), the extremely large sizes are commonly falsely named by the adult entertainment industry using whatever sounds interesting. You will often see many D's (as in DDDDD), or random high letters (L, X, and sometimes even ZZZ). It is not baed on a real size just as XXX is not a real movie rating (NC-17 is the "adult only" rating). --Kainaw (talk) 00:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- http://www.figleaves.com/uk/fitting_room.asp?cat=131&cm_re=fr_lndg-_-sizing-_-textlink seems to suggest that common UK and US sizes run from AA to JJ.
literature
Which is the only shakespeare play that doesnt contain a song --195.92.67.75 19:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Are you sure there is only one? I don't recall a song in Titus Andronicus. It would have been pretty out of place there. Geogre 20:05, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Ahem. See this. :) User:Zoe|(talk) 23:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Oh. :-) I did see that movie. Heck, any film version of Titus Andronicus I wanted to see, since we used to joke that a film version of it would have Titus wearing a hockey mask and the sons saying "Ch-ch-ch-ch! Ha-ha-ha-ha!" It was an interesting film version, but no one sang, except, of course Lavinia. Geogre 01:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- The questioner may not be referring to song sung by the actors. It was common practice to include directions about songs (by the orchestra or at least a minstrel) in the play along with the stage directions. However, I have no idea if Shakespeare had one, none, or many plays with or without such directions. --Kainaw (talk) 02:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Because of the way Shakespeare's works came to be published, authtentic stage directions are far and few between, the classic being "Enter Lavinia, her hands cut off, her tongue cut out, and ravished". - Nunh-huh 02:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Right, and "Exit, chased by a bear" from Merry Wives of Windsor and, according to one wag, a stage direction in a later Hamlet that said, simply: "All die." Geogre 12:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Exit pursued by a bear is from The Winter's Tale. Been there, done it. DJ Clayworth 19:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- D'oh! Sometimes you chase the bear, and sometimes the bear chases you. (I knew it was one of the ones I didn't like.) Geogre 04:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Exit pursued by a bear is from The Winter's Tale. Been there, done it. DJ Clayworth 19:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- And don't forget "Enter mariners, wet". Shimgray | talk | 20:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Henry IV, Part I has the direction "Here the Lady sings a Welsh song" (III:1), and Julius Caesar has the direction "Music, and a song" (IV:3), so it's not unknown. Gdr 13:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Socialism History
Is this entry from "Socialism" correct?
"During the Enlightenment in the 5th, revolutionary thinkers and druggies such as the Marquis de somewhere in France, a guy, and some1 with too long a name, and him, abbé de Mably, and Morelly provided the intellectual and ideological expression of the discontented social layers in French society.
It doesn't sound correct?
- No, it's not. It's vandalism. Looks like it has been fixed, though. Thanks. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:53, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
sociology. four-step change model
can anyone explain the four-step sociological model of change ? (direction of change, rate of change, sources of change, and ability to control change) I do home courses, so i dont have a teacher or anyone to get help from. let me know, thanks =)
- Do you have any text books for these home courses? User:AlMac|(talk) 08:08, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Deaths of the Apostles
Is there any extrabiblical accounts of the deaths and/or murders of the Apostles of Jesus? It is rumor that one died by crucifixion upside down, one beheaded, and another boiled in oil in Egypt. Are there any details about the possible deaths of the Apostles in the earler 1,2,3 centuries?
- The Wikipedia articles contain the Biblical information and then goes on to the stories attributed to them (including all their nasty deaths). See Twelve Apostles and click on each Apostle's name. --Kainaw (talk) 00:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Indus Civilization
What are the reasons for the decline/fall of the Indus civilization? And which theory do Historians find most accurate-- 1/26/06~~
- Also, do check this link for other theories, that the article doesn't cover. deeptrivia (talk) 03:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Universals
Is it reasonable to say that if universals 'exist' then reality is subjective? and if 'universals' do not exist and are only mind constructs then reality is objective? and also, I read in the article that universals are concepts like 'doghood' and can be said to have a separate existence, but then I ask myself, are universals only those concepts? or can for example 'love' be a universal? or can each experience and feeling have it's universal? this sounds really crazy, but how is research in that area going? I mean, what does contemporary philosophy say about universals?( I hope I didn't cunfusse you much) --Cosmic girl 22:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Cosmic girl, your posts are, uh, cosmically interesting... To briefly tackle this:
- First, I think you're setting up counter-intuitive "exclusivity parameters" in the initial sentences: If X, not-X. I don't follow the first two sentences, honestly.
- "Universals are concepts like 'doghood' and can be said to have a separate existence." This is broadly Platonic and you should look at Plato and its links (...you're either a Platonist or you're not).
- What does X say about Universals? You should read Epistemology as a general suggestion and come to grips with the definition. "Where is the field going in terms of Universals?" is a rather fuzzy question. Specify ("theory of science," say) what you mean and it might be quantified better. Marskell 22:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well Cosmic, in Plato's view, the universals did exist, in a real, tangible sense. Just not in the sensory world. As for how research is going, it's not really going. Most professors of philosophy I've talked to consider metaphysics to be a rather dead subject. (I remember one praising the Vienna Circle for 'killing' it). I'd say the most metaphysical thing recently is Postmodernism, which when applied as an epistemology is basically Philosophical skepticism in a new, clever, wrapper. While it has some good points, it doesn't really make for good epistemology. (If Derrida truely didn't believe in the metaphysics of communication, why did he bother writing books at all?) --BluePlatypus 23:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
haha, very funny BluePlatypus! :D I guess noone is free from being inconsistent. ok, I know Plato thought that universals did exist, and he may have been right, but I am more oriented to think like Ayn Rand,like universals are only constructs of our mind and nothing more. Why do most modern philosophers regard metaphysics as dead? I don't unerstand, I mean, do they have any compelling argument to say this? I mean have they found out some logical problem with metaphysics or whatever? or have they simply realized it's something way to dificult to tackle and given up? how did the Viena Circle 'kill' it?...
Marksell, I couldn't understand your argument because I find it really hard to understand logic statements like 'X is X if and only if X is X' (kind of stupid but still) I can't really understand philosphy like that, I think I do my abstract thinking my own way without crystalizing it that way. I already read about epistemology and I believe I am a skeptical/pragmatist/objectivist of some sort...so I am a hybrid, and I don't know how to define myself, haha. --Cosmic girl 01:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- You might be interested in Phenomenon, Noumenon, and Two Truths Doctrine. ‣ᓛᖁ ᑐ 01:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, the Vienna Circle guys were basically just this group of young Austrians in the '20, who were impressed over how the Sciences had been so very successful at describing the world, and quite disappointed that philosophy had done so poorly, despite a head-start of several thousand years. They didn't feel it was going anywhere. So they developed a radical new philosophy called Logical positivism, which held that if a statement isn't verifiable (can't be shown to be true from observation) then it is meaningless. (Although that doesn't mean it can't have artistic and emotional significance.) So in one big swoop they got rid of all of metaphysics, basically saying "Hey, let's focus on the real world, instead of abstractions." They were very influential. Karl Popper later modified the verifiability idea, to be "statements that cannot be disproven", which is more reasonable since a lot of statements are more easily disproven than proven. That philosophy is still pretty much dominant when it comes to Science. But the world isn't populated only by scientists of course. There are artists too. And they didn't really have much inspiration to draw from that philosophy, which is why we've got postmodernism I guess. I think one of the things that the philosophy professors like about the Vienna Circle guys, was that it really broke the tradition of starting with some metaphysic and building up a enormous, single, logically-consistent philosophy (although Wittgenstein's Tractatus has been credited with that too.. it's in that time-period anyway). --BluePlatypus 02:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I get it, so the main current philosophy of science tends to be logical positivism? in what aspects are logical positivism and pragmatism different? because I find them much alike... and also, is there any philosophy that believes that:
- for usefull purposes like science and technology we should go with what works best and not be so restrained by ethics and subjective things (even if they are real metaphysically).
-is skeptical about the ultimate truth and the nature of reality (skeptical in the sense not that it doubts it's existence, but in the sense that we are uncapable of knowing it and even if we know it beyond doubtwe have the possibility of being wrong).
-doubts naturalism and mysticism equally if it refers to the nature of reality, but on the real world of everyday, goes more with naturalism because it works best.
