Humanities desk
< June 13	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 15 >

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.

June 14[edit]

U.S.A./Canada[edit]

Did U.S.A. have a democracy before Canada during the 1700s to 1800's?

This question is apt to draw the response "What exactly do you mean by a democracy?" but I think a reasonable answer is yes. For Canada see the article on Responsible government and in particular the section on British North America. The US can be considered as a democracy from the time of the American Revolution. Of course, in both countries large portions of the population did not have the right to vote until much later. --Anonymous, June 14, 2007, 22:48 (UTC).

Hmm.. I've always thought of the U.S. as beginning as a republic. As you say, it really depends on "What exactly do you mean by a democracy?" 152.16.59.190 08:51, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Democracy" and "republic" are not mutually exclusive terms. For reasonable definitions, the US since the revolution has been both. --Anonymous, June 15, 22:42 (UTC).

Democracy and republic are indeed mutually exclusive terms. For example, Cuba and tajikistan are non-Democratic Republics, while Australia and Canada are non-Republic Democracies.nids (♂) 19:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear on the concept of "mutually exclusive", then? --Anon, June 16, 22:30 (UTC).

I understand that the USA is not a full democracy as there is a sizeable geographic and population group who have no electoral rights in the formation of the government - Washington DC.

There's a much larger population group, close to 20% of the population, with no electoral rights. Although the 26th Amendment reduced the size of this group, its existence is not even considered controversial, just as 200 years ago it was not controversial that women had no vote. --Anonymous, June 15, 22:43 (UTC).

Are you referring to felons? That's state by state, to tell the truth. Felons in prison don't get to vote anywhere, that I know of, but only some states (hellooooooooo Florida!) keep felons disenfranchised. Geogre 13:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not. It's something more obvious than that. --Anon, June 16, 17:09 (UTC).

You'd think a link to the reform would be a clue! —Tamfang 01:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boo bloody hoo if government as an interest group is underrepresented. —Tamfang 01:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iraq[edit]

what started the Iraqi war? please answer soon-—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.164.98.82 (talk • contribs)

Obviously there is no simple answer to this - it depends on whether you mean who fired the first shot; who ordered the invasion of Iraq; who was involved in the casus belli etc. Our Iraq War article provides some detailed information on the background to the current conflict. Gandalf61 12:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The truth is probably that no one knows, including the people who did start it. There were ideological urges toward war, and we can lay the blame on those students of Lewis Strauss (scary guy who was also responsible for clobbering Oppenheimer) who took the White House with a missionary zeal, or we can look at personal psychologies, or we can look at the Bush family and oil (which is a complicated story that takes us into the S&L scandal), or we can look into the history of Sadam Hussein and his need to seem to have chemical weapons, or we can look at the domestic economy of the US, or even Andrew Card's announcing that Iraq was "suddenly" a problem in September of 2002 because "Everyone knows you don't roll out a new product line in August," but the answer is going to be "none and all and some of the above, and other things." Utgard Loki 14:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1) What do you mean by Iraqi War? Iraq, while a relatively young nation, has still be involved in more than one military entanglement.

2) The Reference Desk is doing you a favour by considering your questions. It is very rude to tell someone to hurry up when they needn't help you in the first place. 194.80.32.9 03:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Hindu Caste System[edit]

When did the Hindu Caste System come into the Indian Law?
Who where involved in this?
Was this done using an important coded Epic in India, or it was done using the general public opinion in those times?

BalanceRestored 10:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's very complicated. I suggest you read History of the Indian caste system and the related articles.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Hindu Caste System is definitely not enshrined in Indian Law! Quite the opposite, India, since independence, has been resolutely dedicated to tackling backwards traditions within its society. 194.80.32.9 03:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the history of hospitality[edit]

what is the hostory of hospitality? 209.59.96.124 12:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)ashly what is the hostory of hospitality? 209.59.96.124 12:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)ashly[reply]

