Humanities desk
< August 1	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 3 >

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.

August 2[edit]

New Cold War?[edit]

Is there a New Cold War there? --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 00:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where? --Jayron32 00:44, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There, I think. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:48, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The whole thing's an idea, so if people think there is, there is. A Google News Search definitely suggests that's the phrase. Doesn't mean it'll be like the Old Cold War, but newsmakers love drawing parallels, and this makes it easy. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:48, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard it called "Cold War II" —71.20.250.51 (talk) 04:19, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think The Washington Times is hoping "Cool War" takes off. Pretty lame, especially compared to "Operation Eagle Guardian" and "Saber Strike." InedibleHulk (talk) 07:54, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think one could make the case, easily, that the old one never ended in the first place, and won't end until Russia is either completely assimilated (the kids of the oligarchs and the nouveaux riches living and studying in the West will eventually return and try to make politics. They will be part of and answerable to the transatlantic ruling class that appoints all European leaders) or reduced to something akin to the Congo or PNG. The difference between Germany and the Congo is one of scale (watch Merkel's tepid reaction when the NSA scandal broke), not of substance. It's just how much of the loot from the 3rd World they may keep. Asmrulz (talk) 11:55, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"the transatlantic ruling class that appoints all European leaders" - er, what? AlexTiefling (talk) 12:46, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

from which all European leaders hail. better? Asmrulz (talk) 12:51, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, I'm not trying to belittle internal issues. Colonialism or not, of course it is better if by the time you must industrialize or else, your population is manageable, high IQ and doesn't throw acid in women's faces. But as social modernization goes, direct Western influence isn't exactly helping Asmrulz (talk) 21:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If a new Cold War does start, Russia is in a much weaker state than the old Soviet Union. They may get back parts of the Ukraine, but that's a long way from controlling all of Eastern Europe up to Poland and East Germany. Their current economic clout is due largely to their production of natural gas, and the loss of Europe as a customer would put an end to that (of course Europe would then need to go to fracking to supply their own needs). They might get China as a customer, but that would require massive new pipeline projects to replace the loss of Europe. StuRat (talk) 14:01, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it's far too early to call it one, and not many sources really are. Some media sources are trying to create hype for a new Cold War, but this is nothing like the Cold War. Ukraine is really the only truly pressing issue of contention right now. Before this crisis this year, no one was mentioning a new Cold War. There is no arms race, no Iron Curtain, no other satellite conflicts related to Russia ongoing. The US has not taken Russia nearly as seriously as it did the USSR. After all, what is there to fight about? Just Ukraine? Obama responded to a question on this the other day, and he's right that it's just one issue, not a whole series of issues. Scarlettail (talk) 19:19, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But in international politics, we are seeing two blocks: one consisting of EU and NATO, the other consisting of Russia, China, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran etc. In any international issues, if China supports something, Russia and Venezuela also supports that. And the two bocks are in frequesnt conflict, not only over Ukraine. We have seen Georgia in 2008. --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 05:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And Australia agrees with everything America says and does, at times taking an even more extreme view. (That's the politicians, not the people.) HiLo48 (talk) 05:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Downright daffy. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Supposing Ukraine were to be split in half, this would be more like the iron pullshade; the Slightly Chilly War. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:54, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Iron Pullshade...I like it! But Obama's wrong. The sanctions are (at least nominally) based on the Ukraine issue, but those sanctions have become an issue themselves. They're what seem to be pissing Russia off, not the US/EU verbally condemning their expansion. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:16, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The sanction were toughened after Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 05:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I counted that in with "the Ukraine issue". It itself isn't just one thing. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If the Russians don't like the sanctions, maybe they're working as intended. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:16, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Every action has a few reactions. Did you know Italy and Poland are currently fighting over Europe? Nobody likely knew how the Battle of Vienna would turn out either, but they all had their intentions. When you have a motley crew on either side, the chances of someone getting what they want down the road go up. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this naming game heading in the wrong direction? The thing that started post WWII was called a cold war because it didn't involve openly "enemies" bombing the crap out of each other, so it wasn't a hot war. This current situation seems even less intense, so it's cooler than cold. Maybe it should be a very cold war, or a quite chilly war. HiLo48 (talk) 07:51, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Quite chilly" sounds warmer than cold to me, like autumn. If I heard that, I'd consider bringing a sweater. "Cold" suggests I need to wear a coat. Maybe it's an Australian difference. ~~Do leaves even fall from trees in fall down there?~~ (Yep.)

