Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 May 26

Humanities desk
< May 25	<< Apr | May | Jun >>	May 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.

May 26

Mini Monkey in Amber

Does anyone know anything about this amber that was discovered to contain a mini primeape-like creature trapped inside it? I saw it on TV awhile ago but I never heard the name. --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 02:59, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you referring to Ida? According to the article, that fossil is believed to be "a transitional fossil between primitive lemur-like primates and the monkeys, including the human lineage". 152.16.16.75 (talk) 00:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

No this is a fossil and it way too big. This creature was in a amber the size of pear. It had its arm outstreched and curved so that its body kind of like a heart shape. It was like the size of a mouse. Yet it pose resembled a monkey's pose. --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 02:59, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... then how about Teilhardina magnoliana? 152.16.59.190 (talk) 07:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I have not been able to find any information of a complete mammal trapped in amber. It seems it is only bones or fur (bones for the first time in 1996 apparently) from mammals that have been found in such a way, mammals, even the smaller ones, were simply too big. Are you sure it was a documentary and not a fictional show? --Saddhiyama (talk) 08:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

FYI, it's "primate", not "primeape". --Sean 17:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you sure about that? :) -Elmer Clark (talk) 16:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Or was the OP victim to a mondegreen? BrainyBabe (talk) 20:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Music Website

A while ago I heard about a website where you could put in some of your favourite songs and it would recommend some new songs for you. Does anyone know what this website is called? I tried doing an internet search with no luck. Thanks! Eiad77 (talk) 01:40, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Pandora (music service) does this and also plays the actual songs. Tempshill (talk) 02:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! That is the site I was looking for. It only lets people in the US play music, but it still recommends songs for me. Thanks again. Eiad77 (talk) 02:35, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

There is also Last FM which does something similar, and this site which I like – type in an artist's name and you get a bunch of other artists floating around the screen. The closer they are to the artist you entered, the more similar they're supposed to be. The results can be a little bit random, but it's still a fun site. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 09:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

What does an introductory logic class actually involve?

What does an introductory logic class at a major four year research university actually involve? I have looked at the wikipedia article and understand what logic studies, but I really don't understand how one studies it. What textbooks are commonly used (and provide an external link if one exists or internal if there is a wikipedia page about it)? Is logic like math or does it use a different skill set? Do most freshman enrolled consider such classes to be easy or are they painstakingly difficult? For someone who struggles with math, is this a easier than math classes from the precalculus level up? I assume much, if not all, of the information taught in the class is new material to the majority of the students. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.165.84.18 (talk) 01:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

My introduction to logic was a significant part of my first-year course in philosophy, and a significant part of the logic segment was on symbolic logic. That was, however, more years ago than you are likely old, and things have changed. While there are courses in computer logic and mathematical logic, I suggest that yours probably is a philosophy course and thus direct you also to Aristotelian logic until someone with more recent experience can reply. // BL \\ (talk) 03:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Here is a link to the syllabus of an introductory logic course from York University: http://www.yorku.ca/hjackman/Teaching/2100-fall2008/2100Syllabus.pdf. Hope it helps. Eiad77 (talk) 03:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

My first logic class was also back in the mists of time, but they taught me such rules as Modus ponens and how to set up truth tables (no waterboarding involved!). It was more mathematical than philosophical, but nothing that would scar the minds of math phobes. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps have a look at Benson Mates? Also just found a website [[1]], but don't know anything about him or it (or anything else)--Radh (talk) 08:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I took an introductory course in logic about 15 years ago... This was the text that was used. It was fairly easy and not at all hard for anyone who can grasp simple algebra. On a personal note, I really enjoyed it. Dismas|^(talk) 09:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to y'all. It is indeed a PHIL class and that link to the York syllabus was indeed helpful as all my uni's syllabi are past the course login. It is looking like this is a good option for me. --71.165.84.18 (talk) 23:36, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Finnish Sniper - WW2

I think I have actually asked this before, but I can't find it in the archives, sorry. What was the name of the Finnish sniper in WW2 that the Russians were so terrified of that they called in air strikes just to get rid of this one man (which he survived)? Apparently he killed over 750 Russians in a single year, and all he was before the war was just a farmer. Apparently he was shot in the head at one point, losing half of his face, but he still survived that, waking up on the day the invasion ended. Then he went back to farming, and I believe he died in 1956 (?). That's as much info as I have on him. If anyone can point me in the right direction to the Wiki article on him, it would be very much appreciated. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 07:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

That would be Simo Häyhä, I think. The body count 750 Russians may be kind of dubious. The Finnish Wikipedia article mentions "only" 542 kills. The used artillery strikes rather than air strikes, and and he died in 2002, not in 1956. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 08:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, well, at least I remembered he was Finnish. Thanks, I wanted to show that to someone. --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 07:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Conflicting rights

What to do when two rights conflict with each other? Is there a hierarchy in rights? For example, right of association and anti-discriminatory laws or right of free-speech and right not to be insulted. --Mr.K. (talk) 11:10, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Depends on what level of abstraction you look at it: philosophically, legally, or statutorily, for example.

