Humanities desk
< April 18	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 20 >

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.

April 19

cyclic time

Does anyone know of mythologies with cyclic time? (If that is the right term). In such a myth-system, history progresses from point A to point B etc till point X which is the destruction of the world, but then world is recreated at point A and the entire cycle repeats itself over again infinitely. Does this concept actually exist? If so in which cultures does/did one find it? Thanks Duomillia 02:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it is an exact fit, but Mayan religion had some of these characteristics. - Eron ^Talk 02:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also see the Stoic concept of ekpyrosis. (Hey, there is no article on the subject. We need one, and I'm not the one to write it.) Talking about the Stoa, could someone explain how a philosophy-cum-religion so at odds with facts and especially human nature could ever become that popular. It's striking. Dr Zak 02:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but we do have an article with the unfortunately adverbial title Ekpyrotic. I smell a redirect! As to the popularity of Stoicism, while I am far from a scholar of comparative religions, it does seem to have something in common with at least some forms of Buddhism - in its whole life-is-suffering-self-control-and-detachment aspect - as to suggest that the underlying philosophy has at least enough appeal to the human mind and spirit to arise in more than one location. Maybe it is nothing more complex than making a virtue out of necessity, i.e., if life is a bitch and then you die, why not just call that enlightenment? - Eron ^Talk 03:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ekpyrotic is about a theory in ~~theatrical~~ theoretical physics, not about the concept in Stoicism. As far as the mind goes, Antonio Damasio has written some books that make eminent sense. My own theory about why Stoic philosophy is popular is, - well there is George Bush's remark about the "reality-based crowd". If reality sucks, well, then we must invent our own and actively disregard facts. Others have called such behavior "speaking the thing that is not", but who am I to criticize the President? Dr Zak 03:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Dr Zak If you don't mind, would you be amenable to creating at least a stub for ekpyrosis? I'm sure it will be a useful alternative to nothing at all.~~ dr.ef.tymac 04:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stoicism offers a quasi-mystical cosmogeny, yes, but its appeal was also that it sought to answer the "what is the good" in a totalizing manner. It was popular partly because it provided a coherent system for everything. That kind of solution for everything is always popular, whether you're Epicetus or Sigmund Freud. Even if the e: tells you something that seems weird or unpleasant, having a single master key to every door is itself attractive. Utgard Loki 14:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of some ancient variations on this theme; for out of the fire comes the Phoenix, and the great worm, Ouroborous, is eternally in pursuit of his tail. On an even grander scale, you can have the Eternal recurrence, with roots in Egyptian mythology, moving by way of the stoics and Pythagoras, arriving by leaps of time and faith in the mind of Heinrich Heine, and maturing in that of Friedrich Nietzsche: What if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest lonlieness and say to you 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and inummerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence--even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again, and you with it, speck of dust!' Would you not through yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: 'You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.' If this thought gained possession of you it would change you as you are, or perhaps crush you... (Die fröliche Wissenschaft, 341) Would that, indeed, not be the greatest weight? Clio the Muse 04:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should really finish that excerpt, otherwise it sounds very menacing, and poisons the name of Nietzsche. Vranak

In fact I'll do it myself: the question in each and every thing, “Do you desire this once more, and innumerable times more?” would lie upon your actions as the greatest weight! Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal?

It's no surprise that Nietzsche forsaw people 'making mischief' with his writings. Which would include incomplete quotations. Vranak

I've added dots to indicate that my quote from The Gay Science was incomplete, an omission on my part, I freely admit. The conclusion, in my estimation, detracts somewhat from the drama of the affirmation. I do not accept that it makes the passage in any way sound menacing, though, or that it in any sense 'poisons the name' of Nietzsche, for whom I have great admiration. It is most certainly not my intention to 'make mischief' with his writing-and I fully agree that this has been a problem in the past. I apologise if such an impression was unintentionally given. Clio the Muse 07:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you admire Nietzsche, therein lies the problem. He's dead, and as he wrote, what matters all eternal life? Eternal aliveness is the thing. (obvious paraphrase) Vranak

Coming back to the original question, all schools of Buddhism certainly support the idea of a cyclical universe, and on a vast time scale. See kalpa (time unit) (which sadly is a poor stub – I shall endeavour to improve it some time). Incidentally, Nietzsche is well respected in (western) Buddhism. A colleague of mine has even written a book called Nietzsche and Buddhism. --Shantavira 08:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would this be Freny Mistry or Robert Morrison, the latter I imagine? Arthur Schopenhauer had some admiration for Buddhism, though it had much less influence on his system of ideas than some people would care to allow. Clio the Muse 08:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robert lives just down the road from me. I've never heard of Freny.--Shantavira 11:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is the author of, well, Nietzsche and Buddhism, published by Walter de Gruyter in 1987. It's avilable on Amazon, I think. Clio the Muse 17:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Puranic Hinduism also has a cyclical conception of time. See Hindu cosmology. Marco polo 13:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a diversion, the questioner might enjoy this comic. --TotoBaggins 13:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shinto Buddhism, in my understanding, isn't so keen on cycles. For Yamamoto Tsunetomo, things occur according to 'the evolution of the Yin and the Yang'. Vranak

... and for a modern "myth" of cyclic time, see Groundhog Day. Gandalf61 15:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

president

heys?am looking for an answer to this question.president mh leads it.and its on the strip, clues are 1.its somewhere near indonesia 2.it was recently making world headlines 3.its either above or just below the equator.

