Humanities desk
< October 25	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 27 >

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.

October 26

Pantheism and Suicide.

Does this title cover it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Texasapathy (talk • contribs) 02:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cover what? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We are part of God, we should know. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:48, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No. Alan Vega, vocalist of the duo Suicide (band) is a pantheist, but their self titled debut album Suicide (1977 album) comprises original songs and no covers of songs, plus he died of natural causes at age 78, not suicide. His 68 year old partner Martin Rev is still active. -- ToE 09:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

funny cat

I was looking on Google at some images. They consist of a squinting cat with its paw over its mouth as if the cat was giggling. The caption read "DO YOU WANT TO KNOW SOMETHING FUNNY?" Underneath the images, Grumpy Cat gave her reply "NOPE". Where can I find images of only the funny cat?2604:2000:7113:9D00:B81E:C008:E611:FADF (talk) 11:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here and here. (Take your pic(k)). First one was first hit for "smiling cat". Second one was second hit for "giggling cat". Incidentally there's nothing funny there from the cat's point of view. This is what one of my cats does when there's something stuck between his teeth. Basemetal 18:05, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's the cat I was referring to. Thank you so much.2604:2000:7113:9D00:B81E:C008:E611:FADF (talk) 18:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is the concert harp an instrument blind people can master?

I've tried the Entertainment Desk with no result.

I've been wondering what instruments could be played without any need to look at one's hands. If a blind person has ever mastered the instrument, then it is obvious that instrument can be played without looking at one's hands. One instrument that seems particularly difficult to play without looking at your hands is the large concert pedal harp of about six and a half octaves. The large harp even has strings colored in various colors (usually three colors) which seems to show that visual cues cannot be dispensed with even for virtuoso professional harp players. Obviously there are blind players of small, traditional kinds of harps, but I am not aware of any blind player of the concert harp. Have you ever heard of a blind player having mastered the large concert pedal harp? Basemetal 12:22, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

John Parry (harpist) appears to have played a full-sized harp with no trouble. Harps have no more strings than a piano has keys and pedals, and there are numerous examples of blind pianists. There are also numerous examples of blind organ players, and the full concert organ has far more moving parts than a harp. It should also be noted that I have never heard of an instrument that a blind person could NOT learn to play; notably people like Stevie Wonder is a multi-instrumentalist that has played a wide variety of instruments, from drums to keyboards to strings. --Jayron 32 12:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do hope you're right, especially since I do believe instruments should be played (even by sighted people) using only ear, touch and proprioception (which has practical as well as musical benefits) and that the way blind people approach an instrument is in all cases the right way. At least this is how I play my instruments: currently sax and guitar, in the past cello. For these I can vouch for the fact sight is entirely unnecessary even though you often see cellists looking at their bow or, more ridiculous even, even proficient sighted classical guitarists with eyes popping out of their heads checking their left hand. Now John Parry's example by itself is not entirely conclusive. His harp seems large enough alright (though not quite as large as the modern concert harp) but it's not only a matter of how many strings there are but how demanding the repertoire is. It is difficult to compare an 18th c. traditional musician and the requirements and repertoire of the modern harp. So, while I would guess that you are probably basically right, still I would very much like an actual example of a modern blind concert harp player to entirely reassure me and prove that beyond all doubt. Basemetal 13:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is one enough of an example for you? --Jayron 32 15:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes one is enough. Madeline Link started on the Celtic harp in 2007 (all the pictures show only Celtic harps) but the page does say she took up the classical pedal harp in 2013, so she does seem to be a real example of a blind pedal harp player. Here she is again, a few years later than in your link. Still no picture of a pedal harp but again a mention that she does play that instrument too. What search string did you use? Basemetal 17:05, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think I used "Blind concert harp" or "blind concert harpist". --Jayron 32 17:12, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like there would be lots of opportunity for invention here. For example, a small tube with compressed air behind the harp could have holes punched in it that direct tight jets in front of particular strings to provide some tactile landmarks, or a camera might read the position of the user's finger and provide an audio feedback via an earpiece. Since even the sighted players have given themselves accommodations with those color codes, it only makes sense that the blind would do the same. Wnt (talk) 18:52, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or they could just play the harp, because the last thing people with disabilities need is the able-bodied to patronizingly treat them as being incapable of doing things they're quite able to do without any trouble at all. --Jayron 32 23:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is it patronizing to offer ways to compensate for the absence of some ability? I had to get glasses. Was I being patronized? There's useless gimmicks offered to sighted players too, like colored stickers meant to help you know where you are on the fretboard. Useless even for the guitar, but on the cello they would in addition be a way to hurt your neck. But take this device. It did not become a commercial success but it was meant to solve a genuine problem for harpists, sighted or not, namely knowing the positions of your pedals. Otherwise you may be looking forward to that F string sounding an F♮ and actually getting an F♯. That can come as a nasty surprise mid-concerto. Unfortunately you needed eyesight to take advantage of it. Would it have been patronizing of anyone to come up with an equivalent device that nonsighted or very poorly sighted players could use? Basemetal 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Prosecution of Governor's Spouse

