Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2007 July 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Humanities desk
< July 27 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 29 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


July 28[edit]

origin of expression "Aha Erkenntnis"[edit]

I speak German and have a daughter who refers to "Oprah's Aha moment". I tell her that this is not an original Oprah concept and have searched on the web for the origin of the phrase which describes that sudden enlightenment or Eureka moment. I find references to it in Education theory, but my vague memory is that the phrase was originally cointed by a psychologist or philosopher of the 20th Century.

Who coined this phrase originally? Variations I have found are "Aha Effect", "Aha Erlebnis", but still no origin.

Nicole

Hello, Nicole. It looks like it was coined by the psychologist and phenomenal phenomenologist of thought Karl Bühler (link to German Wikipedia, amazingly, there's no article on English Wikipedia). He called it "ein eigenartiges, im Denkverlauf auftretendes, lustbetontes Erlebnis, das sich bei plötzlicher Einsicht in einen zuerst undurchsichtigen Zusammenhang einstellt." As you can see the emphasis is sensual, rather than cognitive. (My unauthorized translation: "A peculiar, pleasure-oriented experience within the course of thought that pops up with the sudden insight into a previously intransparent context.") According to this bibliography, the Aha-Erlebnis was first described in 1907, in Tatsachen und Probleme zu einer Psychologie der Denkvorgänge I, II, III. Archiv für die gesamte Psychologie 9, 315f') ---Sluzzelin talk 04:43, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There used to be an article, but it was transwikied: Transwiki:Aha-Erlebnis.  --Lambiam 05:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article on Karl Bühler was transwikied? His work and influence reach far beyond the mere coinage of a popular phrase, even if it's celebrating its centennial celebration this year, and Bühler deserves his own article (I know, it's a wiki, and I could try to write one ...) ---Sluzzelin talk
I meant Aha-Erlebnis; an article on Karl Bühler was deleted as a copyvio of http://www.benjamins.com/cgi-bin/t_bookview.cgi?bookid=FOS%2025.  --Lambiam 06:02, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

but I doubt that the word was invented by Bühler. It is a common German interjection.--Tresckow 23:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Do you think the compound "Aha-Erlebnis" was used before Bühler and before 1907? I'm genuinely curious, for I truly believed that he did coin it and thus "invent" it in a sense. Or did you merely mean the interjection "aha"? In that case, of course, you are right. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Im sorry, I just ment the compound. --Tresckow 16:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noshir S. Gowadia[edit]

I'm interested in the case of Noshir Gowadia, but there seems to be very little information on it. This article from the Honolulu Advertiser of November 9, 2006 states that "Gowadia's trial is set for July 10, 2007" but it is already July 28, and no news. Can anybody tell me what the status of the case is? Thanks. Neutralitytalk 06:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Death of the Russian Royal Family[edit]