We heard you the first time. Which type of "hospitality?" Do you mean the hospitality industry -- inns and restaurants -- or the cultural code of hospitality? The latter fluctuates but seems to be at greatest premium in agrarian societies and lowest ebb in urban settings. Some cultures have extremely elaborate rules about hospitality. Some have none. Utgard Loki 13:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's an echo on the line. --Lambiam ^Talk 00:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Hospitallers? --Dweller 13:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This ([1]) may be the oldest recorded instance of hospitality... It's, erm, pretty hospitable, particularly when you bear in mind that he's very old, recuperating from a nasty operation and rich enough that he could have got one of his servants to do all the running around... --Dweller 13:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a really big subject, as I understand it. I've only had the lightest brush with the peripheries of it, but there is a major study of hospitality codes in anthropology/sociology. For example, there is a very, very big code involved in ancient Greek literature. Turning a visitor away was worse than being a bad parent. It helps, for example, when reading Odyssey, to keep in mind that there was an elaborate system for treating strangers (one that Circe and Polyphemus rather spectacularly violate). Utgard Loki 14:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like that word "hostory". —Tamfang 18:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is indeed a vast subject, which could be approached on a whole number of levels, historical, cultural, anthropological and historical. It might help if you fine-tuned your question just a little. Are you interested in experience while travelling, or the general codes of conduct that governed the approach towards strangers? Are you interested in a particular historical period, or in a particular culture? Anyway, these are just a few small indications just how complex this can be. I can really only give you a few general outlines. In the days before hotels and inns hospitality-in the sense of temporary board and accommodation-was provided by abbeys and monasteries in Medieval Europe. Kings and princes, in particular, had a tendency to exploit this service, obliging the clerics to provide special accommodation that, over time, often became grander than the sacred buildings to which it was attached. Royals on tour also made use of various noble houses en route, which could be ruinously expensive for the 'fortunate' host, obliged to feed and accommodate the whole regal entourage. As far as the treatment of travellers was concerned, in early modern Europe this was often governed by some very precise rules. In Scotland, for example, a host was considered to have such a sacred duty towards a guest that any harm inflicted was governed by specific laws of hospitality, the most noteable of which was known as Murder under Trust, a capital crime. The most famous example of Murder under Trust was the Glencoe Massacre of 1692. Clio the Muse 00:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a somewhat deficient article Xenia (Greek), on ancient Greek codes and rituals of hospitality. Wareh 13:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pricing Rule-of-Thumb[edit]

Hello everyone,

In certain markets, one learns a "rule of thumb" for rough estimation of the requested price for a newly developed product.

For exmpale, if the engineer estimate the production cost of a machine by 100,000 $, then I need to sell it for about 300,000-400,000 to make a decent profit.

I do that instead of fully calculting all the overhead of proudction (like R&D, promotion, managment, etc.) In order to justify development of a new product with unclear competation and branding issues.

Is it "known and acceptable" method? Do you know of sources discussing such estimations for different markets?

Do you know any rule-of thumb to estimate accpetable price for cosumer product?

For example, a new Toy or mobile phone will cost to produce X$, what will the estimated minimal pricing?

Thanks ever so much, E.L.

What you are basically describing is cost-plus pricing. Read the article, you will find some useful information there. It's a long time since I studied basic economics, but one thing I do remember is that cost plus pricing is often frowned upon (see the 'disadvantages' section of the article). One alternative is to set your price at the highest price you think the market will bear. If you set the price any cheaper, you start to lose revenue. Any more expensive, and fewer people will buy your product. Using this method, you don't take cost into account at all when setting your sales price. This might be the point where the supply and demand curves meet, but I'm not 100% sure of that. Doubtless someone more knowledgeable will correct me if I'm wrong. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Role of women in the 17th (Jacobean) century[edit]

Please could one of you wounderful people proide some good links on the role of women in Jacobean times. This is for homework but I intend to do the work myself - this is just to point me in the right direction. Thanks a billion! 195.194.74.154 15:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Search Google. Laleena^{talk to me contributions to Wikipedia} 15:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Astell is too late, I suppose. Utgard Loki 16:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Role of women in what? Is this in the home (Stone's Family, Sex, and Marriage), in politics, in ownership and trade? Utgard Loki 16:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Historians generally agree that Shakespeare's plays provide the most comprehensive picture of Elizabethan society available to us (I have definitely read this in a reputable source, but someone may correct me). Although Elizabethan means 16th century, Shakespeare died in 1616, and I don't think he stopped being relevant in the Jacobean era. The Mad Echidna 17:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've got classes with diiferent views, and you also have a culture becoming split in the rise of Puritanism. The worlds of a noblewoman or a member of the upper gentry, of a farmer's wife, of a middle-class Londoner, of a London journeyman's wife and a woman of the poor classes offer four different Jacobean worlds, with greater and lesser opportuniuties. In each world you have a Puritan view. --Wetman 18:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a fascinating subject and there are quite a lot of sources you could draw on, both of a primary and a secondary nature. But it is also, I have to say, a topic of considerable complexity; and since I am not quite sure how you propose to tackle it, I confine myself to a few general suggestions. On the assumption that you are a beginner, I would recommend that you should, first of all, have a look at The Weaker Vessel: Women's Lot in Seventeenth Century England by Antonia Fraser. The advantage of this particular book is that it focuses on women from all sorts of backgrounds and classes, from ladies of leisure to fishwives. The main disadvantage is, I suppose, that it consists of a series of case studies, with an absence of a more general explanatory framework. In the end one is left wondering just how 'typical' the various women depicted truly are. But please do not let this put you off: it's an excellent and highly readable introduction. It is not, of couse, confined strictly to the Jacobean period, but deals also with later events, including the Civil Wars.