Has the spouse of a United States governor (first lady or first gentleman) ever been indicted or prosecuted for a crime while the governor was in office? I can think of some close calls (Cylvia Hayes, Maureen McDonnell) but none that actually happened. Thanks, --M @r ē ino 13:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

irrelevant posting by banned user removed – Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How does that relate to Mareino's question about US state governors? Rojomoke (talk) 17:49, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did find another close call. Bill Collins, the husband of Kentucky Governor Martha Layne Collins, was convicted but only after she had left office. He was charged and convicted in 1993, some 6 years after she had served as governor, however the activities he was charged with occured during her term in office. --Jayron 32 17:56, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

party-list proportional representation voting system how

Is there a website that shows you how many votes does a party need to get in order to reach the threshold like for example in Israel, to get a seat it is 3.25%? Donmust90 (talk) 16:48, 26 October 2016 (UTC)Donmust90Donmust90 (talk) 16:48, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on which method a country uses to allocate its representation. Wikipedia has articles on the D'Hondt method while others use the Webster/Sainte-Laguë method. Both of those articles list countries using those methods, and the minimum thresholds they set. --Jayron 32 17:21, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, forget all of that. Wikipedia has an article titled Election threshold which seems to have everything you want in nice tables. --Jayron 32 17:24, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Earning Money for Dead People

Is earning money for dead people 'logically' and 'religiously' sensical? E.g., I would like to earn/tuck away money for my Late. Mother and Brother... 103.230.105.19 (talk) 18:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care what they tell you at the Western Union office, I say don't pay them to wire any money unless they get you a live video connection first. Wnt (talk) 18:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, in a few religions (ancient Egyptian religion or traditional Chinese religion with joss paper money and possessions, e.g. "hell money") it is nominally considered possible to transfer possessions to the dead, often with a substantial discount. I don't know how serious they were/are about it though. In religions that believe in the Atman, a person can donate to the poor to give to departed loved ones, since all people are expressions of the same underlying essence. Wnt (talk) 18:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

irrelevant posting by banned user removed – Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I read Johann Tetzel and it doesn't really seem like the same idea, but I suppose it's another answer for the question. Wnt (talk) 18:55, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dead people do often have trusts, there to either distribute money to the heirs, or, in the case of a more substantial trust, to give scholarships, support charities, etc., in perpetuity. In the later case, they do need to make money to replace what is distributed, as well as administrative costs, by making investments. So, it makes sense in that case. StuRat (talk) 19:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really understand what you're asking. What do you mean that you want to earn money for your late mother and brother? Obviously they cannot benefit from the money you earn for them. So, in what way is that money for them? Basemetal 19:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Money saved up for a tombstone, monument, etc., might also be said to be "for the dead", although others would argue they are really for the living. StuRat (talk) 19:49, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well it might but here might doesn't cut it. To answer the question (or to attempt to in any case) it is necessary to know what it is for. The OP has to provide more specifics if they want the RD to be able to answer their question in anything but the vaguest terms. And also, to determine if it makes sense in religious terms, one must know what religion the OP has in mind. The IP is from somewhere in Bangladesh but that does not necessarily mean they are interested in a Muslim answer. In any case, that's another important piece of information that's missing. Basemetal 20:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An Englishman, a Welshman and a Scotsman attended the burial of a loved one. To show his appreciation of the deceased, the Englishman laid a pound note on the coffin. Not to be outdone, the Welshman pointedly lay a Five pound note on top. The Scotsman sniffed "I was the one who loved him most" and laid a cheque for £100 on top of the pile. AllBestFaith (talk) 20:25, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And what did the Irishman do? Maybe this is where we go back to Wnt's Western Union warning. Basemetal 20:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Drank a bottle of whiskey in his honor, then shared it with the deceased by pissing on the grave ? :-) StuRat (talk) 22:08, 26 October 2016 (UTC) [reply]

The cheque clears a few days later. The Irishman is the undertaker. AllBestFaith (talk) 22:45, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This humor started out good, but this just seems nasty. If random put-downs of the Irish weren't already out of style, they've been pretty much unthinkable ever since the Orangemen started parading down to the post offices to pick up their EU passports. Wnt (talk) 00:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would also benefit the living person to have some of their wealth transferred to a trust or charity of a deceased person.Instead of using their own money to build buildings etc. and having to pay tax,it could be used as a donation to the trust,which as a charitable foundation wouldn't have to. Lemon martini (talk) 12:09, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The OP may find our article on Testamentary trusts to be of relevance, but such trusts, whilst arising upon the death of the deceased, are still designed to benefit the living. I agree with others above, to give a proper answer, we need more info from the OP. What does the OP expect the dead person to do with the money?

