Humanities desk
< March 11	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 13 >

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.

March 12[edit]

God, King and Democracy[edit]

We do not answer requests for opinion or debate. This is not a forum. AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

God is king. But why king? Democracy. Democracy is better. Nowadays most countries are democracies. Things have changed.

Vanhopt (talk) 04:15, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if God created us all, then it's more of a parent/child relationship, and most families aren't democracies, at least as far as kids having an equal say in all decisions. And how exactly could you have a democracy in deciding how to run the universe, with God having one vote to humanity's 7 billion votes ? Of course, there's the philosophy of the watchmaker God, where he created the universe but now leaves us to run our own affairs. StuRat (talk) 06:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

God is presumed or hoped to be a benevolent king, at least in theory. The hard-line theory is that He created us, therefore he can do whatever He likes with us. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

God doesn't exist. Your question is meaningless. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 07:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The existence or non-existence of God is not provable. The statements "God exists" or "God does not exist" are nothing more than personal opinions. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We are supposed to use facts at the reference desk, not fairy tales. The fact of the matter is that the postulated Judeo-Christian god (or indeed any deity) is incompatible with the laws of science, therefore is a figment of peoples imagination. Fgf10 (talk) 08:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Got a rigorous proof of that? It will come as a colossal surprise to a lot of people. (That said, the original question is pretty meaningless.) AlexTiefling (talk) 08:55, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the UK, the Queen reigns by the grace of Parliament and the government is appointed by the Queen following an election, so the monarchy and democracy are intertwined and have been for centuries. Alansplodge (talk) 09:12, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cuba[edit]

Cuba is a poor country so why does it have a high life expectancy and a high literacy rate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.116.90 (talk) 04:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because the government places a high priority on health care in Cuba ("The Cuban government ... assumes fiscal and administrative responsibility for the health care of all its citizens") and education in Cuba ("Cuba spends 10 percent of its central budget on education, compared with ... just 2 percent in the United States"). Of course, it helps that they only pay doctors "as much as $67 a month" ... and that's after a huge 2014 raise.[1] Clarityfiend (talk) 05:32, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. There are some things that do work better in a command economy. Saying "Everyone must attend school and get regular medical care" results in a better educated and healthier population than saying "You can attend school and get medical care, if you feel like it, and can afford it". Of course, there is a middle road, and many liberal but still capitalist economies, like in the Nordic nations, also do exceptionally well in both categories. StuRat (talk) 06:05, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How do GNP. life expectancy and literacy in Cuba from before communism compare to the rates in neighboring Latin-American countries?Edison (talk) 20:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These demographics were better in Cuba than some other Caribbean areas but upon analysis it was a nation of very poor natives and very rich, mainly American, foreigners. 184.145.53.236 (talk) 05:49, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There was also a small group of rich Cubans, like Batista, who presided over a kleptocracy. StuRat (talk) 05:59, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Russian literature[edit]

Does The Russian literature belong to western literature?--80.117.219.220 (talk) 14:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

excuse me, I find out the Answer in page western literature.--80.117.219.220 (talk) 15:13, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]