-in esscence doubts that anything is 100% confirmed and that there is room for skepticism everywhere and in everything, but still functions in the real world and uses reason eventhough it acknowledges that reality may be irrational.
ok quite complicated but that is somewhat my personal philosophy, and I haven't found many that resemble it, besides pragmatism,do you know of any philosophy that is like this or resembles it?.--Cosmic girl 17:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- The first sounds like moral relativism or social Darwinism. Do you believe the ends justify the means? The second is transcendental idealism, I think. In the third, what does "if it refers to the nature of reality" mean? ‣ᓛᖁ ᑐ 17:36, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I tend to think that the ends justify the means. but I didn't ask for separate philosphies,I was more asking for a philosphy that most resembled all of the points I made, if there is any.--Cosmic girl 00:44, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
January 27
education system
hi! i would like to know about canadian education system. i am from other country but recently settled in canada, but i am facing some problems in understanding education system of canada. can u please give me detailed information about its credits system.
- You could start with Education in Canada. —Keenan Pepper 01:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Guiliani
is Mayor Giuliani a republican
- See Rudy Giuliani. --Kainaw (talk) 02:12, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- He is now. He didn't used to be. Taiq
- He's a Republican though on issues - abortion, gays, gun control - he's like a Democrat. --Blue387 23:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- He is now. He didn't used to be. Taiq
The word 'Dutch'
Greetings from Australia At a recent trivia meeting a questian came up as to why the people of Holland are not called Hollanders or Nederlanders but Dutch Reading on your page the history I understand that Dutch is the English translation of the Nederlands is this correct or have I read it wrong As far as I am aware it is the only large country that does not call it's people as a form of the name ie Australia australian America americians Sweden swedes Germany germans ect Hope you can help
From the article Netherlands:
- The English word "Dutch" is akin to the German word Deutsch and has the same etymological origin. Both these terms derive from what in Latin was known as Theodisca, which meant "(Language) of the (common) people". Taiq 08:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- That can't be right. Latin words don't start with "theo" unless they are borrowed from Greek and theo means god, not people. alteripse 18:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- From Greek or German, you mean. It appears that Theodisca (we have a very short article on it) was a medieval Latin spelling of the older Germanic word meaning 'people'. --Heron 22:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- That can't be right. Latin words don't start with "theo" unless they are borrowed from Greek and theo means god, not people. alteripse 18:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- And the Dutch do call themselves 'Nederlander' in their own tongue. Holland is a part of the Netherlands, and for some reason some people call themselves 'Hollander' (again, in Dutch). -- Ec5618 08:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, people from the United States call themselves Americans, since United Stator sounds like some kind of motor part, LOL. StuRat 14:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- The problem with "American" is well discussed. Frank Lloyd Wright proposed "Usonian." It's the most euphonous suggestion so far, but people of the US have been called "Americans" since the 1680s, so it's hard to change now. Geogre 17:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
The direct answer to the question is that in the 16th century the Netherlands and Germany were called Low Germany and High Germany and were parts of a single state. The English called them all 'Dutch', as the word 'German' wasn't in use then. When the two parts separated, we kept calling the Low Germans 'Dutch' because we had closer relations with them than with the High Germans. We started calling the High Germans 'Germans' at the same time. (Ref: 'Dutch' and 'German' in OED.) --Heron 22:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Details appearing on British naturalisation certificates
Can you please tell me whether the original surname in their country of origin of the holders of such certificates and the name of the town they came from, appears on the British naturalisation certificates issued in the 1920s. With thanks.
American Revocable Trust Agreements
Is the text of a Revocable Trust Agreement established in 1990 in the County of Sarasota in the State of Florida open to the public and if so, how can a member of the public obtain a copy? Thank you.
- Simple answer is most likely no. Revocable living trusts that people set up are generally private documents. There could be some caveats that could make the document a public document so if it is important to you you need to hire an attorney in Fla to look into the issue for you. I'm not an attorney and this is not legal advice. See our trust (law) USA article for background information that until rewritten is pretty confusing, sorry. - Taxman Talk 23:35, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
who owns it?
i have tryed to contact them but they do not reply.... as i have heard they work for free if you are the right client...
please advise as i would like to know if anyone has had any luck contacting them.
regards
Mr Hall (OBE)
- Your question was answered here. User:AlMac|(talk) 11:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think that link was supposed to be: this. I am assuming that when you say "it" you mean "Wikipedia". - Akamad 20:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Sultan Ahmed I's Blue Mosque
Hello
I was wondering if you could help me by answering some questions that I have about Sultan Ahmed I's Blue Mosque. Could you please tell me what some of the significant architecture representations are or beliefs and values reflecting the Islamic religion of the: • Iwan-Prayer Hall • Qubba-Domes • Minarets-Towers for the Call of Prayer • Sahn-Courtyard • Sebil-Fountain • Mihrab- In the inside of a Wall in the Prayer Hall facing Mecca • Decoration and colour • light
The question im trying to answer and currently working on is: "How does the style of Architecture of the Blue Mosque in Turkey, Reflect the Islamic Religious Beliefs, Ideas and Expression of Feelings?
Or provide me with some references
Thank you, your help is greatly appreciated
Popocatepetl - a poem
A long time ago when the earth was young, we were required to anylise a phoem which was either about Popocatépetl or contained a reference to Popocatépetl. I can remember very little about the poem other than the fact that it had a profound impact on me. What is the poem called, who wrote it and where can i get of copy of the text?
- Could it be "All the earth is a grave and nothing escapes it" [14], attributed (though perhaps wrongly) to Nezahualcoyotl? Gdr 12:49, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
GDR - Thank you. No, I don't think this is it... bit dark for grade school poetry I think. No... the poem I vaguely remember was about being friends (or perhaps lovers???) And there was something about popocatepetl inviting the writer to be his friend... Whew! I know this is terribly vague but as I say it was a long time ago when things like this were less important to me that they are today!
- Well, this isn't it, but it does have the Popo reference! Geographical Fugue --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:37, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Who was the only president to hold a PhD?
See President of the United States. Gdr 15:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
And Jack Ryan, of course. Proteus (Talk) 15:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- And President Bartlett. (I wish they Wood row over to our articles, where they Wil soon find their answers.) Geogre 15:57, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Are you telling me an intelligent man like the current President Bush doesn't have a PhD ? The only way I can explain that is that his military draft was deferred by intermittent service in the National Guard, otherwise I'm sure he would have stayed in college indefinitely to avoid the draft. Eventually they would have had to give him a PhD just to get rid of him. StuRat 17:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- You must be ignoring all his honorary degrees from small conservative colleges! Don't those impress you? alteripse 18:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- But the question is, can he spend those honorary degrees? Did they come with honoraria? Are they part of his political capital? Halcatalyst 19:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, the link to political capital above is a wrong number. To get the point, you'll just have to know what Bush said about "political capital" the day after the 2004 election. Halcatalyst 19:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- But the question is, can he spend those honorary degrees? Did they come with honoraria? Are they part of his political capital? Halcatalyst 19:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'll bet Bill Clinton held a PhD. At least one of his interns must have been one. DJ Clayworth 19:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Geogre is surpassingly subtle. The answer is Woodrow Wilson. Halcatalyst 19:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- There have been many: Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, Dr. Zakir Hussain, Dr. Shankar Dayal Sharma, Dr. K. R. Narayanan, and the current president Dr. Abdul Kalam. What a waste! deeptrivia (talk) 20:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, if we're including India, don't even bus drivers have PhD's there ? StuRat 21:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, but they're not President. Not yet anyway. JackofOz 21:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- I've heard of bus drivers with masters degrees in India, but not yet with PhDs :) The question was "Who was the only president to hold a PhD?" deeptrivia (talk) 22:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds like they need to upgrade their educational system. I wouldn't feel safe with a bus driver who only has a masters degree. :-) StuRat 22:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- There is another way to look at it - if the bus drivers have masters degrees, then the unemployed must have at least a BS or BA. So, everyone in India is either highly educated or the schools are extremely relaxed. I wonder which one it could possibly be? --Kainaw (talk) 23:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- The not-so-funny reality is that some people in India are highly educated and some have never been to school. Halcatalyst 03:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Competition for jobs is so tough that even highly educated end up being drivers. Despite 35% population being illiterate, there are far too many educated people compared to the number of jobs. By the way, for the same reason (tough competition), getting into college is real hard too. deeptrivia (talk) 15:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't forget Presidents of Corporations and Non-Profits. They are all over the economic landscape, and many of them have advanced degrees. User:AlMac|(talk) 08:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Can someone born in Puerto Rico become President of the United States?
