Humanities desk
< December 18	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 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.

December 19

Banks Make Me Nervous

During my high school years, 1956 - 1961, I came across a poem in one of my text books, it was - to me - very funny. I think it was by a famous American author but he could have been British. One line was: Banks make me nervous OR Banks frighten me. Can anyone help me to find the poem and the author?Aster43 (talk) 00:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I think of immediately isn't a poem, but a short story, and the author is Canadian, not American or British. The title is "My Financial Career" by humourist Stephen Leacock. It is from an era when banks took themselves very seriously indeed, when they were only open to the public from 10 until 3 five days a week, which is where the expression "banker's hours" originated. ៛ Bielle (talk) 03:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematical Equations in Das Kapital

What are the main Mathematical Equations in Marx's Das Kapital? --Gary123 (talk) 05:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Offhand, I'm afraid I don't know. But your question puzzles and interests me. Your user page announces that you supports Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory and The Three Represents; how can you claim to support Marxism without a familiarity with Marx's most famous book? Tama1988 (talk) 10:00, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it any different from saying you support capitalism without being familiar with the equations used to model money-supply or macroeconomic theory? He may be familiar with the book but not the mathematics - he certainly wouldn't be the first person to skip equations when reading a book! -- Q Chris (talk) 10:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bit different. There aren't any non-trivial mathematical equations that model Marxism for a couple of reasons. First, Marx was principally a philosopher, not an economist. Second, if of adequate complexity, the equations would either end up being self-contradictory or rely on false premises. Wikiant (talk) 17:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Capital Marx does express some of his ideas in algebraic format. C is Capital, L Labour S Surplus Value etc. This should not be confused with the equations that are used for modelling economic relationships (e.g. in structural equation modelling) in present-day econometrics. Itsmejudith (talk) 17:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Countries with a Protestant heritage more secular in the 21st century than those with a Catholic or Orthodox heritage?

If you look at these maps [1] [2] and examine them, it seems like that the people in the countries which were once Protestant in Europe are more likely to have abandoned religious belief altogether than those countries which Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox Christianity dominate. This is pretty much a definite link - the only real exceptions to the rule should be that France is quite secular for a Catholic country, Germany a mixed Catholic/Protestant coutnry is not too secular, and of course Iceland which still maintains strong religious traditions. But definitely in the UK, Holland, Scandinavia this rings very true. The opposite can also be observed in the strong religious traditions of such European countries as Italy, Poland and Romania. Is there any academic work on this? Also, in countries with a large secular population whose ancestors would have been Christian, are there more Muslim immigrants in these countries?--Nubile Servant (talk) 14:18, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to edit the last couple lines out of your post before someone decides it's soap-boxing, or debate-inciting, and therefore against Ref Desk rules, and deletes your question. APL (talk) 14:28, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done.-Nubile Servant (talk) 14:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You want to be careful not to confuse correlation with causation. While religious belief and practice may be weaker in many European countries with a Protestant tradition than in those with a Catholic tradition, you can observe almost the opposite in the United States. Churchgoing and belief tend to be weaker in the parts of the United States with relatively large Catholic populations than in those with predominantly Protestant populations. Also, the United States is a country with a Protestant majority that is decidedly more religious than most European countries. Marco polo (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recently heard that the main reason people choose Protestantism or Catholicism has little to do with dogma or doctrine. The underlying key is a person's belief about individual determination. Protestants do not seem to believe in power determinations outside of one's self. 75Janice (talk) 01:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)75Janice[reply]

I can think of two possible reasons for differences in religious fervor between Protestant and Catholic nations:

1) Protestants tend to have more of a "question everything" attitude than Catholics, which can ultimately lead to questioning, and deciding to reject, one's own religion.