Also perhaps relevant is that some people can seemingly continue to earn money (sometimes lots of it) even after their death. See the article at [1] for the latest list of the highest paid dead celebrities. Apparently, Elvis Presley continued to earn $27 million in 2015, despite being dead for 39 years. But of course, the deceased themselves do not get the money - it goes to the heirs, or whoever the heirs have sold the rights to the celebrity's work to. I suppose the celebrity, whilst alive, could order that their intellectual property (and other property, if it has significant value) be put into a testamentary trust when they die, with instructions as to the trust deed, i.e. how the income should be spent. John Baker, you're the lawyer here - Can you see any reason why this couldn't be done? 110.140.69.137 (talk) 15:41, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blimey, is that John Baker (legal historian)? _Muffled ^Pocketed 15:46, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you're not kidding, I mean User:John_M_Baker, who's a qualified lawyer, and often contributes pro bono to this desk on legal questions. Although it might be interesting for the John Baker on this desk to explore his ancestry and see if he's related to his legal historian namesake. 110.140.69.137 (talk) 16:52, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not related to Professor John Baker, but I do know him, or used to. I took a class from him in English Legal History when he was a visiting professor at Harvard Law School in the early 1980s. We got mail and phone calls for each other.

In the United States and other common law countries, a dead person cannot own property. Instead the decedent's property is held by the executor or administrator of their estate, for the benefit of their heirs or beneficiaries. (Sometimes the estate is held open for an extended period of time, typically in order to realize on the decedent's intellectual property.) Thus, it is impossible to give money directly to a decedent. However, you can spend money to memorialize a decedent or to pay for prayers for them.

As 110.140.69.137 suggests, you can of course specify in your will what is to be done with your property, including intellectual property, and putting it in a testamentary trust is one option. John M Baker (talk) 05:10, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stream of consciousness

hi,can you please help me understand the writing style-Stream of consciousness?I read the wikipedia article,but i'm in need of a clearer answer.Azmain apro (talk) 19:13, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The idea is that people don't think in a particularly logical order, like chronologically. Instead, they start thinking of one thing, which reminds them of something else that sounds similar, which reminds them of an old friend, which reminds them of their childhood, which reminds them of amusement parks, which reminds them of something else, etc. So, a book written in that style is extremely fragmented and hard to follow, but you may eventually get some insight into the mind of the author or fictional character, similar to the psychological test where the "shrink" says one word and you say the first word that pops into your mind. Unfortunately I had a history book written this way (which I was only subjected to because my prof had written it and required it), and this method is terrible at conveying factual info. StuRat (talk) 19:24, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to this article? What is it you don't understand? Basemetal 19:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) See the article Stream of consciousness (narrative mode). I recommend reading James Joyce's Ulysses (1922) and Virginia Woolf's Mrs Dalloway (1925) as examples. AllBestFaith (talk) 20:13, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kigeli V of Rwanda

So, what about the heir to his claim? Who is the current pretender now? Our article remains silent.--78.87.221.199 (talk) 20:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The king had no children. There was no previously named heir - in line with the traditions of royalty in that part of Africa. The wider family will now have to make a decision as to which member of the family will be considered the titular king - and their choice has not yet been announced. Wymspen (talk) 22:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reference for that? We could put it in the article. Alansplodge (talk) 10:27, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BBC says heir will be announced later, quoting King Kigeli's official website. 184.147.116.156 (talk) 14:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Washington Post - Kigeli did not marry, in deference to a rule that kings take no wives in exile. Pennington declined to provide a complete list of survivors, citing “security reasons.” An heir has been selected and is expected to be announced in the next week, he said. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/kigeli-v-ndahindurwa-rwandan-king-without-a-crown-dies-at-80/2016/10/18/c02e6a22-948a-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html Wymspen (talk) 14:58, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Saenz

Has his trial not commenced yet?--78.87.221.199 (talk) 20:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For what crime exactly? He's a prolific criminal. More about him: [2]. Llaanngg (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Dylan