The President has to be a natural-born citizen. If you are born in Puerto Rico (or anywhere else outside the US), and one or more of your parents is a US citizen, you may also be deemed a natural-born US Citizen. See United States citizenship#Through birth abroad to two United States citizens and United States citizenship#Through birth abroad to one United States citizen. Halcatalyst 19:16, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Note that at least two people considered candidates for President have been born in US territories - John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, and Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona before statehood. No issues were raised over either Shimgray | talk | 20:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- When the Governator, born in Austria, first assumed office as governor of California, there was a lot of talk about changing the Constitution so he could run for President. That talk has died down as problems in the state continue to accumulate and solutions are not so easy to find as some imagined. Halcatalyst 21:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- I understood that "a natural born citizen" meant passing 2 tests: (a) being born in the USA or in US territory, and (b) being born a US citizen. It would not be enough to pass only one test. A person like John McEnroe, for example, who was born a US citizen but in Germany would be ineligible for election to the presidency. JackofOz 21:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- But I think anyone born in the US or a US territory is automatically a US citizen. StuRat 22:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, I think you're right. Those people would have no worries. It's only the US citizens born on foreign soil that seem to be excluded (through no fault of their own). JackofOz 23:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think that's right -- I think meaning (b) is the entire meaning of the phrase. Do you have a reference saying otherwise? --Anonymous, 01:01 UTC, January 28, 2006.
- The writers of our article on Henry Kissinger seem to agree with me: "There was even discussion of ending the requirement that a U.S. president be born in America so that Kissinger could have a chance to run." I guess you're saying that the real reason Kissinger is ineligible is that he was not born a US citizen (I assume he was German at birth), not that he was born outside the USA per se. Is that so? Then the Kissinger article needs amendment. I've never contributed to that one, so it seems others have the same wrong idea as I've had for as long as I can remember. Maybe it's something I should add to "the greatest furphy of all time". Of course, you realise what this means? John McEnroe could become US President after all. You can't be serious!! Cheers JackofOz 01:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- FWIW, the Kissenger article eventually gets around to telling us he became a naturalized citizen after fleeing Germany. I suppose "There was even discussion of ending the requirement that a U.S. president be born in America so that Kissinger could have a chance to run." should be changed to "There was even discussion of ending the requirement that a U.S. president be a natural-born citizen so that Kissinger could have a chance to run." since that's the actual language of the requirement. - Nunh-huh 04:15, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- The writers of our article on Henry Kissinger seem to agree with me: "There was even discussion of ending the requirement that a U.S. president be born in America so that Kissinger could have a chance to run." I guess you're saying that the real reason Kissinger is ineligible is that he was not born a US citizen (I assume he was German at birth), not that he was born outside the USA per se. Is that so? Then the Kissinger article needs amendment. I've never contributed to that one, so it seems others have the same wrong idea as I've had for as long as I can remember. Maybe it's something I should add to "the greatest furphy of all time". Of course, you realise what this means? John McEnroe could become US President after all. You can't be serious!! Cheers JackofOz 01:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- George Romney was considered a legitimate Presidential candidate, even though he was born in Mexico to US citizen parents. User:Zoe|(talk) 04:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
In short... Is there a lawyer in the house? Halcatalyst 03:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure a lawyer would be useful. We need a Supreme Court Justice. It's in the Constitution, and so we don't know what it means until the Supreme Court rules on it (and even then we only know that until they rule on it again). I don't know that it's ever come up, but I think it's clear that Ahnold doesn't qualify. The wording was discussed when John McCain first ran for president, as he was born in the Panama Canal Zone, under American control at the time but not American territory; as he was born to American parents no one considered the "natural-born" language a real impediment. - Nunh-huh 04:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Orrin Hatch seems to have a different point of view. He discusses his proposed constitutional amendment here, and makes the point that it is far from certain that people outside US territory are eligible for election to the presidency, not even if they were born US citizens. This and this are not authoritative, but they illustrate the American community's lack of agreement about this question. This article ("Allow foreigners to run for president?") gives some background, but also confuses the terminology. Henry Kissinger himself talks about the issue here, saying: "And I think foreign-born should have a possibility of running for president" (my emphasis). Maybe he was using imprecise wording, but that's the concept that seems to have gained a foothold in the minds of many. JackofOz 07:53, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Historically, a person born in country X is usually automatically a citizen of nation X. However, there is currently an Immigration Reform movement in the USA to try to deny US citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. In fact, some children were apparently not told by their parents that the parents were illegals, then when the children tried to do what is Ok for US children, such as apply for jobs, attend education, or visit neighboring nation, they got arrested by immigration authorities. User:AlMac|(talk) 08:14, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
How many other countries have requirements for high office based on place of birth rather than simply citizenship or length of residence, etc.? It seems a rather artificial requirement — someone born in the US but who spent his entire childhood in another country is eligible whereas someone born abroad but who has lived in the US since the age of 2 months is ineligible, which seems rather strange. Proteus (Talk) 12:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- I believe, at the time those rules were made, it was the fashion to form "blood alliances" by marrying royals from two countries. The Founding Fathers wanted to avoid anything like that happening to the US. Since the US wouldn't have hereditary rule (except perhaps for the Adams, Roosevelt, and Bush dynasties), they weren't concerned with cross marriage but did have another fear, that a "foreigner" would be elected President and would have dual loyalties, thus getting the US into an "entangling alliance", as Washington warned us. Much of this fear seemed justified when the family links of Europe (descendants of Queen Victoria) seemed to cause WW1 to spread from a small conflict to global war as a result of such alliances. To this date we haven't had any of those type of "blood alliances", so it seems to have worked. StuRat 12:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Inhabitants of the Philippines
What amount of people over the ages have inhabited the Philippines? Gelo3 22:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
It was the time before we fir
--64.12.116.72 23:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- What is the question ? StuRat 23:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Nobody knows; he didn't suitly emphazi his question. Perhaps he needs to think about questions before he fir asks them. Cernen Xanthine Katrena 02:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe he was typing and he was shot before he finished the question.
- No. He wouldn't have hit the submit button if he was shot.
- Maybe he was dictating and the typist thought that was the complete question.
- Maybe you need to watch less Python.
- --Kainaw (talk) 19:44, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- I often think one thing, but type another, then submit, then see it is not quite right, and I fix it. Perhaps something went wrong so he could not come back to fix it. User:AlMac|(talk) 22:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- that IP address account is an Aol's, and has been banned to Elfland. --DLL 19:53, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Miscellaneous?
Where/when did the word miscellaneous first come into use and what was its function compared to its modern meaning?--64.12.116.72 23:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC) <--could somebody please put this question on the RD:Miscellaneous page for me, it seems I'm the victem of an AOL based sharedip autoblock, so sadly i cannot edit that page myself--64.12.116.72 23:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Miscellaneous comes from Latin: "miscellus" (mixed) or "miscre" (to mix). As for where to put this, perhaps the RD:Language page would be better. --Kainaw (talk) 23:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- It's miscere, not *miscre (2nd conjugation verb). —Keenan Pepper 07:20, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- As per Merriam-Webster Collegiate, the first attested use of "miscellaneous" in English was in 1637. - Nunh-huh 01:20, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Is renaming a ship bad luck?
