Humanities desk
< October 12	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 14 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 13

Assassination of Jiaqing Emperor

The article on says Jiaqing Emperor: “Members of the Qing imperial family tried to assassinate him twice – in 1803 and in 1813. The princes involved in the attempts on his life were executed. Other members of the imperial family, numbering in the hundreds, were sent into exile.” All three sources (most are 19th century European accounts too) don’t mentions the names of the the princes involved or the ones who were executed or exiled. Who are these princes or relative who were trying to assassinate Jiaqing? KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:29, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Chinese article, which admittedly I'm guessing here from a machine translation, the 1803 attempt was a lone assassin named Chen De (陳德), and the second was a group of around 200 led by Lin Qing (林清). Neither is mentioned as a prince, but maybe the Chinese sources have more information. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:07, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rereading Modern Chinese History by Zhu Weizheng (p. 102) has the 1803 attempt committed by "some men brandishing knives... These people were connected to Chen De, who had been the house slave of a bannerman in the Imperial Household". It goes on to say that a commission of inquiry failed to find any high-ranking person behind the plot and that those directly responsible were sentenced to a "lingering death". Alansplodge (talk) 14:43, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We also have an article about the 1813 event called Eight Trigrams uprising of 1813 which says; "Leaders: Lin Qing (林清; 1770–1813) was a hustler who drifted between odd jobs before taking over a local White Lotus sect". So neither were princes or anything like. Alansplodge (talk) 14:47, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between job and occupation?

What is the difference between a job and an occupation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.70.2 (talk) 16:03, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looking Wiktionary's pages on job and occupation, a job is a task that you have been given, or taken upon yourself to complete - consider the phrase, "I have a job for you." A regular, paying job is an occupation. It is thus accurate to refer to a regular paying job using either word. Although, anything that regularly occupies your time might also be considered an occupation, even if it does not pay (consider occupation:student). Someguy1221 (talk) 16:14, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is the level of prestige. A job is lower than an occupation, which is lower than a career. That's why a heroic firefighter (eg) who is performing humility says "I was only doing my job" rather than "I was only occupying my occupation" or "I was only enacting my career." None of the three necessarily pay, though a 'career' referenced to which doesn't pay is more highly metaphorical. An occupation can also be a value judgement on whatever thing: "They had an occupation with quilting while pointedly avoiding their spouse." It can have an expansive meaning, cf this bit from Crime and Punishment, that expands the meaning for humorous effect: “You shouldn't have gone murdering people with a hatchet; that's no occupation for a gentleman.” Temerarius (talk) 18:21, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If a firefighter were to actually say "I was only occupying my occupation" or "I was only enacting my career", they would probably be considered very strange. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:23, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would say an occupation is what you do for a living (e.g. you're a hairdresser, something that describes a category of people), while a job more specifically yours (you are a hairdresser at Jane's Hair Salon on 45th Street). Donald Trump's current occupation is "politician" but his job (such as it is) is POTUS. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 20:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC) Added: "job" implies somebody else is paying you to show up at work. So if you are self-employed (even doing something crappy like selling pretzels on the sidewalk), you don't have a "job", though you have an occupation (selling pretzels). But President Trump has a job since as POTUS he is an employee of the US government, even though the POTUS slot doesn't seem to be listed in the Executive Schedule, hmm. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 21:18, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this (mostly) and not with Temerarius above. "Occupation" is not more prestigious but it tends to be more permanent, as you could have one occupation through several jobs, as you worked for several employers doing the same sort of thing. (And if you changed your occupation while working for the same employer, you might choose to describe it as a new job.) However, I do think self-employment, with a legitimate expectation of deriving income, can be considered a type of job. --76.69.116.4 (talk) 00:54, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right, it's less about who is paying you than if you are responsible to someone else for your work schedule and activities. I know a self-employed tax preparer who has an office with certain advertised business hours, so she has to be there during those hours or her clients will be stuck and angry. I.e. she has a job. But I'd say a pro author who writes a novel on their own schedule and sends it to a publisher doesn't have a job per se. Similarly if the pretzel vendor takes a day off for some reason, they don't have to answer for it, so they don't really have a job either. As Jayron says, it's a linguistic difference. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the broadest sense, there are a large number of words to describe "how you occupy your time and earn money", including (just off the top of my head): job, occupation, career, vocation, profession, work, pursuit, livelihood, etc. Insofar as the words have differences, it's determined by context, linguistic register, prestige, etc. Here is a forum discussion from Word-reference that discusses the specific difference between job and occupation. Here is another article about the same, and also throws "career" as well. Here is a discussion at Stack Exchange including even more terms. --Jayron 32 11:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient astronaut view on afterlife?