At the latter end, a bill of rights or human rights statute will often specify certain exceptions for some human rights while others may be more absolute. For example, one's right of movement is likely constrained by all sorts of exceptions - you would not be allowed to move around inside another's house when they do not welcome you, for example. This will vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiciton.

At a higher end of abstraction, certain legal rights are "fundamental", and other rights are to be interpreted as being subject to them. Or, on another spectrum, certain legal rights are "fundamental" and laws must be read subject to them, while other legal rights are less so, and are to be read subject to the law. In countries sharing the common law tradition, the rights which are regarded as "fundamental" are usually similar.

You will find that many of the "universal" freedoms are today contained in international treaties, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and others.

Further up, we have, for example, political philosophy about the extent and conflict of rights. I don't know much about those, but, for example, Rousseau's idea of the "social contract" includes the concept of being "forced to be free" - where one's inate "freedom" is constrained (for example, by a law that stops you from sleeping on the road) in order to achieve greater freedom for the society. (I hope I got that roughly right.) --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 11:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

In the legal realm, I'm sure this differs by country. In the US, "rights" are codified, explicitly or implicitly, into laws, and there is a hierarchy of laws; the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any other federal or state law can be invalidated by a judge if it conflicts with the Constitution. (To use the easier example you cite, if the federal government outlawed insulting people, during the first trial of an insulter, a judge would rule the law unconstitutional, because freedom of speech is guaranteed in the Constitution's First Amendment.) Similarly, each State has a constitution which will override laws passed within that State which conflict with it. When rights of equal hierarchy conflict, or when the hierarchy is unclear (which often happens in the US; see dormant commerce clause for an example), then of course it's messier, and in the US, it's up to the judges. The lawyers for both the plaintiff and defendant will write long briefs to the judge that delve beyond the text into the background that influenced the legislators who wrote the text, the things that were actually said on the floor of the Senate ... in the case of conflicts involving the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, there will be analyses of the Federalist Papers and British common law. The poor judges read all this stuff and write a long opinion that details which of the rights "wins", and why, so that judges in all the lower courts can apply the same principles in the future. Tempshill (talk) 15:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

You write, "if the federal government outlawed insulting people, during the first trial of an insulter, a judge would rule the law unconstitutional, because freedom of speech is guaranteed in the Constitution's First Amendment". But I'm pretty sure there are jurisdictions where it's illegal to insult a police officer, and those laws haven't been found unconstitutional (yet). And of course falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater isn't protected speech either. +Angr 16:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

For concision, I didn't want to discuss libel or shouting fire, so I said "insult". You'll have to cite sources for your claim about insulting a cop. Tempshill (talk) 16:36, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'd have to cite sources if I wanted to add it as a fact to an article. I know it's illegal here in Germany (which does put more restrictions on freedom of speech than the U.S., for example Holocaust denial is a crime here but protected speech in the U.S.), and I thought it was widely illegal in the U.S. too, but I can't prove it at the moment. +Angr 16:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't know about any such law in the UK, and the UK is generally between Germany and the US on free speech issues. --Tango (talk) 17:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Police (along with just about anyone with an ounce of power) are insulted on a daily basis in the US. If it were illegal, we wouldn't have enough prisons to hold all the criminals. It would be easier to make "prisons" where the non-criminals can live and leave everyone else outside. -- kainaw™ 18:43, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

... and as every student of Australian criminal law knows, in Australia it's perfectly legal to say "fuck you" to a police officer, though not to any ordinary person, because police officers have, according to the court, stronger aural fibres than ordinary people. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:54, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

This is a complicated question and not one with a single answer. You really have to look at it on a case-by-case basis. For example, in the case of Buckley v. Valeo, the US Supreme Court ruled the First Amendment right to express oneself (by spending money) outweighed the government's desire to have fair elections. But in McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, the court said the importance of fair elections outweighed the First Amendment implications of banning a type of political contribution. So which is it? It depends. Rights are not black and white. The right to express a political opinion will have a great degree of First Amendment protection, more so than advertising and certainly more so than the "expression" of exotic dancing. So while the First Amendment may on first glance seem to be on a higher plane than, say, protection of character, which is not in the Constitution, it really depends on what type of expression and protection of character are at stake. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Tiananmen Square protests of 1989/The Internationale

Copied from Tiananmen Square talk page, thought it might get more answers here. F (talk) 12:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