2) Catholic nations tend to be poorer and less developed. These are conditions in which religion thrives. StuRat (talk) 18:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As stated, correlation does not imply causation, but if you were to look for a cause, maybe the fact that the protestant countries switched religions once implies that they, as a people, are more willing to consider ideas that go against their current belief. Belisarius (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the maps a second time, though, I'm not so convinced that there really is a correlation. There's way to many exceptions, look at the France, Iceland, Bulgaria, Austria, Slovenia and especially the Czech Republic, the most atheist country on in Europe, apparently. Atheism might skew a little more towards protestantism, but I'm don't think it's enough that pure random chance alone can't explain it. Belisarius (talk) 20:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think Belisarius's points pretty much refute the thesis. There does not look to be any real correlation; Iceland has strong connections to evangelical christianity, and is protestant, and places liek France and the Czech Republic, which were largely historically Catholic are highly secular societies today. Nope, don't see any connection at all. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:46, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"... poore and less developed" also tends to mean less educated. Is that the correlation, perhaps, rather than poverty or even original brand of Christianity? ៛ Bielle (talk) 23:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Based on my knowledge of religiosity in the United States, I'd guess that there is a negative correlation between it and education here, though of course educational status does not solely determine religiosity here. There may also be a negative correlation between the size of an urban area (or rural community) and religiosity. I suspect that churchgoing is more common in rural areas and small towns than large metropolitan areas. Marco polo (talk) 00:58, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can't really count France because of the French revolution. And the US, which some have mentioned, seem too much of an exception as well, given that they got for a long time all the Protestants who left Europe because of their (strongly-held) beliefs; in addition, many young Christian denominations (= Prostestants) started there. - Not sure if that helps with the original question. I'm hesitant, however, to rely much on that misnamed map. What exactly does it mean that "there is a God"? That they are religious? That they believe in a Christian God? (...) And how was it measured? Who did it? (...) Too little data, even though I have confirming "anecdotal evidence." --Ibn Battuta (talk)01:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise if I didn't make clear that the correlation I was drawing between education and religiosity was the inverse of the correlation StuRat had noted between poverty and religiosity; that is, the greater the poverty, the greater the religiosity, and thus, the less the education, the greater the religiosity. My post was awkward. ៛ Bielle (talk) 01:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) I agree that correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation, and that even the correlation is questionable. Compare the Czech Republic and Slovakia. According to the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, 70.2% of Slovaks were Catholic and 23% Protestant. 96.5% of Czechs were Catholic, 2.4% Protestant. So, at the time of Czechoslovakia's formation in 1918, the Czechs were, by far, the more uniform in their religious identification, and they were very strongly Catholic. Today, 27.4% of Czechs are Catholic (estimate), whereas 59% self-identify as "atheist, agnostic, non-believer or no-organized believer." Meanwhile, 69% of Slovaks are Catholic, 13% atheist, and 6.9% Protestant. (From Demographics of Slovakia/Demographics of the Czech Republic) You could write a book theorizing why Catholicism took a nosedive in the Czech lands while remaining strong (and, indeed, becoming part of the national identity) in Slovakia, but I doubt you could apply your results to many other countries. There are just too many factors that contribute to the religiosity of a given population.

Religion is also something that comes and goes in waves; communities tend to stick with their general religious affiliation, but just how strongly a group feels about its religion may vary between generations or in response to outside events (think Croatia). There are also those individuals who rarely go to church, or even rail against the hypocrisy of religious institutions, but who nonetheless identify themselves as religious when filling out surveys because they believe their religion to be an important part of their cultural identity (see, for instance, Religion in Italy). And even if nobody ever converted/lost faith, the religious makeup of any country would change over time due to immigration and the like (compare the Poland of 1931 to the Poland of today). So even the question of "Which country is more religious: x or y?" can be answered in a variety of ways. As for Muslim immigration, that has a lot more to do with economics than it does with religion. Immigration laws, availability of jobs, and willingness to accept refugees are generally the deciding factors. --Fullobeans (talk) 02:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As previously stated, one should be very careful in attaching causation. You can divide european countries in Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox, but you'll soon discover that that all these three categories contain remarkable diversities. The role of religion and politics in Ireland and France are starkly different. The issue of church-n-state relations is starkly different in Scandinavia compared to other protestant-dominated regions. And so forth. As per protestantism and secularism, I'd say that the complete dominance of Protestantism in Scandinavia (as compared to Germany, Britain, Netherlands, where Protestantism was continously challenged by presence of non-protestant minorities) enabled an historic transition towards secularism, as state and church were completly merged (as opposed to catholic countries, were the church had a parallel structure with loyalty to vatican) the church was subject to the same democratization process as the state as a whole. Thus it could not act as an effective counterforce against modernization and secularization of the state, at least not in a larger timespan.

Talking about migration, whatever the religious identity of the migrants in question, colonial relationships tend to be the most important factor in European former colonial powers. The fact that Pakistanis have migrated to Britain and Algerians have migrated to France in larger numbers has virtually nothing to do with the the Protestant/Catholic divide. --Soman (talk) 20:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

is it worth buying the dvd of monarchy tv series?

Hi, I saw a dvd for the tv series Monarchy, and was thinking of buying it, then I thought I'd better seek advice first. Is it reliable, and is it good? It's been emotional (talk) 17:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable? Probably. Good? Depends on what you like really. I'm guessing you might have an interest in the history of the Monarchy (or know someone who does) so I'd say go for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.111.99.97 (talk) 23:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

David Starkey's article shows him as qualified and ascerbic, so that he doesn't offer the party line without critique=entertaining and thought-provoking. Afaik, Julia Rossi (talk) 08:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ta for the advice, I think I'll get it, since I also had the opportunity to watch it on tv (didn't know it was being repeated here on oz tv, so how good is that), cheers, It's been emotional (talk) 15:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ganymedes picture

From where is this picture of Ganymedes. ----Seans Potato Business 20:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a Pierre et Gilles picture. DuncanHill (talk) 20:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You would appear to be correct. Thanks :) ----Seans Potato Business 23:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How old is this picture of Ganymedes? ----Seans Potato Business 00:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found it on Commons, according to which it is an engraving after F. Kirchbach, 1892. DuncanHill (talk) 02:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And Budweiser adapted it in for an ad in 1906DuncanHill (talk) 02:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ganymede has no 's'. Ganymedes is someone else. Xn4 (talk) 05:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Ganymede can have an "s". DuncanHill (talk) 05:52, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I see that the question I was answering was changed while I was answering - to make it clear "Ganymedes" is a valid spelling for the mythological youth, and Ganymedes should redirect to Ganymede (mythology). DuncanHill (talk) 06:08, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bodies buried in Great Wall of China