All tabloids and gossip columns say that he has silently decined the Nobel and that he hasn′t even contacted the Academy. Isn′t the Academy′s spokesperson a reliable source?--78.87.221.199 (talk) 20:38, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Failing to acknowledge an award is not the same as declining it. I've seen him roundly criticised for not uttering a single word of thanks, but nothing to say he's "silently declined" the word. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But he did not simply fail to ″utter a word of thanks″. He failed to go and receive the prize, or even send a proxy.--78.87.221.199 (talk) 22:09, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been a bit difficult for him to go and receive the prize, as the ceremony isn't till the 10th of December. Fgf10 (talk) 22:12, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch, I guess I didn′t know that... still, our article could include a reference to the Academy′s reaction.--78.87.221.199 (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See [3] [4] [5] [6] for some discussion surrounding what may happen with Dylan's award. If you want to discuss what to include in our article/s, I suggest you use the talk page and various methods of WP:Dispute resolution where needed. As always, you're welcome to update any articles yourself where you can, or use the edit semi-protected template where you can't. Nil Einne (talk) 04:28, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan has acknowledge the prize and said he's attend the ceremony if possible although it's somewhat unclear what he told the foundation about attendance. [7] [8] [9] [10] It also doesn't sound like he's commented on whether he's going to do what's necessary to receive the money. Nil Einne (talk) 01:24, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bhumibol Adulyadej

Was he considered a natural-born citizen of the U.S.? Did he lose his citizenship on succeeding as King or before?--78.87.221.199 (talk) 21:00, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does "except children of foreign ministers" of United States v. Wong Kim Ark apply? Mahidol Adulyadej (Bhumibol's father) was a Prince, but he was in the US as a medical student at Harvard at the time of Bhumibol's birth. -- ToE 13:05, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In what way does being a medical student qualify one as a diplomatic envoy?--Jayron 32 17:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My intent was to suggest the opposite, that, despite being a prince, Mahidol's role as a medical student suggested that we was not a foreign minister and thus not excluded from jus soli. -- ToE 04:23, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Posters on reddit and quora claim that the hospital where he was born was declared Thai territory, making him a Thai citizen and not an American citizen. (See Princess Margriet of the Netherlands for an actually attested case of this tactic.) However, I can't find a reference to this being done for Bhumibol, so this may not be true. This 1960 newspaper article does claim American citizenship for him but that doesn't have much authority either. 184.147.116.156 (talk) 17:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be it would likely be quite difficult for the US to simply give up on the territory of the hospital even momentarily so I'd expect there to be much more info if it happened. For starters since it was in a state Massachusetts, I'm pretty sure it would require both the state and federal government involvement. And given the various parts of the US constitution, I strongly suspect it wouldn't simple be the executive but the legislature that's needed. Nil Einne (talk) 01:30, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do tipped employees' income have a round number-based business cycle superimposed on the general economic one?

Especially while the long-term trendline for job X & clientele Y transits the 1 $/£/etc. neighborhood and that's the smallest bill?

Cause maybe when the long-term trend was somewhat below a dollar people didn't want to look cheap by giving a bunch of coins summing to like 19 shillings. So they give 1 banknote. The US didn't have half dollar coins in common circulation after the Sixties I think so even more coins would be needed than in Britain. Then inflation happens and the long-term trendline's somewhat above a dollar but many probably still give the same $1 bill. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:04, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The correlation between tipping and inflation is complicated, especially since most tips are paid as percentages and tips themselves seem to be one of the drivers of inflation. I only managed to find one study that looks at the effect of currency redenomination (in Ghana), which finds that, again, it's complicated. (As an aside, there were coins between the shilling and the pound that were acceptable tips in the UK - depending on the service and the era, you read about people pressing crowns, Half sovereigns, 10-bob notes, half crowns and so on into the hands of eager urchins - it was relatively easy to tip with just a couple of coins.) This is not at all related, but in searching for answers, I came across this amazing patent for a gun for shooting money at strippers. The inventors tells us that this "frees up the customer from using their hands". Smurrayinchester 08:59, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting invention, I may have to ask permission from the manager at Spearmint Rhino before bringing a money gun into the premises. But I'm not clear from reading the patent if the gun shoots the money, or merely dispenses it, and keeps track of how much is dispensed, to avoid the client over-spending. Currency notes don't make good projectiles, and I don't easily see how one could be "shot" any distance through the air, unless the "gun" automatically folded it into some kind of paper aeroplane. EDIT: To quote the patent, "a speed control switch operable to adjust an operation speed of the electric motor, thereby adjusting a currency eject speed at which currency exits the currency exit slot during operation of the device". So you can adjust the money shooting speed. Still, even at the fastest speed, I don't see the currency note travelling very far. Remember, the device is for paper currency, not coins. It also includes a speaker for sound effects. Doubt it will take off, but an interesting patent nonetheless. 110.140.69.137 (talk) 13:27, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]