I was fascinated by the question above by Ghirla on the Moscow station named after one of the killers of the Tsar and his family and the response by Clio the Muse. I would like to know more about the whole episode. I've looked at your page on Nicholas II which has some of the details, but it's still not clear to me if the decision to murder the whole family was purely local or if there was some central involvement. Surely the local authoriity in the Urals could not have taken such an important decision on its own? Private Kirk 10:54, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The execution of any royalty would certainly be consistent with any extremist Marxist ideals (ie: Leninism), as Communism was itself radically republican. Somehow I seriously doubt that the Bolshevik leadership (ie. central involvement) would at any rate have disapproved of it. Perhaps common sense for any Red Army soldier.martianlostinspace 22:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would refer you specifically to the books I mentioned above, Private Kirk, though any decent biography of Nicholas II will provide you with all of the details of the crime.
As you will have gathered from the Nicholas page, it is still not been proved conclusively just how the decision to kill the family was arrived at; if it was central, or if it was local; and, if central, who exactly was involved. However, I can offer you a reasonable amount of circumstantial evidence that points quite firmly at Moscow.
For the Ural Soviet the presence of the royal family at Ekaterinburg was a growing concernn, especially as the Czech Legion and other White forces approaching the town from the east. Rather than risk moving them they decided on execution, though they were unwilling to act without the approval the Council of Commissars in Moscow. Ivan Goloschekin, a member of the Ural Soviet who also happened to be a friend of Yakov Sverdlov, a close political associate of Lenin, was sent to Moscow to take soundings on the matter. He was told by Sverdlov that the government was still considering puting Nicholas on trial, an idea favoured by Trotsky. However, the steady advance of the Whites towards Ekaterinburg changed this, and Goloschekin was able to return with the news that Moscow had delegated the whole business to the Ural Soviet.
With Lenin's permission Sverdlov formally announced the death of Nicholas at a meeting of the Executive Council on 18 July 1918. Nothing was said of the fate of the Empress Alexandra and the five children, though an official statement was issued that they had all been moved. However, both Lenin and Sverdlov knew that they were all dead. They had been so advised by telegram from Ekaterinburg. The statement was a lie.
A year passed before the government admitted that they had all been shot, though the Social Revolutionaries were blamed. However, the real link between Moscow and the Urals was later made clear in a conversation between Sverdlov and Trotsky. Trotsky reports this in his memoirs thus;
"My next visit to Moscow took place after the fall of Ekaterinburg. Talking to Sverdlov, I asked in passing: 'Oh, yes, and where is the Tsar?
'It's all over,' he answered. 'He has been shot.'
'And where is the family?'
'And the family along with him.'
'All of them?', I asked, apparently with a touch of surprise.
'All of them,' replied Sverdlov. 'What about it?' He was waiting to see my reaction, I made no reply.
'And who made the decision?', I asked.
'We decided it here. Ilych [Lenin] believed that we shouldn't leave the Whites a live banner to rally round, especially under the present difficult circumstances.'
I did not ask any further questions and considered the matter closed. Actually, the decision was not only expedient but necessary. The severity of the summary justice showed the world that we would continue to fight mercilessly, stopping at nothing. The execution of the Tsar's family was needed not only in order to frighten, horrify, and dishearten the enemy, but also in order to shake up our own ranks to show that there was no turning back, that ahead lay only complete victory or complete ruin...This Lenin sensed well."
Sverdlov was certainly implicated in the murder of the entire family. It is difficult to accept that he would not have cleared this with Lenin, who, in my estimation, is guilty by association. He certainly deserves part of the 'credit' for this atrocity. Clio the Muse 00:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On height[edit]

What was normal height of ancient romans? And Spartans? Germans? --Vess 11:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vess, I'm sorry that you have not had an answer, but I rather suspect that is because your question is largely unanswerable. Clio the Muse 22:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, no, Clio, we can dig up all these ancient peoples' bones, and the Romans have left us some rather low passageways, not to mention doors. In any event, What song the sirens sang, or what name Achilles assumed when he hid himself among women, though puzzling questions, are not beyond all conjecture. Xn4 02:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Odyssey 12.184-191 gives one version of the Sirens' song (there is some ambiguity & you could argue that it is merely the Sirens' invitation to hear their song; but Odysseus says that after the ship is out of range "we could then no longer hear the Sirens' voice or song"; and it is legitimate to wonder whether the fair ladies' manslaying practices didn't obviate the need to deliver on any further song!):

Come here, much-praised Odysseus, great glory of Achaeans,
and land your ship so you can hear our voice.
For no one ever passes by here with a black ship
before he hears the honey-toned voice from our mouths,
then after he enjoys it, he departs, knowing more,
since we know everything, all that in wide Troy
Argives and Trojans suffered by the will of the gods.
And we know whatever happens on the earth that feeds many.

(By the way, our article on Hydriotaphia, quoted by Xn4, doesn't mention that Browne is alluding to Suetonius, Life of Tiberius 70.3.) Wareh 18:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I recall reading once that 1,000 years ago men were about the same height as today, an average of about 5'9". From 1000 AD to 1700 AD men got shorter, to an average height of something like 5'6" and then gradually started getting taller again. I can't remember for the life of me where I read that, and I only mention it here to observe that someone studies this sort of thing. --JayHenry 03:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You should be able to find what you are looking for by reading Nikola Koepke and Joerg Baten's paper, "The Biological Standard of Living in Europe During the Last Two Millennia" (PDF). Rockpocket 05:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's a great link, and the series are surprisingly zigzag (surprising to me). ---Sluzzelin talk 06:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Germans of what period? Useful evidence of height can be gleaned from various sources. An excellent one that sticks in my mind is Henry VIII's armour, which is displayed at the Tower of London reveals that he was fairly short by modern standards, yet he was considered tall in his day. --Dweller 11:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article that tries to cover this is human height. There is also a very good New Yorker article on the subject of historical human height that can be read at http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/04/05/040405fa_fact?currentPage=1 . - SimonP 14:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Intuition in Arts...[edit]

Could anyone please just tell me the role of intuition in the field of arts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.149.32 (talk • contribs) 11:21, 28 July 2007