The other studies that might be of use are slightly more academic than Fraser, though all mercifully free of jargon. Here I would suggest The Working Life of Women in the Seventeenth Century by Alice Clark, Women in the First Capitalist Society by Margaret George, and Women in Early Modern England by Sara Mendelson and Patricia Crawford (eds.) There is also a good sourcebook, Women's Worlds in Seventeenth Century England by Patricia Crawford and Laura Gowing (eds), with documents and texts touching on a whole variety of themes, from politics to sexual experiences.

You might also consider looking at depictions of women in Jacobean drama, in particular The Duchess of Malfi by John Webster. A whole variety of possible interpretations have been placed on this play. One I find particularly persuasive is that it depicts a woman's fight for autonomy and self-determination against the conventions of her time. Good luck with your research! Clio the Muse 23:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One caveat: there was a real industry in "bad-girl" plays in the Jacobean era. Tis a Pity She's a Whore, The Insatiable Countess, The Duchess of Malfi, and many others probably reflect (again with the Marxist readings! Sorry, but I can't help it) a society experiencing a deep anxiety about the role of women. Raymond Williams argues that literature reveals the "fissures" in ideology, and Jauss argues that popular literature reflects the "questions" a society is asking itself, and Marx himself seemed to suggest that the literature that is undefinable at a time is the socially active. Well, under all of those, "women having sex because they want to" seems to be the most excruciating preoccupation of the audiences of drama during the early Jacobean era (and it's arguably quite active in a good bit of Shakespeare, and esp. later Shakespeare, too -- Othello, e.g.). Now, one can argue that it's some kind of social "fear of the feminine" or "revulsion at the sexual body" or some other Freudian thing, or one can argue that it shows, instead, a crisis in determination of property. Either way, bad girls are very sexy for the Jacobeans. I know that James himself was troublingly devoted to young men, but I know nothing of his queen. I have wondered, in the past, whether these plays reflect an anxiety about marriage that had particular favor at court. Utgard Loki 12:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately, it seems that Anne of Denmark is a featured article. It supplies ample reasons for the court to have had additional desire to see runaway women, "green sick" girls, and the like. (BTW, The Insatiable Countess is absolutely not a good play. That's why you haven't heard of it, if you were wondering.) Utgard Loki 13:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plato's theology[edit]

I've been looking on the Internet for any references to Plato's theology, but can't turn up much at all. I'm wondering if his writings show a distinct monotheism, as interpreted by academics. My own reading (especially the early part of the Timaeus) suggests he really did believe in a single, all powerful Creator, but I'm looking for some concurrence on this. In particular, he appears to also support the Greek pantheon in some way, as if he is trying to reconcile different theologies possibly stemming from different influences. This is quite noticeable in the Timaeus, but also, I believe, in the Phaedrus, and maybe even the Republic. Can anyone help me here? Regards, The Mad Echidna 17:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus of classicists is that when Plato is speaking of "God," he isn't thinking of something like the Judeo-Christian deity, but more a vague creative force. In general, he tends towards atheism in his philosophy. The footnotes to any good critical edition of the works you cite will have a great deal more than I can come up with off the top of my head.Donald Hosek 18:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The two locations for Plato's most "Christian" works are Ion and Timaeus. Christian Platonism required some purposeful misreading of Plato (particularly of Phaedro), but Plato is awfully close to Pythagoreanism and its mysticism from time to time, and it is such a time that furnishes occasions for appropriation. In Europe, Christian Platonism picked up earlier than in England, and when it does show up in England, it's in the form of such things as the Cambridge Platonists, who use Plato with their eyes wide open to his essential paganism. Geogre 18:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's worth noting also, that part of the reason why it's easy to see Plato in the new testament (especially in Paul's writing) is because Paul was aware of Plato's ideas and doubtless incorporated them in materials he was writing to an audience who had been educated in Platonic philosophy. Donald Hosek 18:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MENSA[edit]

My name is Andrew and I'm only 10 years old. She made me take an IQ test. We had the results and it is, apparently, 144. What is an IQ test and what does the number mean please?