I was reading about the accidents aboard the Upholder/Victoria class submarine HMCS Chicoutimi (SSK 879) and I read somewhere that renaming a ship was bad luck. Is it? --Blue387 23:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- There are two answers here. First, luck is a matter of debate all its own. Second, there are many superstitions around boats. Renaming them is considered bad luck. There are psychics (and other con artists) who will gladly accept payment to help your boat accept a new name without too much bad luck. Try this Google search [15]. --Kainaw (talk) 23:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Pretty much everything has been considered good or bad luck at some point. As for whether it actually is bad luck, no. Superm401 - Talk 02:20, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- The two commonest superstitions regarding ship names are: 1) renaming a ship is bad luck; 2) giving a ship a name starting with T is bad luck. I doubt whether either is in any way less lucky, though it's difficult to tell, even with a statistical analysis, since a re-named ship will logically be older than one still with its original name, and therefore more prone to needing repair or other similar problems. Grutness...wha? 02:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- You could still control for age. There's no shortage of data out there. Superm401 - Talk 07:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
January 28
Poems that glorify war
Could anyone point me to some poems or verse that paint a rosy picture of war or conflict, perhaps single combat? --Impaciente 02:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- The Charge of the Light Brigade? —Charles P._(Mirv) 03:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Pace Charles (supra), I am not certain that The Charge of the Light Brigade would generally be seen as painting a rosy picture of war; at the very least, there is a good deal of scholarship that would militate against one's citing the poem as an example of a verse painting a rosy picture of war. Joe 03:24, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- "The Battle of Maldon" [16]; ""Our hearts must grow resolute, our courage more valiant, our spirits must be greater, though our strength grows less. Here lies our Lord hewn down in the dust. ... I am advanced in years. I do not desire to be taken away, but I by my liege Lord intend to lie."; "Le Chanson de Roland" and probably a few more fairly ancient writs. - Nunh-huh 04:05, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
The greatest of all goes back near the start of western civilization: the Iliad. War is the subject, on and on and on. alteripse 04:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
And if you really want to psych the troops up for battle, check out the pre-battle speech in Henry V (play). alteripse 04:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the responses. --Impaciente 04:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Horace had a few. There was a whole industry of Tudor poetry on the soldier going to war, where he would say, effectively, "I loves ya', Babe, but I loves my country more." The list is quite long, actually, and I've been trying to remember which Horace Ode it is that has the "dulce et decorum est pro patria mori" that Wilfred Owen took such exception to. Also, Kipling does have some glorymongering stuff (and some anti-war stuff). Basically, there are too many to pick one. Iliad isn't really one to glorify war, exactly, although the war is glorified. Geogre 04:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
How about a war poem set to music ? The Star Spangled Banner, national anthem of the US, is one of those:
http://www.bcpl.net/~etowner/anthem.html
Note that there are some who wish to change the US national anthem to a non-militaristic song, namely America the Beautiful.
StuRat 06:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- There's also "War song" by John Davidson, Michael Drayton's "Ballad of Agincourt", John Pierpoint's "Warren's address"... Grutness...wha? 06:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
I'd say the people who want to glorify war don't write poems about it. They just do it; glory is a major motivator for warmakers. The depictions of violence are usually left to the novelists and filmmakers. The poets generally have something else in mind: patriotism, courage, camaraderie, etc. --Halcatalyst 15:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe not strictly a poem, but the song referred to in Jingoism might qualify. Also the Lays of Ancient Rome by Lord Macaulay. DJ Clayworth 16:57, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Though containing the Gita, the Mahabharata is sometimes warlike. --DLL 19:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Stars and Stripes Forever Opus #
What is the opus number for John Philip Sousa's Stars and Stripes Forever? --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 05:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- interesting question... this site only numbers his earlier works - most of those numbered are below 40 but also from the 1870s. Opus 131 was in 1881 (President Garfield's Inauguration March), but that's the highest number there is. Stars and Stripes forever is considerably later (1896), so it would theoretically have a considerably higher number. That is, of course, if the numbering was conntinued. It could be that his work was becoming considered "popular" rather than "classical" (always tenuous terms at best), and the numbering may simply not have continued. Grutness...wha? 06:57, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Employees in the People's Democratic Party Of Nigeria
Is John Oscar a National Secretary in The People's Democratic Party of Nigeria --84.18.71.131 07:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- No. Do not respond to any of "his" emails requesting help with fund transfers. They are 419 scams. See Snopes and a listing of false identities (including John Oscar). Superm401 - Talk 07:50, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- (Link edited above) --Anon, 09:45 UTC.
civilization
Why people learn about civilization?
- Do you mean the video game Civ? I learned about it so I'd have an appropriate means of wasting my undergraduate years.
- As for civilizations in general, they've given us the Pyramids, the moon landing, and African slavery amongst a few billion other things of some import. Marskell 08:50, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- I thought that people avoid learning about civilizations so they can believe that everything happening is new and nobody has ever experienced it before. For example, the stock "correction" after the tech bubble was the very first time that anyone has ever lost a lot of money in the stock market. Hurricane Katrina is the very first time a whole city was flooded out by a natural disaster. Bush is the first world leader in history to invade another country to preempt them from taking military action themselves. I am the first person ever to be skeptical of all these "firsts" that the media blabs on about all day. (Please, if you cannot see the humor, do not waste your time responding. I know I'm a (fill in your insult here).) --Kainaw (talk) 18:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- "I did not know that." Johnny Carson --Halcatalyst 15:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- The first to speculate on markets believed that the summer would be hot and the olive crops would be plentiful. He reserved for his own usage all the olive mills around. His name : Thales.
- The first flood is in the Bible. Noah did anticipate.
- No one could anticipate such a disaster.
- Every philosopher believes he is the first person to think. But Stu, your contribution was first quality. --DLL 19:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Carriage Clock presented to Earl Haig early 1900's
Dear sir, Whilst surfing, I came across your site regarding Earl Haig. It reminded me of a brass carriage clock that I was told had been presented to Earl Haig in the early 1900's. As I remember, it was an 8 day clock with a repeater chime. There was no engraving or reference to the manufacturer of the clock or to Earl Haig. When asked, the dealer said that the top of the clock had been skimmed to remove the engraving. Sounded 'Fishy'. I am interested to know is there any truth to this story? Look forward to hearing from you. Best regards, Gordon.
- Sounds rather fishy to me, too. I would ask how he knows these facts. Does he have any documentation of them ? Can he provide contact info for whoever told him these facts ? Is he willing to let you take it to an appraiser for an opinion ? I think you should stay away from this dealer. StuRat 11:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your input. I was interested to find out if anyone knew of a site that may have details or references of presentations to Earl Haig. Thanks again, Gordon.
- That's good, too. If you do find such a clock was given, then you can approach the problem from both ends, starting at the date it was given, going forward in time, and from the present clock, going backwards, to possibly establish a link. This is called provenance, a clear chain of custody from origin to present. StuRat 12:53, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Nigeria
Is the name (FRANCIS OGBO the owner of ASHLAND RESOURCES LTD) REGISTER : 1765460 EAN / BAR : 5765490 INTERNAL REVENUE REGISTER CLEARANCE No. : 3031
Does this company realy exists in:
- 85 RANDLE AVU,S/LERE,LAGOS .BRANCH; 58B OMUOBA
OGBOR HILL-ABA -ABIA STATE NIGERIA
Or is this person a scammer. --212.38.148.226 14:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- The person and company probably exists, but if they ask you to share contact details or money in an email they're most likely part of a scam as discussed in a question a few posts above this one. I recommend you do not respond. - Mgm|(talk) 15:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
See the question just above on the Humanities reference desk. The same old scam started out years ago and now has "evolved" to the Web. What they want is your bank account number. --Halcatalyst 17:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
All-male rock bands with female vocalists
Can anyone name some very well-known rock (or any subgenre thereof) bands which are completely male except for the vocalist? Reperire 15:53, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Ummm... Blondie (band), No Doubt, Gladys Knight & the Pips. If you want more, I'll have to turn my brain on and start thinking. --Kainaw (talk) 18:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Evanescence! --Cosmic girl 19:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Morningwood. Belly, although Tanya Donnelly also played guitar. Big Brother and the Holding Company. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Though it's not listed on the article, Joan Jett's backing band, the Blackhearts, were all men IIRC. --Robert Merkel 00:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Patti Smith Group, Curve, early line-ups of Fairport Convention (more folk than rock), Jefferson Airplane, PJ Harvey (the band - the vocalist is Polly), Katrina & The Waves, Dead Can Dance, Siouxsie & The Banshees... This could develop into a very long list! Grutness...wha? 00:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Cowboy Junkies. Sixpence None the Richer. X-Ray Spex after Lora Logic left to form Essential Logic, which also qualifies. —Chowbok 01:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Len if you want to consider them rock, The Cranberries, Heart though they had two women they both took lead, 10,000 Maniacs, shall we go on? Dismas|(talk) 14:40, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Australian bands (just off the top of my head): The Superjesus, Killing Heidi, Little Birdy, Magic Dirt and Baby Animals. Also George, although Tyrone Noonan did vocals on some tracks. -- Chuq 11:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I swore at myself that I wouldn't enter this discussion, as it's already on the edge of becoming List of male bands with a female vocalist, but if you're going to mention the Australian acts, don't you have to include Devinyls? Also, my favorite band from my youth was Pylon (band). Geogre 14:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Funny you should mention that. I was considering suggesting the creation of just such an article. :) User:Zoe|(talk) 16:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I swore at myself that I wouldn't enter this discussion, as it's already on the edge of becoming List of male bands with a female vocalist, but if you're going to mention the Australian acts, don't you have to include Devinyls? Also, my favorite band from my youth was Pylon (band). Geogre 14:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Steeleye Span (again folk rather than rock), Nightwish (metal, not rock though)... Thryduulf 17:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- The Thatcher cabinet ? --DLL 19:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Architecture
Hi, I am not sure if this is the right place to ask this question but I will try anyways. My question is where can I find good pictures or drawings of St. Giles area of London from the period of the late 1800's and find some good descriptions of the streets and building, it's architecture, etc.?