According to List of heads of state by diplomatic precedence, the only heads of state that have “M” and “H” in their names are Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and Roh Moo Hyun of South Korea. But these countries are nowhere near either the Equator or Indonesia, nor am I aware they've been in the news recently Not sure what you mean by "its on the strip". Are you sure this person is a president, and not a head of government such as a prime minister?JackofOz 05:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed Waheed Hassan was leader of the Maldives, which is a lot closer to Indonesia and the Equator, but he left office in 2005. JackofOz 05:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...and José Manuel Ramos Horta is Prime Minister of East Timor. (It's near the equator and Indonesia and it has been in the news for the past few years. But Horta is Prime Minister, not President and, well, his initials are JMRH, not MH.) ---Sluzzelin talk 07:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good one. He did stand for president in the recent election (9 April), and was widely seen as the front runner, but the result of the first poll was indecisive and a run-off election will be held on 8 May - see East Timorese presidential election, 2007. I seem to remember his having resigned as Prime Minister in order to run for President, but don't quote me on that. Amazingly, our article on Ramos Horta says absolutely nothing about this presidential bid. I've never heard anyone use the "Manuel" in reference to him, so I'd be very surprised if that would get into the question the questioner is trying to get an answer to. JackofOz 08:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Belief About Life Before Birth?

I was having a religious conversation with someone who is Catholic today, and the topic about souls existing prior to birth was brought up. I was nearly certain that Catholics believed the soul and the person were created when they are conceived, but my friend claimed that people's souls always existed but just never had a body. Can someone please help clarify this? Thanks! --pie4all88 10:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That someone has given you a not-standard answer. As per [1] and [2] the soul is created at conception (at least this was is the official stance of the catholic church these days). Most "religious ppl" have not idea about religious dogma of their religion and rather stick to labels as catholics, protestants, orthodox, muslims, jews, etc. Truly ask them about particular issues of their religion and you will find that most of them have no idea or simply don't agree with the official stance of their church. Flamarande 11:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can also look at metempsychosis and transmigration of souls for the various times the theme has been introduced into Christian theology. All forms of Christianity and Judaism have flirted with the idea, but it is not orthodox at present. Utgard Loki 13:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which Right-Wing dictatorships has Red China supported?

Which Right-Wing dictatorships has Red China supported? I'm intrested in learning whcih right-wing dictatorships China has supported since 1949. I have heard accusations that China has supported Pinochet in Argentina, the South Africans in Angola, the rebels in Afghanistan and even sent arms to the Contras. If anyone knows any other rightwing dictatorships and movements China has supported since 1949 I'd be intrested in hearing about them. --Lee1863 15:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lee. You will find some information on this topic in the page dealing with the Sino-Soviet split. Much of China's foreign policy, from the days of Mao onwards, was shaped and determined by growing rivalry with its former Communist partner. Principle and ideology was no obstacle to the geo-political path taken, support being given to groups as diverse as the Islamists in Afghanistan and the Contras in Nicaragua. China also went to war with Vietnam in 1979, and continued to support Pol Pot well after his downfall. The lietmotiv of Chinese foreign policy was opposition to what was termed 'hegemonism', essentially opposition to the Soviet Union and its allies. The political complexion of any particular regime had little importance against this background, and China is likely to have embraced a right wing dictator or two, though I have no specific information on its relations with Augusto Pinochet, who, incidentally, was the president of Chile, not Argentina. Clio the Muse 18:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't they support Somalia when the Soviet Union switched to supporting Ethiopia? Actually, I've always been amazed that China was not able to crush their hegemony, since they had way more people....Evilbu 19:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

all of english literature from beowolf to beatnick?

hello, I am new to this so please bare with me. I recently got interested in a female who is a school teacher. I found out she use to be english major and she loves literature and is very smart. when it comes under the sheets, she is definitly pleased with me, but out of bed in normal convo I can tell she feel uncomfortable silences. I ask my cousin and He says its cause I dont know english literature and cant understant her. He said I need to know it all 'from Beaowolf to beatnick' and be able to know at least the titles of all of them so she does not go over my head when she talks.