See Artistic inspiration and look at the last section. "Intuition" is a term for inspiration that is preferred by people who want to avoid the Romantic connotations of the ingenium and genii dichotomy. Geogre 12:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now I'm kind of curious, given that this IP asked the same question about mathematics on the Mathematics desk and about both on the Miscellaneous desk, and the one on the Miscellaneous desk was later removed by Steve Summit. I wonder if they were looking for something in particular. Confusing Manifestation 06:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Teutonic Order[edit]

In what way did the Teutonic Knights contribute to the nationalist myth in Germany? Infinityone 14:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a highly engaging subject, Infinityone, which might be said to allow the changing political temperature of modern Germany to be taken by fairly precise degrees. If we begin with the Enlightenment there is little doubt what the Teutonic Knights represented -cruelty and coercion. For Johann Gottfried Herder the behaviour of the Knights towards the native Prussians, particularly in the policy of forced conversion to Christianity, was comparable to the Spanish policy towards the native peoples of South America. Even so, while this idea found wide acceptance, it could be combined with a residual belief in the 'civilizing' mission of the Order. For example, in 1847 Friedrich Christoph Schlosser published Weltgeschichte für das deutsche Volk in which they were accused of rapacity and fanaticism, but neverthless commended for the advance of 'Christian-German' civilization into barbarian lands. But the first thoroughly modern and chauvinist perspective comes with the work of another historian-Johannes Voigt of Köningsberg.
In his nine-volume history of the Teutonic Order, Voigt was to complete the most thorough assessment ever written. His central contention was that the 'moral judgements' of people like Herder were anachronistically out of place, as the survival of paganism in the heart of Europe had to be understood from the perspective of the Medieval church. For them the campaign against the ancient Prussians was entirely praiseworthy. Voigt also combined this with a rather more modern anti-Slav, specifically an anti-Polish perspective. If the Order had not conquered the Prussians the task would have fallen to the Russians or the Poles, denying the benighted barbarians of the benefit of the 'German spirit.' In political terms this translated into a thoroughgoing defence of the superiority in every measure of German culture, and a rejection of the Polish demand for statehood, a view that travelled with ease from the scholarly to the political arena. In 1848, Wilhelm Jordan, a deputy of the National Liberal Party, declared that one should never forget in dealing with "these charming mazurka dancers" that Poland only ever represented anarchy, and the partitions were simply the "burial of a long decomposing corpse."
Thus a new mood was struck, expressed at its most fullest in the writing of yet another historian, Heinrich von Treitschke, arguably the most chauvinist and nationalist of them all. In Das deutsche Ordensland Preussen, which appeared in 1862, historical scholarship was given the colour of new modes of nationalist mythology, a paean to the modern state of Prussia, the "conquerer, teacher and discipliner" of its neighbours. For Treitschke, whose work also had a thoroughly modern determinist and Darwinist edge, the Teutonic Order's Prussia was a 'bulwark' against the Slavic east, an island where the supreme values of the state were were upheld against the "anarchaic crudity of the Polish Slavs." Treitschke's Order had little to do with Christianity and everything to do with Race. His contemporary, Max Toeppen, tried to challenge this new direction, warning against the projection of nineteenth century nationalism onto the Medieval past, though to little lasting effect. Amongst the German political elite Treitschke's version of the Ordnensstat was far preferred over simple appeals to sobriety and reason.
In 1902, Kaiser Wilhelm II, that most operatic of modern monarchs, organised a costume festival to celebrate the restoration of the Order's headquarters at Marienburg, a grotesque combination of pseudo-Medievalism, modern nationalism and German mysticism. In the Slav areas of Europe the spectacle was an occasion for both humour and anger. In Prague one socialist newspaper published a mock 'Wanted' notice, in which an escaped mental patient is sought calling himself Kaiser Wilhelm, last heard of making deranged speeches in Marienburg. In Poland offprints of The Teutonic Knights, an anti-German historical novel by Henryk Sienkiewicz were distributed to a congregation Gniezo Cathedral, attending a thanksgiving to celebrate the Battle of Tannenberg, the great victory of the Poles and Lithuanians over the Teutonic Knights in 1410.
The Germans also were mindful of this historical reverse; and in 1914 deliberately named their first victory over the Russians as Tannenberg. In the Weimar era the Order was invoked as a symbol of nationalist demands for a 'new order' in the east. In Unsere Ostmark of 1923 Dr Kathe Schumacher argued that the Order had returned to the those allegedly ancient German lands of the east to breed a 'race of supermen', quite an achievment for a celibate Catholic order! The Order was further celebrated in the Artamanen League, whose members included Heinrich Himmler and Rudolf Hoess, later commandant of Auschwitz. Hitler himself was to invoke the myth of the Teutonic Knights. At a meeting at the Tannenberg Memorial in August 1933 he declared that the new Reich would have to follow the Knights' path to the east if "the nation was to have its daily bread." In 1942 he was to say that his commanders in Russia were 'Crusaders for the National Socialist cause.' For Himmler, filled with the same misty notions as the Kaiser, the SS were the new Teutonic Order. It is surely no surprise that 'Tannenberg' was used as the code name for the operation of the Einsatzgruppen in Poland. A mission of Catholic civilization had given way to the worst forms of Race war. Clio the Muse 14:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