- Try the Royal Historical Society [17] or the sites on this list: [18].StuRat 12:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
January 29
Brave New World characters
I was just wondering about two characters in the book by Aldous Huxley. Henry Foster and Benito Hoover. I know that the other characters in the book all have their names from historical figures.. who are these two characters' names based on? gelo 01:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Brave New World says "Benito Hoover joins fascist Benito Mussolini and Herbert Hoover, early 20th-century President of the USA." I'd imagine the Henry is from Henry Ford. I don't know who Foster is (see List_of_people_by_name:_Fo#Fost for some possibilities) - perhaps Michael Foster (physiologist). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- I doubt if it would be Stephen Foster, but perhaps John Foster Dulles ? StuRat 12:20, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! gelo 02:13, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Mt. Rushmore
There is a worker's path that goes to the top of Mt. Rushmore. It is normally restricted. Does anyone know if it is ever open to the public (even by guided tour)? I'd like to ensure I visit when I can go to the top. --Kainaw (talk) 01:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Films dealing with loneliness.
What are some films or artistic pieces or literature that deal with the theme of loneliness? gelo 02:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- There are scads of them. Some that come to mind right now: Taxi Driver is well-known, Tokyo Story is my favorite movie ever, and Requiem for a Dream is more recent. As for literature, it's hard to beat the poems and short stories of Dorothy Parker; it's one of her most consistent themes. --George 02:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Separate Tables is a great film that deals with this theme. It's one of my 2 favourite movies of all time. JackofOz 03:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Come to think of it, almost any movie based on a Terrence Rattigan play will have a strong element of this. JackofOz 10:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Just for chuckles, I'll mention one of the lesser known short stories that deals with loneliness, "Silent Snow, Secret Snow" by Conrad Aiken: a child sees snow falling and obscurring the world. (He probably nicked it from the closing image of Joyce's The Dead, but everyone steals from Joyce.) Loneliness is, simply put, one of the most prevalent themes in literature. For some hard core loneliness, though, try The Seafarer, The Wanderer, and Deor in Anglo-Saxon poetry. It's hard to get lonelier than those. If you want something you can read without translation, try Elegy Written in a Country Church-yard by Thomas Gray. Still, though, you can't put your thumb into any Norton Anthology without hitting something about loneliness, whether loneliness because of tragedy (the second section of Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury) or just being a solitary person. Geogre 03:05, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
For a poem leading from lonliness to terror to insanity, try Edgar Allen Poe's, The Raven. StuRat 12:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks everyone! gelo 03:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- If you want a recent film dealing with loneliness, Lost In Translation comes to mind. --Robert Merkel 08:11, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sure they deal with other issues, but the films "Blue bird" and "Nobody Knows" probably deal with it on some level. - Mgm|(talk) 09:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
A good classic film about loneliness is Umberto D. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 10:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Seconded! Umberto D is absolutely explosive. It's one of the saddest films on loneliness ever. Much, much, much less high quality would be Silent Running and My Side of the Mountain, which both deal with happy solitary individuals. (Lost in Translation is another good nomination.) (I wish there were a way I could recomment The Last Laugh here somehow, but it hasn't anything to do with loneliness.) Geogre 11:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- The Beatles produced artistic pieces of literature : songs! Try Nowhere man. --DLL 19:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Another one I've just remembered is the obvious one "The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner". JackofOz 21:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Investigative, analytical, creative?
Sorry for my many queries...but I wanted to know what the difference was between investigative, analytical and creative pieces of work? gelo 02:30, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- An investigative work tries to discover the answer to a question.
- An analytical work tries to display, explain, or explore the relationship between two or more things.
- A creative piece of work is the vaguest term, and instead of having a specific purpose, is characterized by some degree of novelty. In a narrower sense, a creative work may be said to bring into existence something new as the purposive product of the creator's imagination.
- From some perspectives, there would be the expectation that the structure and results of an investigative or analytical work would be constrained to a greater degree by a pre-existing, objective truth about the subject matter of investigation or analysis, while a creative work would be less constrained by reality. These characterizations have been challenged and in some perspectives (especially literary theory) may be rejected. alteripse 02:45, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you! gelo 03:15, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Executive Order W199I-WF-213589
Conspiracy theorists keep talking about a Presidential order named W199I-WF-213589 (or simply W199I) supposedly signed by George W. Bush in July 2001 - but looking for information, it appears to be widespread among conspiracy sites...but none of them can quote it. The best anybody provides is a "partial scan of documents released to the BBC", and a transcript to a BBC interview that references the documents...yet surely they must be online somewhere? Is this whole thing fictitious? Surely Executive Orders are somewhat recorded? http://www.gaianxaos.com/SpecialReports_files/199I-WF.htm and http://propagandamatrix.com/newsnight_greg_palast_report.html (BBC transcript) are the two closest things I can find to "reputable" sources Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 03:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- According to the official White House website, the only executive orders issued in July 2001 were ones about trade with Belarus and energy efficiency in government operations. The document number "W199I-WF-213589" at the websites you mention appears to be some kind of internal FBI case number, not an executive order number. -- Mwalcoff 05:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- You may be interested in this GIF file [19], also from propagandamatrix.com, which purports to be a copy of an FBI printout with that number. Of course, the "printout" is of the sort that anyone with a PC could churn out in about three minutes, so I certainly wouldn't give it much credibility, no matter what the conspiracy theorists are trying to claim it "proves". In any event, it most certainly is not an executive order. That fact alone should be enough to make any rational person question just how much conspiracy theorists care about accuracy. (As an aside, Mr. Palast is quite a character in his own right, to put it mildly.) --Aaron 06:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
![[19]](http://www.propagandamatrix.com/W199I.gif){kind=link}
- Note that the GIF file mentioned above is also so low resolution that you can only make out parts of the heading, not any of the actual content. StuRat 12:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- You ain't gonna get this information. Executive orders are issued purely at the pleasure of the President, and he can attach to them any degree of security he likes; he can certainly claim executive privilege. If the President wanted to withhold the information, it would take a Supreme Court decision to wrest it from him. That's what happened in the case of Nixon tapes in 1974. The Watergate scandal article states, "This issue of access to the tapes went all the way to the Supreme Court. On July 24, 1974, in United States v. Nixon, the Court (which did not include the recused Justice Rehnquist) ruled unanimously that Nixon's claims of executive privilege over the tapes were void and they further ordered him to surrender them to Jaworski. On July 30 he complied with the order and released the subpoenaed tapes." --Halcatalyst 06:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Tie in the House of Representatives
In the Senate, the vice president casts a tie-breaking vote should there be a tie. I was doing some thinking. There are 435 members in the House. Let's assume that every congressman and representative is in the House chamber to vote on an important bill and it is tied with one representative out sick. In the House, who cast the tie-breaking vote should something like that occur? Has something like this ever occured? --Blue387 03:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution specifies that Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member. According to current House rules, If a vote is tied, the presiding officer does not have a casting vote (unless he or she has not yet cast his or her vote). Instead, motions are decided in the negative when ties arise. --Halcatalyst 05:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Hatcatalyst is technically right. However, the speaker of the House generally only votes to break ties. So if the vote comes up a tie, the Speaker breaks it. If the vote is a margin of one, the Speaker doesn't bother voting, because, as Hatcatalyst points out, making the vote even would not pass the bill. So the House never has a situation in which a vote ends in a tie the way it does in the Senate -- Mwalcoff 05:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- I admit I made my comment after only a few minutes of research on Wikipedia, and I was quoting Wikipedia in my last statement. However, of course, the quotation from the Constitution stands. The House, like the Senate, is the sole arbiter of its rules. --Halcatalyst 06:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, I wasn't criticizing. You were correct, I was just pointing out how it works in practice -- Mwalcoff 07:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Not a problem, I wasn't offended :o) --Halcatalyst 15:15, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
N KOREA NUCLEAR
We know that America does not do anything without any reason and his campaign against Iran nuclear program dipicts its intention to capture monopoly over oil resources and above that he does not want EURO to overpower DOLLAR if Iran's opens its oil market for the rest of the world. In the similar manner I want to know the reality behind US opposition for Nkorea nuclear program and what are the gains US can get by doing so? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.95.154.3 (talk) 01:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Please see the articles on U.S.-North Korea relations, North Korea and weapons of mass destruction and Foreign relations of North Korea for some background info on the subject. Dismas|(talk) 06:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
The assumption in your question, that "the US opposes Iran's nuclear program so it can have a monopoly over the world's oil supply and keep the EURO low relative to the US dollar" is quite absurd, for several reasons:
- England and France also oppose Iran's nuclear program.