But yeah, you're right about "cool" not working in that sense, either. The beach is a cool spot. You can tell, because while the crabs certainly aren't formidable, they aren't drafting resolutions and press releases, either. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:40, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have fall, and leaves fall from gum trees in summer. HiLo48 (talk) 05:02, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what's going on in Australia.com? Those look like "normal" trees. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:48, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Though I see Orange and the Yarra Valley are exceptionally cold. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be fooled by a small subset of information. Coldstream, the one official weather station in the Yarra Valley, has recorded a maximum of 44.8 degrees Celsius (approx 113 F). It was -3C (27 F) this morning though. Bloody cold!. You're getting close to my home there. HiLo48 (talk) 07:08, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Being fooled by small subsets of info is what Cold Wars are all about. Just trying to do my part. Cool news, though!

Speaking of autumn mists, that front of the war has definitely steamed up since the Old Days. Used to be you'd have to wait weeks for a lie to even get to the other side, let alone be repeated enough. Now the birds never shut up. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:17, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any particular order to naming cathedrals and monasteries?[edit]

I'm specifically talking about the ones that call themselves "Our Lady of Mercy" and et cetera. Is there some sort of selection process for these names? Is "Our Lord" only reserved for Jesus, and "Our Lady" only reserved for Mary, mother of Jesus? 65.24.105.132 (talk) 12:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Our Lady shows a raft of titles that Mary has been given. Our Lord redirects to God, but methinks it should perhaps redirect to Jesus, or even have an article of its own, explaining who it refers to and why. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:34, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In Christian usage it usually means Jesus; in the Ein Keloheinu prayer it means God... AnonMoos (talk) 01:59, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AnonMoos, in Christian usage, what's the address for God then? What would be higher than "Lord"? 65.24.105.132 (talk) 02:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anno Domini, "the year of our Lord, Jesus Christ". Or the oft-heard expression, "our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ". That kind of thing. Keep in mind that in Christian tradition, God and Jesus are the same. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:21, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yet not the same. Jesus died on the cross, God didn't. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:36, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that gets into the question of the Trinity and all that sort of thing. Anyway, I have heard the expression "Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" countless times. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This diagram may or may not help (text in connecting links is bidirectional)

For a traditional diagram of Trinitarian relationships, see the Shield of the Trinity, though it doesn't obey strict Aristotelian logic...

-- AnonMoos (talk) 12:18, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To quibble slightly, it's not logically inconsistent, as only the outer bars are bidirectional. We can read "The Father is God", but _not_ "God is the Father", which we'd have to do to create a contradiction. Tevildo (talk) 14:29, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's not really the traditional interpretation of the diagram, and in any case, in conventional basic logic, equivalence or identity relations are symmetrical and transitive... AnonMoos (talk) 14:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I should keep worrying at this, but I would argue that this _is_ the traditional interpretation of the diagram, and getting a contradiction out of it would involve the fallacy of illicit major. But this isn't relevant to the OP's question. Tevildo (talk) 01:28, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the ca. 1255 A.D. version of the diagram here (British Library), and you'll see the words "EST" written running in both directions in the links connecting the central node to the peripheral nodes (or two of the links -- the third is damaged)... AnonMoos (talk) 04:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So, that means the Christian God is just referred to as "God" instead of "Lord"? 65.24.105.132 (talk) 12:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By 'the Christian God' do you mean the Trinity? Both terms 'Lord' and 'God' are applied by Christians to each person of the Trinity individually, and also to the Trinity itself, see the Athanasian Creed. However, the phrase "our Lord" both in New Testament and in later Christian usage has often been applied specifically to the Son (i.e. Jesus). Similarly the word 'God' is sometimes applied specifically to the Father. Just keep in mind that Christians do not make absolute and precise distinctions between these terms. They can be used interchangeably, for example, in Revelation 11:15 "our Lord" refers to God the Father to the exclusion of Jesus. - Lindert (talk) 13:01, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

65.24.105.132 -- "Our Lord" usually means Christ, but "Lord" as a conventional translation of Hebrew adonai means God... AnonMoos (talk) 13:10, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Getting back to usage in the name of religious buildings (as opposed to more general usage): "Our Lady of..." usually means the building is dedicated to Mary, but there may be a few exceptions where the phrase is used for one of the other female Saints. Blueboar (talk) 13:04, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]