If the students were demanding democracy, then why were they singing The Internationale, which is clearly communistic? 86.166.125.182 (talk) 00:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

They got accustomed to it and keep singing at any occasion?--80.58.205.37 (talk) 12:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

It is not "clearly communistic." It is merely a preferred anthem of many socialist and communist groups. If you read the first few stanzas, you will see that it is a series of complaints about the corruption of government and exploitation of the poor. How you fix that is an open-ended question. Both communism and democracy claim to be a solution. -- kainaw™ 12:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

You may also be making the mistake of assuming that when any group calls for 'democracy' they mean 'American style democracy'. Your other mistake may be assuming that everyone believes that 'American style democracy' is the best form of democracy. America is unusual in that 'socialist' is considered an insult (just like 'capitalist' is in other parts of the world). DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:33, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

A little less overgeneralization would suit most discussions, including this one. Tempshill (talk) 15:29, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

While you are right, you must also admit that the opening question is similarly overgeneralized. TomorrowTime (talk) 17:27, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

They were arguing for reform, not revolution. There is a big difference there and not understanding it is one of the reasons Westerners have such a difficulty in making sense of the opinions of the Chinese people. It has long been a common argument by those inside China (and in the former Soviet Union) that what they want is democracy within their Communist system—not an overthrow of the entire system itself. (Whether you can have such reforms within such a system is up for debate—Gorbachev wanted the same thing, but it turned out that the system really couldn't maintain itself in such a state. His attempt to push the USSR towards pro-market, pro-democracy, anti-corruption ended up with the entire state system collapsing, though there was more to it than just his reforms, of course.) --140.247.251.62 (talk) 17:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The Internationale is the anthem of socialists. Socialism is not mutually exclusive with democracy, as opposed to the dominant view in the US which I remember discovering with some shock. India, the world's largest democracy, had for many years a constitutionally enshrined socialist system. The Socialist International parties are in power in a significant proportion of the world's democracies, including, for example, the United Kingdom and Australia.

Repeat after me: capitalism does not equal democracy; democracy does not equal capitalism.

The students in 1989 wanted liberty and democracy, but they did not necessarily want rampant capitalism. They wanted political, not economic change. For many of them, the quasi-socialist economic system was serving them well. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Are there any democracies in this world that do not also practise capitalism. Indeed even communist countries are practising capitalism. 81.153.165.128 (talk) 03:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't the left-wing of socialism overlap with, even becoming communism? And isn't capitalism in China socialism with Chinese characteristics? 81.153.165.128 (talk) 03:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

They were likely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Chinese having an elite class of wealthy robber baron entrepreneurs, with the army keeping the peasants and workers downtrodden. In the ensuing years there are increasing numbers of billionaires in the "workers' paradise." Edison (talk) 23:11, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Since someone mentioned the UK; haven't the recent news shown that people (MPs and ministers) in the UK government are bent and corrupt? The people of the UK demand a general election, but the prime minister Gordon Brown won't hold one. The people in the UK know if they took to the streets in London, then its government would send in the armed Police and shoot. It is a shame that the young people of Beijing in 1989 didn't realise that any government in the world would have done the same thing. 81.153.165.128 (talk) 00:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I read a magazine article once that argued some of the students were demanding not American-style democracy but a return to purer Marxism-Leninism. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Edison is right: the guandao or "official-merchants" were one of the key targets of the protests. No doubt some of the protesters supported Marxism-Leninism, but the majority, it appears, were for democratisation and liberalisation. Both strands, of course, were united by discontent with government policies at the time.

You mean this guandao. F (talk) 09:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

The notion that the 1989 protests were about democracy is a common mistake. Among the various issues to note are inflation (over 20%), cuts to student stipends and corruption. I recall seeing banners (in Chinese) reading "we want the [communist] party to lead us correctly." The death of former General Secretary Hu Yaobang in April 1989, and the duplication of unofficial wreath-laying that followed Zhou Enlai's death in 1976 sparked a debate within the leadership as to the pace of political reform, which Zhao Ziyang lost. Oh, and it was a Western journalist who told some of the student leaders that they needed some sort of icon, like the Statute of Liberty . . . which led directly to the Goddess of Democracy. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

The notion that the 1989 protests were about democracy is a common mistake. What about the banners that said "democracy"? I find it non-trivial to dismiss one set of banners as props and another as genuine. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Clarification: The notion that the reason the 1989 protests were held was to call for were about democracy is a common mistake. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I like the idea of protesters using the anthem of the people they are protesting against, it suggests they really represent the ideals it expresses, unlike those that officially claim to do so. 148.197.114.207 (talk) 16:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