- Preventing Iran's nuclear ambitions would not give the US any more control over the world oil supply. If anything, the predicted UN boycott on Iran would reduce Iran's contribution to the world oil market and that would increase world oil prices, which is quite bad for the US. Specifically, high oil prices drive the US inflation rate, and make the US dollar worth less relative to other currencies.
- The US is very far from having a monopoly over world oil production, as many oil producing nations are historically and/or currently unfriendly to the US, including Venezuela, Russia, and many nations in the Middle East.
Why is the US opposed to Iran's nuclear ambitions then ? For exactly the reasons stated:
- Iran has repeatedly cheated and tried to develop nuclear weapons while pretending to develop peaceful nuclear energy. The UN has caught them doing this. As a result, the US, as well as most of the world, no longer trusts Iran when it says it's not going to build nuclear weapons.
- Iran, being oil rich, doesn't appear to need nuclear energy.
- Iran has even rejected Russia's proposal to provide them with nuclear fuel, provided Iran does not develop any capacity to refine the fuel further into nuclear weapons. The only way to explain this rejection is that Iran wants to build nuclear weapons.
- The US, and many other nations, consider Iran to be an unstable, fundamentalist, anti-democratic government which supports terrorism (Hezbollah) and is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Allowing such a nation to have nuclear weapons would be very destabilizing, possibly resulting in nuclear war with Israel.
StuRat 11:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
As for North Korea, the US opposes it having nuclear weapons because:
- It promised not to, but cheated, on several occasions.
- By spending it's money on weapons instead of their people, North Korea's population is in a nearly perpetual state of starvation and it's economy is near collapse.
- North Korea is a totalitarian nation which has been aggressive toward it's neighbors, South Korea (they are still officially at war) and Japan (they have kidnapped Japanese citizens then killed them OR forced them to work as translators).
- Traditional enemies, like South Korea and Japan, may very well want to develop nuclear weapons to defend themselves from North Korea. This nuclear proliferation could then spread to Taiwan. With all these traditional enemies armed with nuclear weapons, a nuclear war is quite likely.
StuRat 11:44, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Iran wishes to have nuclear weapons so it can protect itself (threatening MAD) from the nuclear arsenals of Israel (and the United States), and also have them on hand to use offensively if they feel like it. Defense/offense is the motivation of every nation which possesses nuclear devices and other weapons of mass destruction. Oh, and there's a little national glory and pride involved, too. --Halcatalyst 19:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
North Korea, enthralled in the cult of Kim Jong-il, has had for many years a million-man army which could flood into South Korea at a moment's notice. South Korea, however, is protected by the American nuclear umbrella. Under the communist rule, the people of North Korea have suffered some of the worst social disasters (especially starvation) in recent decades. They have few or no resources to pull themselves up. Having nuclear weapons and threatening to use them is one way of getting the world's attention and humanitarian help. In addition, the government is ideologically opposed to the West, with which it considers itself in a life-or-death struggle. --Halcatalyst 19:35, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Video Law lectures on the Internet
Where on the Internet can I find video law lectures? With my best thanks.
How about Law School Video Lectures -- the first site that came up when I put video law lectures in the Google search box. --Halcatalyst 19:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
What Kept Hitler
What kept Hitler from invading Switzerland and Sweden?"
- It was useful to have neutral nations nearby for the exchange of prisoners, hiding stolen assets, negotiations, and an escape route once the war was lost. StuRat 10:13, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Re Switzerland: Mountainous + fully mobilized citizen army = awful drain on manpower. Switzerland is not an easy country to invade and given the terrible time the Nazis had in occupying the Balkans another open sore would have been a bad idea. But the water is murky here, because the Swiss carried on trade, currency exchange, and general relations with Belin; Swiss banks were used to hide assets of Holocaust victims; and the Swiss closed their borders to potential refugees from the Reich. Marskell 10:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
See our articles Switzerland during the World Wars (also Operation Tannenbaum) and Sweden during World War II. Gdr 13:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I guess I'm the only one who gets that this is a joke reference, to the fact the question is our very example of questions to ask on this page :P Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 14:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Haha, this is great! We should change the example question every month or week or something, and see how many people ask it. —Keenan Pepper 16:45, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I'm completely out to lunch I guess but where is the sample question on this page? Marskell 16:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Where to ask a question says For general questions, ask our volunteers at the Reference Desk. e.g."What kept Hitler from invading Switzerland and Sweden?" Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 17:15, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Ah good, now I feel like less of a dunce for answering. If I've ever looked at the page, it was months ago at least... Sneaky little devil, whoever asked. Marskell 17:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Cover of Radiohead's Creep by "Abigail"
A while back I heard a cover on Radio 2 of Radiohead's song Creep by a female vocalist. All I've managed to find about about her is that she is called "Abigail". I am pretty sure that it isn't this Abigail as it was a slow, very emotional vocal rendition not a clubbing-type version. It isn't listed in the cover versions in our article on the song.
I know this is a long shot, but can anyone help me find a copy of it! Thryduulf 12:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- This is the All Music Guide page, if you haven't checked it, on the song. There are several possibilities. BTW, the "Richard Cheese" version is absolutely hilarious and intolerable (lounge singer parody). Geogre 13:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- not nearly as hilarious as his cover of NIN's "Closer"! Grutness...wha? 00:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
The Beating Five
Dear sir, miss,
I have an old single with the record label 'Lion Tops'. The artists are Lennon and Mccartney ( i think John Lennon and Paul Mccartney ) and the title of the song is 'I wanna hold your hand'. The name of the band is 'The Beating Five'.
On the other side of the single the title of the song is 'Think', and there are two names : P. Phitington and dee dee fern.
I've searched on the internet but couldn't find any information. Maybe professionals can give me more information of the originin of this record, thats the reason i wrote this email.
Kindly
Bertus van Soeren
- The Beatles did originally have five members, then Stuart Sutcliffe suggested the name The Beatles, so perhaps that was their name for the band at the time. See this page for details: [20] StuRat 18:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- I heard the name "Lion Tops" before. I did a Google search, but couldn't find anything definative. What I remember is that it produced singles out of Germany. Though, I may be remembering Germany and it was actually Sweden or Austria. They did a lot of knock-off singles and tried to make them look like they came from England (printing the labels in English, regardless of typos). From that memory, I do not think it is much of a stretch that they took an English hit by the Beatles, stamped it on a single and mistyped the band's name as "The Beating Five" - especially since the Beatles were a 5-member group that was rather popular in Germany at the time. As for P. Phitington - that is probably another typo. Is it Wittington, which would become Phitington with a German accent? --Kainaw (talk) 18:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, to start with, it's definitely not the Beatles. They never called themselves the Beating five (The Quarrymen, Johnny & the Moondogs, The Silver Beetle band, but not the Beating Five). They also never recored a song called "Think". The early Beatles recordings were released by a number of labels (Lingasong, AFE, Pickwick), but never Lion Tops. What often happened in the early 60s (and since, come to think of it), is that because it wasn't always easy to get recordings of original artists doing particular songs, other bands would be deliberately employed to cover those songs in the style of the original artists, and release the music on local labels. Lion Tops seems to have been a label that went in for this sort of thing - another of their early releases was a cover of "Have I the right?" - a big hit from the early 60s - recorded by Ton Theyn & the Young Ones. The label was based in Utrecht, Netherlands. You can find out a bit more about the label here. Grutness...wha? 00:18, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Medieval kings of England
Can anyone tell me more about the French king Louis who apparently ruled England briefly during the mediaeval period, possibly around the 12th/13th century. I remember the reference from simon Scama's TV history, incidentally, and know all about Blackadder's Richard IV.