Your name happens to be mine too. Have you read our article on the intelligence quotient? Do sign future messages with four tildes, or ~~~~. Splintercellguy 18:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or what? You'll start making waves at him? What kind of a threat is that? :) DirkvdM 11:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 144 is supposed to be "genius," but 144 isn't possible on the Stanford-Binet scale (the "classic IQ test"). Basically, a genius is the upper 2% of IQ in any given population (so there would be 6,000,000 US geniuses). IQ is supposed to show "mental age" over "actual age." There are profound questions about the utility of the concept and the scale. Why did you entitle this question "Mensa?" I presume someone wants you to join. You can do as you like, but few geniuses I have known have found it at all worthwhile. As one of my friends said, "I am smart. I don't need a certificate." Geogre 18:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of three acquaintances who have been Mensa members for a long time, but they're outnumbered by those who dropped out. As for me, I learned the hard way that IQ ain't everything, and I reckon there are better ways to make contacts. But it can't hurt. —Tamfang 19:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(afterthought) I've never heard the 2% definition of "genius" before. (ObSnob: so US population is exactly 300,000,000?) Someone once told me the cutoff was 160, considerably higher than 98%ile (Mensa's cutoff) which is about 135. BWDIKA. —Tamfang 19:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The meaning of the IQ numbers is not standardized across different tests. From our Intelligence quotient article: "Various IQ tests measure a standard deviation with different number of points. Thus, when an IQ score is stated, the standard deviation used should also be stated." Assuming the common standard deviation of 15 points, the score 144 is at about 99.8%, meaning that only about 1 in every 500 to 600 people would score higher. However, the reliability of a single test is not very high, so the precision with which this is stated can be misleading. --Lambiam ^Talk 20:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I stated the percentage. I thought Stanford-Binet went to 140, while there are the infamous "this goes to 11 (i.e. 200)" tests. I've known others than went to 160. Meh. At most, it shows a particular set of aptitudes. If aptitude meant achievement, the Aldous Huxley's world would have come by now. Geogre 21:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew, please don't take labels or statistics as being gospel truths. You're a kid and please don't think of that as a condesention (spelling?), I don't pity rather I envy you. MY advice? be a kid first, a genius second.24.226.90.6 00:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC) Rana sylvatica[reply]

Kids are geniuses. The process of "growing up" usually beats it out of them. Don't ever "grow up", Andrew. (it's "condescension", btw, 24.226). -- JackofOz 00:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I used to be a mensa member, but left because I didn't profit from it in any way. What kind of people join mensa seems to vary per country. In the Netherlands (where I live), members are mostly unemployed, but at a mensa meeting in Spain, I got the impression most members are actually 'economically successful'. However, there is a SIG (Special Interrest Group) in the Netherlands for entrepreneurs, possibly based on the idea 'if we're so clever, then together we should be able to make loads of money'. I haven't heard of any successes, though. The problem with intelligent people is that they have more brilliant ideas than clues as to how to implement them (that certainly goes for me). They need not each other, but more down to earth people. The 'stupid ones' are also needed, so to say. See also Emotional intelligence. DirkvdM 11:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photos of Prague ca 1900[edit]

Any pointers to locations that I might find photos of Prague from ca 1900? Donald Hosek 18:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The best I could do was this: Special:Prefixindex search. Regards Dep. Garcia ( Talk + | Help Desk | Complaints ) 20:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also this search on google for the picture at the wikimedia commons:: site:commons.wikimedia.org "Prague" "1900" "Image". Sorry i cant be anymore help =[ Dep. Garcia ( Talk + | Help Desk | Complaints ) 20:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are many books with old pictures of Prague. Try your closest big-city research library. -- Mwalcoff 04:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there are many books. Titles, however are always helpful.Donald Hosek 17:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

election vs appointment of cabinet officers[edit]

I've lived nearly all my life in Illinois and California. The cabinet officers of both states (governor, lt.gov., attorney-general, treasurer and so on) are separately elected. Is that true of most of These United States? Is it true of any sovereign state? —Tamfang 18:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Florida, where I live, it is the same. (See state government). Note that some U.S. states have exceptionally strange setups; for example, in Texas the lieutenant governor is elected separately from the governor and is often considered more influential. But in seven other states the office of lieutenant governor doesn't even exist). Neutrality^talk 19:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is more information in the United States section of our general Lieutenant governor article. Briefly, it says that in 24 states, the gov and lt. gov are elected as running mates, and in 18, they are elected separately. --LarryMac | Talk 20:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Lieutenant Governor of California is also selected separately from the Governor and often, as is the situation currently, they are of different parties. There is also an elected Superintendent of Schools, but the governor also has an education assistant whose title I don't remember. Corvus cornix 22:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]