What's "the duplication of unofficial wreath-laying"? a reenactment in 1989 of an illegal(?) incident in 1976? —Tamfang (talk) 20:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

post-WWII Disarmourment Cartoon

Hello, I'm looking for a cartoon from a post-WWII disarmourment conference (probably the League of Nations) where a French President urged for disarmourment. The cartoon depicts him singing to other allied leaders and has a play on words 'Disamour' as in the French word for love. I recall it from a GCSE history textbook. Could anybody steer me to an online source of the picture? Thanks in advance, 79.72.194.53 (talk) 15:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I have the cartoon I think you are refering to. However, it's interwar and describes the Locarno Treaties - but it is the French singing Parlez Moi D'Amour Ma Cherie! to other European Leaders through radios, labelled Rome, Warsaw, Berlin, London and Moscow. Can't find it online. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 15:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

It may be useful (e.g. for search) to know that the standard spelling is "disarmament". BrainyBabe (talk) 23:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)(

gold coins again

Since I never got my earlier question on the topic answered, I will ask for something else.

I would like a list of when each country stopped making gold coins, or be pointed to a reference that will supply that information. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 18:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

"...each country" would be a very long list to research, indeed. Our article Gold coins says that "most countries" stopped minting gold coins prior to 1933. That's at the opposite end of specificity from your question. Here you can find out much about when and where gold coinage started, though only a few countries are named. This site suggests, however, that many countries have recommenced making gold coins in the past 30 years. For every country with a blue link on the page, there is a short history of its gold coins and production dates. I looked at Andora Andorra and Australia on the site's list, for example. According to it, both countries currently mint gold coins. // BL \\ (talk) 19:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean Andorra? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, I do. I have made the correction. I also wanted to comment that your "earlier question" on gold coins received quite a few answers. See "gold coins". // BL \\ (talk) 20:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

'Dug-out' officer

I've been reading a book on World War 1, and it keeps referring to "'dug-out' officers". Anyone know what this specifically means? It seems negative, as in "the men were largely young volunteers fired with patriotic courage, but poorly trained and led by 'dug-out' officers". Thedoorhinge (talk) 18:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, a dugout was a shelter in a trench system, so at a guess I would say it refers to an officer that spent most of their time hiding in dugouts ordering their men to do dangerous stuff rather than fighting and putting themselves at risk. --Tango (talk) 18:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I hit the edit button right after Tango, and it does seem that, from the context, it describes an officer leading from the safety of his dugout rather than in the front trenches. Livewireo (talk) 18:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

A Google book search [2] indicates several books about WW1 using this term for British officers who were elderly. Perhaps they were retired officers recalled to service, like being "dug out" of the grave, except they were "dug out" of retirement [3]. . [4] refers to their "obsolete tactics (and) terminology". [5] says the German Hindenburg was "dug out of retirement at age 67." The term seems to have been so well known as not to require definition in "Experiences of a dug out 1914-1918(originally published 1920)" The author had passed the age to be a Colonel and was no longer even a reserve officer, but in 1914 was called back to be Director of Military Operations (p 30). The press accused the dugouts back home of reactionary tendencies and of being "prehistoric creatures."(p129). The home office dugouts freed younger men to go to the front and command in the field. This is not to be confused with the World War 2 reference to U.S. General Douglas MacArthur as "dug-out Doug" for his staying in Fortress Corregidor while his troops on Bataan were being slaughtered by the Japanese invaders of the Phillipines, then Mac's fleeing in a PT boat when it came time to surrender. The connotation for the WW1 "dug-outs" seems to be that they were not up to leading troops in combat, but not that they were cowardly. Edison (talk) 18:52, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

'Dug out of retirement' seems to fit the bill best for the book I was reading. Thanks everyone.Thedoorhinge (talk) 19:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

medical condition from beauty procedure

is there legal action that can be taken after contracting a medical condition after getting a beautyprocedure done —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.16.222.26 (talk) 22:10, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

While we may sympathize with the problem, this is a question for a lawyer, not for the Ref Desk. The Ref Desks do not give legal advice. // BL \\ (talk) 22:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

In many (most?) jurisdictions, anyone can sue anybody for anything. It's the outcome that's in question. You'll need a lawyer, of course. -- Nricardo (talk) 00:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

You can't file initiating process without a cause of action... --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 07:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Book title....

I'm looking for help on the title of a book I once read.

My memory is hazy, but here's what i remember:

There were several people playing poker and as a result of one of them losing, he has to build some sort of wall, brick by brick for the winner. I have no recollection of anything else. For some reason I thought it was by Paul Auster but I read the wiki summaries, and it doesn't seem to be one of those.

It must have been published before 1998 because that's when i read it.192.136.22.4 (talk) 22:27, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The Music of Chance? Nanonic (talk) 22:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Gah, I'm an idiot--i just completely missed that one somehow. Thanks nano!192.136.22.4 (talk) 23:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)