- You're thinking of Louis VIII of France - who invaded (but was never crowned King of) England after the First Barons' War in 1216. He ruled as king de facto if not de jure. GeeJo (t) (c) • 17:45, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
"Cory" as in Chilean or Polish "Cory"
I'm a Political Science student and can't find the meaning of this term in "The Third Wave," Samuel P. Huntington, U of Oklahoma Press, 1991. p. 158.
Appreciate your help.
Janet Hudgins Vancouver Canada
- for those without the book in question, could you give some idea of the context? GeeJo (t) (c) • 18:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- "The second wave was an expression of machine muscle, the Industrial ... The “Second Wave” was the shift from agricultural societies to industrial societies. Toffler contrasts industrial ways of organizing societies to new social ...". Source : google books!
- So, the book about waves must be Alvin Toffler ; first is agriculture, second industry, third is information. --DLL 18:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Anglicans
Assess the problems faced by the Anglican Church during the 16th century?
I've no idea where to start with this essay, any ideas?
Sure. Latter 1500s. Henry viii forced separation from Rome: problem-- conflicted loyalties among clergy, king vs pope. Reformation is spreading in Europe: problem-- probably a wide range of receptiveness to the Reformation ideas among the clergy and consequently great potential for conflict. Scotland was more receptive to Reformation than England and Presbyterian church becomes dominant: problem-- church conflicts become aligned with the poltical conflicts in the relations of England and Scotland. Kings confiscate monastery property wholesale: problem-- loss of revenue and social power base. Now you are off and running. alteripse 19:26, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Go rent A Man for All Seasons, essay done! Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 20:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow, that's too big an essay you've got there. I'd never give that as an assignment. Essentially, the Church of England faced the Scylla and Charibdis of the Roman Catholic Church and Counter-reformation on the one hand and the emerging "Geneva Church" (John Calvin) on the other. It faced these dangers theologically with Richard Hooker's Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, politically with increasing absolutism of the monarch and decreasing civil rights, militarily with the great naval expansion, economically with a series of alliances with protestant nations, internationally by alliance in several entanglements designed to ensure protestant succession. Nothing was settled in the 16th century. It wouldn't be settled for good and all until 1745. Geogre 22:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Doonesbury Quote
There was a Doonesbury comic a while ago involving someone (I believe Mark Slackmeyer's dad) shouting "Death, be not proud!" while being wheeled into the emergency room. This wasn't actually shown, it was described secondhand by his wife to his son. Another phrase I remember from it was, "It was just so tacky." Does anyone know how I could find this particular cartoon online, or which of the book collections it showed up in? Time's a factor. Black Carrot 19:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know, but it was fun browsing Doonesbury and List of published collections of Doonesbury. You could start there and wish for luck. --Halcatalyst 21:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Who influenced Hitler?
Since Adolf Hitler had moved to Linz after his parents death and his history teacher Professor Leopold Poetsch had influenced himabout the ideas to reunite the german-speaking people under one government. Who else has influenced Hitler in terms of his thoughts, ideas and concepts?
_S.M_
Thank You.
- See Hitler. It has a quick, but well written rundown on his early years. --Kainaw (talk) 21:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
You might also consider looking through some of the articles on early 20th century German history - such as Kapp Putsch. They may give you more clues. Grutness...wha? 00:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Composer
The 1976 Summer Olympics were held in Montreal and I believe the closing ceremonies were a tribute to the Five Nationsm in which the music featured was that of a young man whose first name was Maurice. Does anyone know his last name and any information about him. Roland
- Maurice Forget gave the official oath. --Kainaw (talk) 22:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
See 1976 Summer Olympics. Gdr 22:49, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- I did look at the Wikipedia article and then at the official olympic.org website. They disagree, so went with the Olympic's site and spelled it "Forget". I then Googled for both names and turned up many unrelated hits. (also - do not edit other's comments. Simply comment for yourself.) --Kainaw (talk) 23:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Seems I touched a nerve there. Sorry. Gdr 23:44, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Meta-God
ok... I hope this doesn't sound too heretical ( well it will but I hope I don't offend noone since I'm only a silly annoying speculating psychology student). What if God turns out to exist and by this I mean a complicated notion of god resembling mysticism and not monotheism the way it's understood by children. (meaning a human-like god).
I mean for example, the way Meister Eckhart saw God...ok, let's say I take skepticism to it's extreme and say that not even God can be sure he is the ultimate? since he (it or whatever) can always have the doubt that He can be being fooled into believing he is the ulitmate and be given apparent control over the multiverse or universe or maybe HAVE that control, but be no more than a simulation or something of that sort controlled by outside forces (whatever they may be) .
ok so what I'm saying is that there can ALWAYS be a possibility of being 'fooled' by something outside,no matter how accurate scientifically, or compellingly mystical or Godly a notion, reason can always make us doubt. even if a mystic thinks he/she reaches union with God or a buddhist thinks he/she reaches nirvana, even then, that can only be make believe...because if there where no room for doubt, mysticism would already be the dominationg philosphy and be regarded as the truth...but it is not and I suppose that is because there is room for: A) an irrational truth -or- B)a make believe 'ultimate', maybe only make believe for us, and maybe make believe for 'the ultimate' also.
is there any philosopher that postulated this? are there faults in my reasoning that I haven't noticed?.- I'm sorry if this question is really crazy and stupid...-Cosmic girl 23:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Delusion, especially self-delusion, by definition can't be recognized by the deludee. So we can easily imagine a deluded, self-deluded god. However, Doubt is not merely, or even mostly, rationalistic. In Analytic philosophy, doubt about God isn't on the table for discussion. Such topics are "bracketed," meaning excluded from discussion.
- The Mystics don't necessarily exclude or derogate reason. They simply claim experience which can't be proven or disproven by reason and empricist approaches. As Pascal put it in his Pensées, Le coeur a ses raisons, que la raison ne connait pas: "The heart has its reasons, of which reason knows nothing." --Halcatalyst 02:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think Woody Allen ruined that quote for at least a generation... alteripse 02:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
That can be, but what if the heart (as a metaphor for mysticism as opposed to the brain representing reason and skepticism)is deluded?...what I mean here is that 100% absolute knowledge isn't possible and maybe it's so for God too (the most probable thing is that it isn't and He knows everything) but there is a posibility for him to doubt he is the ultimate...even if He is, He can still have doubts about it...he can for example, I don't know, sometimes believe that he is a celular automata controlled by an outside environment.--Cosmic girl 02:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- This is the type of question that Thomas Aquinas would have thought reasonable, but Ludwig Wittgenstein would have pointed out is simply a meaningless linguistic generation without any relation to anything real. So make sure you arrange a seance with the right dead European philosopher. alteripse 02:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
hahahaha!!! :D :D :D I'm glad my question wasn't taken as if I was heretical or delusional :S !! how and which kind of reasoning would wittgenstein have used to say what I asked was meaningless? maybe meaningless for our immediate reality but I'm talking about metaphysics. and also, how could a Theologian and religious person like Aquinas find reasonable a doubt about God's omniscience? since what I know of Aquinas was that he loooved to prove God existed and so I'm quite sure he would've come up with a rationalization that refutes my question hehe. --Cosmic girl 03:04, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't say Tom would have agreed with you, just that he would have considered it a meaningful proposition, even if provably false. On the other hand, Ludwig would have dismissed it as an artefact of language: just because you can generate a proposition or a question by applying standard language rules to an abstract noun like God, it doesn't necessarily represent a model of reality, and logical manipulation of it doesn't yield any more knowledge of the world than you started with. alteripse 03:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- After a mystic experience, Aquinas set aside forever his academic, intellectual, theological work. He never finished his Summa. You might judge by that how powerful a mystic experience can be. Or you can simply dismiss it as delusional. Actually, you'll never know unless you experience it yourself. And then you won't "know." You'll be in The Cloud of Unknowing. --Halcatalyst 03:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, me and the Eckmeister. I am still waiting for mine. alteripse 04:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
hahahhaa!! :D same here...--Cosmic girl 17:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, there is no God, so all your discussions here are merely playing with language. If you believe there is a God then He is unknown and all the discussions are still meaningless - Adrian Pingstone 09:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
hmmm... well when I say God I mean truth... I outgrew the human-like God when I was 14. and also, if we are merely playing with language, and reality allows us to do that, doesn't that mean that reality (truth) is weirder than we can imagine? since I know math is 'stuck' because we can know things but we can't know why they are so...but I can be so wrong since I'm not a philosopher, and I can be sooo crazy, but can you explain me on what basis can you dismiss my question with such confidence? please, because I need to understand.--Cosmic girl 17:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Cosmic, see Omnipotence paradox. Marskell 09:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
About that paradox, I think that God CAN act irrationally,(since existence doesn't seem that rational to me when I question it)...if God can, then there's no hope that we understand 'it' 'him' because we are logical mentally.--Cosmic girl 17:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Is God in self-delusion ? Are we logical mentally ? For us, it seems that there is some unconscious mind driving us. This "Das ?" is not logical.