Is there any truth to the rumor that workers were entombed inside the Great Wall of China while it was being built(their remains being discovered when sections of the wall collapsed or were damaged)? I have heard similar apocryphal stories about the Hoover Dam, which I understand are false. 69.224.113.5 (talk) 21:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did the Chinese dispose of Jimmy Hoffa? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There apparently was some kind of fanciful legend that it was prophesied that Shih Huang Ti's work on the Wall would result in the death of ten thousand, so he had someone named Wan (a word meaning "ten thousand") killed to avert such misfortune... AnonMoos (talk) 23:42, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a self-fulfilling prophecy from here. Julia Rossi (talk) 11:06, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

American television commercials

I remember a series of commercials for Philip's Milk of Magnesia a few years ago, in which a wife typically would tell her husband that he should have used Philip's. I'm guessing that, in the commercial, the husband was named Raymond: I think she addressed him by name in virtually every commercial. Does anyone remember these commercials, and if so (1) can you confirm that it was "Raymond", and (2) any idea what the wife's name was? Nyttend (talk) 00:52, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't personally remember, but apparently the couple were "Raymond" and "Maureen": [3]. - Nunh-huh 03:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poverty gap in Israel/Palestine; Jews & Palestinians

Where do I find data on the difference between the wealthy and the poor in Israel, and if possible, with separate data for Israeli Jews, Israeli Arabs, and Palestinians?

In the last few weeks, I've read somewhere that Israel has the widest gap between wealthy and poor citizens of all developed (or industrialized or OECD?) countries. I've tried forever to find that article again (maybe Haaretz?) and trace it to its (original = data!) source, but to no avail. I'd appreciate any suggestions as well as other (original) sources about the poverty gap(s) in Israel/Palestine. Thanks, Ibn Battuta (talk) 01:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article did appear in Yedioth Ahronoth in Hebrew, possibly including "again" or "still" in its title. I'll have to leave the search for others, but will add the following points for general background context:

The comparison, if I recall correctly, was probably with "Western" countries in Europe.
It (probably) covered the population of the State of Israel excluding the Palestinian territories of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, which also means excluding Jewish Israeli citizens (a.k.a. "settlers") residing in those territories.
Mainstream reportage of socioeconomic studies of Israel refers to population "deciles" ( 'asironim, עשירונים) plus an "upper one-thousandth" (alpiyon 'elyon, אלפיון עליון).
That topmost icing on the cake (= thin and rich ;-) are those whose income goes through the ceiling. To appreciate the income range, the breaking point between the fourth and fifth decile (the only one I know by heart, as it's my household's), is 10,000 NIS, or at the time of the most recent survey (when the exchange rate was roughly 4NIS=US$1.00), the equivalent of US$2,500. :*The large cluster at the low end of the income scale is characterized by low-income households, many in the ultra-orthodox and Arab sectors, with a sole (or no) wage earner and an above-average number of children.
Bear in mind that (a) V.A.T. is 15.5% and levied on foods including bread, dairy, and fresh produce, (b) parents pay annual fees for primary and secondary education despite the so-called "free public education," (c) both public and private transportation costs are high, and (d) etc.
To offset the detrimental facts in the previous point, consider that the health care system based in the nationwide HMOs provides some significant quality-of-life in that sphere, which in other Western economies would be more costly and difficult to obtain, possibly out of reach for low- and middle-income inhabitants.

I hope this helps shed light on the picture, and believe me it's not a pretty one. -- Deborahjay (talk) 13:14, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deborah, Thanks so much for your answers, they're a treat every time! Yes, I'm exactly curious about the income gap for Jewish non-ultra-Orthodox Israelis and Arab Israelis (as compared to other developed countries) and for Palestinians (from one statistic I've seen, the gap is rather low, apparently because there aren't so many rich Palestinians, compared to other areas and countries??). --Ibn Battuta (talk) 17:50, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Duchess Natalia/Maria Petrovna of Russia

Somebody must have messed up somewhere when creating these articles, Grand Duchess Natalia Petrovna of Russia (1713-1715) and Grand Duchess Natalia Petrovna of Russia (1718-1725). One of them is Maria Petrovna 1713-1715 instead. I not sure maybe they were both named Natalia. And also which Natalia is this really?Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 19:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peter and Catherine (whose children, with very few exceptions, died in infancy or shortly afterward) had a tendency to re-use names for their children: if I remember right, they had several little boys named Peter and several named Paul. I don't remember these two little girls; you could consult Massie's biography of Peter the Great. As far as the portrait: the description says that it was painted in 1722, so if the articles themselves are correct it's surely the younger Natalia: she was a few years old at the time, while her sister had been dead for seven years. Nyttend (talk) 14:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]