He told me to go to internet or wikipedia and get the list of all major titles of english literature. He said it is very long but He has seen it online before. where can I get the list? I will do anything to learn more ok? thank you for helping me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AWorldLikeIPit (talk • contribs) 13:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

You should probably start with English literature. Of course, that is a huge topic that some people spend, quite literally, their whole lives studying. Rather than trying to pretend to understand it in order to impress her, a better approach might be to get her to help you in your attempts to learn more about it. If she is very knowledgeable, you are not likely to catch up to her by simply reviewing a reading list - but you can still hold a conversation with her. Ask her what she thinks. Ask her what her favourite books are - and then read one of them, and then discuss it with her. You might find that she is delighted to help you discover what it is that she loves about literature. Good luck. - Eron ^Talk 17:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there's a particular list to be found, he's probably talking about Harold Bloom's Western Canon, which can be found here: http://home.comcast.net/~dwtaylor1/theocraticcanon.html (There are four parts, so follow the links.) Note that Bloom compiling such a list is pretty controversial; aside from the fact that the number of people who have read all of it probably numbers around zero, one can question the worth the of any such list itself. zafiroblue05 | Talk 18:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You'd better rope her into this endeavor; you are not going to have enough time to read more than a few of these before she dumps you, it sounds like! Tell her you are interested in enriching your understanding of English literature after having gotten involved with her, ask her what her favorite books are, then talk to her about them as you read them. Honestly it'll make you look a lot better than trying a sitcom approach where you cram Beowulf and then find that she hates Beowulf or hasn't even read it herself. At the moment this plan sounds the plot of a bad romantic comedy. --24.147.86.187 00:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! Quite frankly, this has the makings of disaster. Women detect insincerity in the same way a shark detects blood. Your relationship will die for the simple reason that you will be spending most of your time scaling the heights of the literary canon! Clio the Muse 08:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's possible to "fake" knowledge of literature. You can be a minah bird with some critic or other, but that's it. It is a field as difficult and vast as physics. Now, it's possible that she will be fooled, but, if she is, she is, herself, a fool. She may take kindly to you for showing an interest, and she may pretend to be fooled, but starting a relationship with anything as dishonest as fakery is a deep, wet, kiss of death. Utgard Loki 14:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also take under consideration the (in my opinion) pretty strong likelihood that your cousin is wrong. Often those embarrassing, uncomfortable gaps have more to do with a difficulty in actually communicating than in any knowledge either partner has - and difficulties in communicating will affect not just the sufferer's personal life but their ability to succeed in the work world as well. Listen to yourself, carefully, the next time the two of you have a discussion. Do you ask her questions about herself and her opinions, or is the conversation more about what you think and feel? Do each of you respect the other's beliefs and values and not try to prove the other wrong? When she asks you a question, are you prone to answering in one-word replies (which can lead the other person to "monopolize the conversation" in a desperate attempt to fill up the gaps)? When you don't know a specific, exact answer to a question, do you just shrug instead of trying to explain what you *think* might be the case? Do you "shut down" a bit (if you know what I mean) when discussing things such as emotions and feelings? As importantly, is she doing any of these things? --Charlene 01:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the US law regulating game shows?

According to this essay about the quiz show scandals and their aftermath, Congressional legislation in 1960 "declared illegal any contest or game with intent to deceive the audience". However, I can't find the name of that Act; preferably I would like a link to the current version. All I could find in Wikipedia is the statement in the article quiz show scandals that "After concluding the Harris Commission investigation, Congress passed a law prohibiting the fixing of quiz shows." I've also looked at the Wikipedia articles game show, reality television, and Standards & Practices. --Mathew5000 19:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check the 1960 amendments to the Communications Act. The quiz show regulations are briefly mentioned in the third article of this journal. HTH. dr.ef.tymac 20:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dreftymac! I put the cite into the article quiz show scandals. --Mathew5000 09:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Samurai

What people could divent samurai? Samurai was hereditary? All samurai took oath?--Vess 20:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Divent? I don't know what this means. Do you mean something similar to bestowing knighthood?-Czmtzc 20:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "become" – like French devenir. --Lambiam ^Talk 09:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should find all the information you are looking for, Vess, in the Samurai page. The Samurai, from ancient times, were Japan's traditional warrior class, and followers of the code of Bushido. However, after the Tokugawa shogunate was established in the seventeenth century, they steadily evolved into a ruling elite of bureaucrats and administrators for the Diamyo, or great feudal chiefs. With the Meiji Restoration in 1868 they lost their monopoly to bear arms, after the new government decided to establish a modern, western-style conscripted army. Samurai reaction to the modernisation of Japan led in 1877 to the outbreak of the Satsuma rebellion, and their defeat at the Battle of Shiroyama. The samurai tradition, of course, never entirely went away, and many of the officers in the new army came from the old elite. These traditions might be said to have re-emerged in the early 1930s, in organisations like Kodaha and later the Imperial Way Faction, and the entry of the army into politics. Thus old attitudes and values, when coupled with militant nationalism and fascist-style ideologies, brought, it might be argued, a new and much more militant direction to Japanese foreign policy from 1931 onwards. Clio the Muse 22:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just so Vess isn't confused, the usual spelling is "samurai", which is why Samuri redirects to Samurai. :) JackofOz 02:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Silly me! For the sake of consistency I have now changed my spelling. Clio the Muse 07:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