European economy in 15th century[edit]

Is it true that before Christopher Columbus's voyages, Europe was in an okay economic state (or was it really bad, considering the Crusades?) I can't seem to find any information on this, but after his voyage, European economy became a lot better because of the Colombian exchange and colonization attempt. (This is related to my question on: How did Columbus's voyage change European perception of geography and change world economics? In other words, compare and contrast the world view and economies of Europe before and after Columbus's four voyages.)

This is like asking if North America was in an "okay economic state" before the Apollo moon landings (or in "really bad shape", considering the War of 1812). Europe in 1492 was not a single economic entity. The crusades had involved a relatively small number of people centuries earlier and had relatively modest cultural and economic effects on Europe compared with centuries of East-West trade before and after. The voyages of Columbus did not have a large immediate effect on the economies of Europe, but number of voyages, the number of places discovered and the volume of economic exchange rose steadily from 1500 to 1600. Here we are nearly 40 years after the Apollo flights. Will they be seen as the equivalent of the Columbian voyages in beginning a whole new era, or like the Viking voyages to America-- having almost no influence at home and gone with hardly a trace from America as well? alteripse 21:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Columbus' trip was just one of many. Special, but not all that special. And mostly to Spain. For the English it was more a resettlement area and after the independence of the US it wasn't even a source of income anymore. For most other European nations, most colonies lay in the East. On top of that, the colonies were just one source of wealth. For the Netherlands, for example, trade within Europe was more important. The colonies were a source of wealth, but some wealth was needed to start them in the first place. DirkvdM 07:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "colonization" you refer to presumably is that of North America, but that was rather a long time in coming. Much more relevant was the conquest and despoilation of South America by the conquistadores. IIRC (always happy to be corrected) there's good evidence that once the Spanish began exploiting South America, particularly its precious metals, that there was a detrimental impact on Europe's economy. --Dweller 11:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is debate over these matters, but the general view these days is that the Renaissance period of the 14th and 15th century was one of economic malaise across most of Europe likely caused by the Little Ice Age and Black Death. Medieval demography has some good information on this. The long term effects of the Age of Exploration were hugely beneficial to Western Europe. It became the central hub of international trade, and raw materials from the colonies helped fuel the industrial revolution. The largest benefit to Europe was probably the introduction of new crops, such as the potato, that greatly improved the efficiency of agriculture. The massive influx of gold and silver from South America certainly destabilized the economy for a period, but having a steady supply of bullion was beneficial in the long run. - SimonP 14:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Urk. On further thought, I could be being pedantic, but the 'discovery' of the Americas will have had no impact on (14th or) 15th century European economies, as regular expeditions there only began in the 16th century. --Dweller 15:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We are pathetic, indeed :) May I recommend following publications:

See also some related stuff at Questia.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Legal status of steroid use in the US[edit]

In the US, are anabolic steroids illegal period, or just for pro athletes?--67.67.196.63 20:53, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't confuse the criminal law with the rules of sports. The DEA notes that steroids are a controlled substance and and each requires a prescription to be used legally in the United States. Anabolic steroid#Legal and sport restrictions notes that US law classifies them as Schedue III controlled substances, which is lower than serious drugs of abuse like cocaine, but the same or higher category as lots of prescription medications like strong painkillers. So someone possessing or selling steriods in the US without the proper paperwork (the possesser has to be a pharmacist or have a prescription, the seller has to be a pharmasist) can go to jail for a lengthy period.
All of this is unrelated to the penalties that different sporting bodies might impose on someone trrying to cheat (or helping others to cheat), which vary by sport. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rime of King William[edit]

Hi. Is there any information about this poem, the Rime (Rhyme) of King William, written during the trasition from Old English to Middle English? I am interested in it because it has the first recorded mention of a Hunting license, and would like to source that statement in the history section of said legal article. Bearian 22:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I am aware, Bearian, The Rime of King William first appeared in the Peterborough Chronicle, and is said to express Anglo-Saxon indignation at the new Norman hunting laws. Clio the Muse 22:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2007_July_28&oldid=1138600157"