- As for God, first thing, does He believe in you, in us ? Is there reciprocity : some admit a forceful Yes, I don't.
- Let's say that few psychology students really try to think, and they are the ones who should. Let's not leave this to theologians. --DLL 17:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- ...Reading again : I do not mean that you are of the many who do not think. Go on! --DLL 17:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thank you, yeah well first of all I hope the admins don't get upset over the length of this question...:S since it says up there that further discussion should be moved to another place like a talk page. also...well thank you DLL, I think that way too, psychology needs theology even more than maybe theologians need it since our job here is to point people in the right direction but I myself have a very vage idea of what is right and we can't know what is right until we know what is the truth since our notions of right and wrong may be even backwards...and there are a lot of psychologists (specially my teachers) that pretend to know the truth, I sympathise more with the ones with naturalistic world views but there are those with a mystical blend to them, which I cannot grasp and they may be right...so in conclusion, I guess we can't know what is 'mental health' since we don't know what truth is, so a shizophrenic person may be more sane that we are just because the truth is weird and resembles his thought pattern more than it does ours. (it's obviously not that way in the 'real' world since it apears to be rational, but I'm talking about the bassis of it)--Cosmic girl 20:12, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'm hesitent adding to this because it's so long, but I think I have a point that hasn't been brought up yet. One is that, if you accept a common assertion that God created creation, then it could logically follow that He created its rules and would therefore know exactly how omnipotent He is because He knows all the rules. So, by this line of reasoning, applying the psychology of a human perspective to Him is meaningless because His perspective is different. -LambaJan 20:52, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
January 30
Noah, Ham, Shem, Japheth
We are trying to find out the age of Noah and his sons Ham, Shem and Japheth when they died. --"""
Noah was 950 (Gen. 9:29). I don't think the ages of Ham, Shem, and Japheth are given, but you can search through Genesis chapters 6-9. --Halcatalyst 02:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
950 years! How many people in the world believe this? deeptrivia (talk) 05:00, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- there are suggestions that the incredible ages in the Old testament are a mistranslation or misunderstanding - a confusion with an old method of calculating time by lunar cycles. 950 lunar months would work out at about 73 years. Grutness...wha? 09:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Also, reportedly, many literalists believe that the amount of inbreeding that had to occur chopped human life expectancy right, right down. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 18:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- To answer deeptrivia's question directly, yes there are a significant number of people that believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible. Primarily fundamental Christians. We have articles on it, try reading from Bible and go from there. I think it's not majorly different from people tht believe literally in the Koran, Gita, etc. There are statements in the Bible that could directly lead one to conclude that the age and time numbers given in the Bible are meant not to be taken literally, but many people refuse to let the facts get in the way of a good story. - Taxman Talk 23:18, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Shem was 600 years old when he died (see Genesis chapter 11 verses 10-11)
- Grutness is probably right. Not only did the Torah Hebrews count years differently, but they counted differently in general (with a base-12 system). However, the mistranslation has consequences for folks in the west. James Ussher, the Archbishop of Armagh, infamously set the date of the creation of the world at October 23, 4004 BC. He did this by going with known history and then counting the ages of the patriarchs in the Bible. Furthermore, the various Chronicles in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle began with the Creation, and they did this by also counting the ages of the patriarchs (although none of them came up with 4004 BC). The reason this is more than a joke, though, is that there are people out there now using Ussher's dating to deny evolution and geology, and the mistake in calculating the ages of patriarchs means that, had Ussher known about the lunar ages, he's have put the creation at more nearly 2800 BC. Geogre 11:55, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- At last the catholic church glose tells us that the years may be taken as a metaphore of a long life ; Or a symbol, see also Gematria. --DLL 17:35, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Youth center
What is a Youth center? I've heard about them, but I haven't found a formal definition yet. --Oskilian
- don't know whether there is a "formal description" as such, but they tend to be clubs where teenagers can congregate to meet, often with recreational equipment like pool tables, etc, and often with things like counselling services available onsite. I'm amazed we don't have an article on the subject... Grutness...wha? 09:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- The concept behind it is that teenagers will congregate there, in a safe environment, as opposed to, for example, the streets. - Akamad 09:11, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Canadian women
62% of canadian women have done what the rest haven't done--Ronny 64.152.195.34 06:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I always suspected the world was divided into 2 kinds of people, and now I know for sure. Thanks. JackofOz 06:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, the world is divided into three kinds of people: those who can count and those who can't. --Halcatalyst 22:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I thought it was: The world is divided into 10 kinds of the people: those who know binary and those who don't. --Kainaw (talk) 22:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'm quite sure it's two: those who go around dividing the world into 2 kinds of people, and those who don't. JackofOz 22:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Had a pedicure? Visited the United States? Had maple syrup on their pancakes? --Robert Merkel 08:09, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- 38% have yet to do it. Grutness...wha? 09:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Written potty non-questions to Wikipedia? Adrian Pingstone 09:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- 38% have yet to do it. Grutness...wha? 09:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I feel this proves your either with us or your against us. Marskell 09:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Of the 62%, a good 43% didn't know they were doing it, and 15% said that they didn't plan it in advance, so that leaves only 4% of 62% who really were committed to it. Also, of the 38%, 80% said that they approved of it and would do it if they ever collected enough coupons. 10% said that they wouldn't judge the 62% harshly and would join them in a bridge club, if asked. I think these are important facts to keep in mind. Geogre 11:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Well guys am not messing you up but thought I would get a good answer here.This is a serious question The question is 62% of Canadian women have done it what's that......Anybody has an idea webwalkers
- I'm sure we've had this question before... smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 18:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- We did. It was a few months back but it's been here before. I don't think there was a serious answer that time either since it could be so many things and the questioner doesn't even narrow down a context to maybe help out with a google search. Dismas|(talk) 22:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Not only here. It has been asked on many reference sites on the Internet. It apparently was a quiz show question a while back and now people keep asking it over and over. The closest answers I've seen on any site (ones that had references to new articles) were: 62% of women were found attractive by men and 62% of young women put money in savings. Neither were accepted as the correct answer because they didn't fit the "62% of women have done" criteria. --Kainaw (talk) 23:19, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Consulted a physician regarding migranes. [21] -LambaJan 21:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Biography of the late Rabbi Dr. Kopul Rosen
Has anyone written a biography of the late Rabbi Dr. Kopul Rosen, who was Principal of Carmel College, Wallingford Oxfordshire in England? With thanks
- A google search for "Kopul Rosen" turned up a book entitled Memories of Kopul Rosen, ISBN 0950137200. If you click on the ISBN link it will take you to a book source metasearch page. The Google search I did turned up lots of other interesting links which you may wish to peruse. --Robert Merkel 11:56, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
How about turning them into an article? Start with this: Kopul Rosen alteripse 12:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- You guys did the research, not I, but are we comfortable that the person will pass the notability bar and be worthy of a biography? I.e. has the figure had an effect upon the world in some context other than merely one doing his job? I only say this because I hate to see new users write an article, get on AfD, and then get frustrated or turn bad, and, if this biography doesn't establish his wider importance, that may happen. Geogre 14:08, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Britain france and poland during the 1930s
Why did britain and france go to war against germany over poland?
- You should check out our article family on World War II, specifically sections relating to the origins of the war. As an immediate answer, though, Britain and France had signed a mutual-defense pact with Poland in hopes of deterring Hitler's desire to annex the Polish Corridor. The subsequent declaration itself, while upholding the terms of the pact, was also probably intended as further deterrent in hopes of forcing Hitler to back down; certainly neither nation was interested in immediately and aggressively prosecuting the war effort (see Phony War). — Lomn Talk 21:08, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
The Joe-Max Moore says he is third in US history in goals scored. An email to the Help Desk mailing list, alleging to be from Joe-Max Moore, claims that he is second in US history. Can somebody verify this and correct as appropriate? User:Zoe|(talk) 22:18, 30 January 2006 (UTC)