What is the view on the afterlife with the ancient astronaut theory? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.70.2 (talk) 16:12, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As the ancient astronaut theory is a diverse set of beliefs, there is no one answer, and many of these beliefs do not have a spiritual component. I would point you toward UFO religion, which describes some notable religions whose belief systems involve UFOs, and some of which intersect with ancient astronaut theories. Someguy1221 (talk) 16:18, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Opposite of misophonia

Misophonia is the hatred of sound. Is there an opposite condition, the hatred of silence? Does it have a name? I'm thinking of a particular someone who seemingly can't stand to exist without the TV making sound, even if they are paying no attention at all to what it is showing. But, I think it is not that uncommon. Just wondering, thanks. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 19:14, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Googling "opposite of misophonia" yields something called "Autonomous sensory meridian response" or ASMR. Looking at the article, I'm not so sure it's precisely the "opposite". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:22, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sedatephobia turns up in online searches, but doesn't seem to have any real currency. Mikenorton (talk) 19:36, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ASMR is a big thing on reddit and youtube. It's not what I'm thinking of. It's more like some people seem to suffer from anxiety that is relieved by noise. I'm wondering if this is a generally recognized issue. Yeah, sedateophobia doesn't sound like a good term. I don't know what the right linguistic counterpart to misophonia would be, but I think "misophonia" has Greek roots rather than Latin. Anyone know the ancient Greek word for silence or quiet? 67.164.113.165 (talk) 20:26, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Must be extroversion. I recommend movement to Manhattan furnished room post-haste for all afflicted with said condition. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The opposite of wikt:miso- is wikt:philo-, so logically the opposite of misophonia would be philophonia. However, I see no evidence of such a word existing, except as the name of a Swiss women's choir. --76.69.116.4 (talk) 01:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yet philharmonic is a real word and means orchestra instead of liking harmony or music. Language is weird. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:36, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. The word "philharmonic" ("love of harmony", "love of music") is typically prefixed to "orchestra", for example the New York Philharmonic Orchestra, which is now called the "New York Philharmonic", but the "Orchestra" part is understood. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:14, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note that having the TV on when not watching is not necessarily to avoid silence, but often to drown out annoying sounds, like barking dogs, shouting neighbors, traffic sounds, etc. SinisterLefty (talk) 02:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This person wakes up in the middle of the night and turns the TV on. I have gotten him to turn the volume down so I can't hear it as much. That helps quite a bit. Mostly I'm just wondering about the condition. I guess I experience it sometimes and will occasionally put on quiet music to calm myself down if I'm bothered by something, but not cable news blitherers like this guy puts on, and not that often. Anyway I guess it's not something with a name. Thanks for all the responses. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 04:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it has to do with what the brain pays attention to, and what it ignores. A TV left on can be easily ignored, while other random sounds demand our attention. If trying to sleep, this is a problem. SinisterLefty (talk) 05:26, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"A TV left on can be easily ignored," Not for me, it can't. Having the TV or radio on keeps me awake, because the sounds of speech or music demand my attention.--Khajidha (talk) 15:16, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A good set of earplugs might help. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I use noise cancellation headphones sometimes, but frequent use of earplugs is a bad idea because they can cause ear infections and other irritation, at least for me. 67.164.113.165 (talk) 16:26, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Have you talked to your doctor? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:03, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure there is an opposite, but check out the work of one Gordon Hempton, whom I’ve not read but might be interesting to you. Temerarius (talk) 21:40, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]