fire alarms

whose in charge of the number and placement of fire alarms placed in a household 24.107.236.95 20:35, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, depending on the local building codes, safety codes, by-laws, etc. - Eron ^Talk 20:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I would start by asking a local building inspection authority.-Czmtzc 20:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In a household? Assuming you mean a private home and not an apartment building or duplex... In the U.S. at least... When insuring that home, insurance companies will ask if you have a smoke alarm (possibly as many as one for each bedroom plus one for the kitchen) and if you answer no, they may not insure the house. And if you aren't able to secure insurance, mortgage companies won't lend you the money to buy the house. So, while there's no federal law (There may be state level laws though as suggested by this and this) to say that you must have one, it's incredibly hard to get around not having one unless you lie and say that there is a smoke alarm when in reality there isn't. If you mean some sort of apartment complex, then there are local building codes and laws that would cover such a thing and that information should be available from the previously mentioned inspectors as well as the town offices for the town that the building is in. Dismas|^(talk) 09:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And if the homeowner lies and there's a subsequent fire (which, of course, will never happen, not to them; fires, like car accidents, happen to other, less capable people), the insurance company won't likely cover the damages. Tenants may find that their tenants' insurance won't pay up if investigators find evidence that the detector was shut off or somehow covered. This evidence is fairly easy to find, despite the popular conception that everything in a fire, including all evidence, will be irretrievably destroyed. This is also why some killers try to hide their crimes by setting fires - they don't know that investigators can in almost all cases easily tell whether a victim was alive or dead before the fire. --Charlene 01:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help with quote:

"Work like you don't need the money Dance like no one is watching Love like you've never been hurt."

Who said it first? I've seen it attributed to Mark Twain and Satchel Paige, among others. Ronbarton 20:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you haven't heard of Wikipedia's sister project Wikiquote. After a simple search, it turns out to indeed be Sachel Paige. [3] Reywas92^Talk 22:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not sourced, though. According to this site [4], and several others, it was Mark Twain, in the form, Dance like nobody's watching; love like you've never been hurt. Sing like nobody's listening; live like it's heaven on earth. Unfortunately, once again the precise source of this quotation is not given, and therefore I am not prepared to say that it definitely was Twain. Clio the Muse 23:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural cues, like "being hurt", expectations of narcissism in dancing, and the formula "dance like" instead of "dance as if" all place this definitely post 1975. Are "hurt' and "eart'" rhymes that would occur to Mark Twain? --Wetman 01:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's so trite and banal, Wetman, so lacking in wit, and so juvenile in sentiment, I would be amazed if it was Twain; I certainly do not believe these words were ever penned or spoken by him; but, as you see, it's out there, and in more than one location. There is even a T shirt for sale with this quote, or something similar, attributed to Twain. Clio the Muse 02:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

William Purkey seems to have played a part. (Twain is often given as the "author" of mystery quotes, as are Shaw, Wilde, Dorothy Parker and Shakespeare.)--HJMG 11:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Names

What type of name is Köksal and Dragani?

Köksal seems to be a Turkish name, and Dragani seems to be Italian. Marco polo 00:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

White Southeast Asians

What is the percentage of Southeast Asians whose skin are white and whose skin is like Indian people because I noticed some people Southeast Asians are fair white and some are brown-kind? - Anonymous

Please define white. Seriously, if I use a digital SLR camera to take a picture of a person skin under bright sunlight using ISO 100 and automatic exposure. What range of RGB values should a white skin have. 202.168.50.40 23:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What .40 is getting at is that race is a very muddy concept. Almost nobody (not even those with albinism) actually has white skin, and everything darker than that is a matter of culture, not biology. --TotoBaggins 02:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It really depends on where you mean by Southeast Asia. Taiwan is considered Southeast Asia, and I've seen some fairly pale people from there. Same with Japan. If you move further down, to say the Phillipines, then you will see much darker skin. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 06:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toto, I am curious as to what you mean by skin colour being a matter of culture, not biology. How exactly is skin colour influenced by culture (apart from fake tan of course)? Skin colour is a product of both genetics (the amount of melanin in your skin) and environment (the amount of exposure to sunlight), but I think both would fall under biology. 137.138.46.155 07:21, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The actual, physical, coloration of skin is a matter of biology. What particular colours or shades are classified as "white" is a matter of culture. - Eron ^Talk 13:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I understand better now.137.138.46.155 15:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]