Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 July 26

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.

July 26

explosion memorial pins

It seems a lot of people are looking for lapel pins with the same design of the Deepwater Horizon explosion memorial ribbons. What could be a good place to start?24.90.204.234 (talk) 01:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

To start selling them or to start buying them? If you want to buy some, and you can't find any readily available premade ones, I suspect there are lots of places that make customized pins - I'd search online (but verify that the company is reputable before you order one). If you want to make them and sell them, well you'll probably want a business plan (if you want to make a serious investment), machines that make pins of some sort, a design, etc. Falconus^{p t c} 03:52, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't going to make and sell them. Actually, I wanted to purchase at least one. Are there any companies selling premade Deepwater Horizon memorial ribbon pins?24.90.204.234 (talk) 07:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Jewish identity

Does anyone know of a book or paper that speaks at length on how adversity helps Jews hold fast to their religious identity/faith? To put my question into context, the Kaifeng Jews never faced bigotry in Chinese society, so they began to assimilate very quickly. In order to advance their family's social status, many Jews gave up learning Hebrew so that they could study the Confucian Classics and pass the imperial exams. This happened on such a wide scale that by 1800 CE, the last Rabbi died leaving no one with knowledge in Hebrew. This is the exact polar opposite of what I am talking about. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 06:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually the Jews of Kaifeng did not "assimilate very quickly". For a period of about 300 years, when they were totally cut off from any other Jewish community in the world, they continued to observe Jewish practice to the best of their knowledge and ability, and even the many missionaries who tried to convert them during this period were very very unsuccessful. I can speak authoritatively on this subject since I have very recently completed my manuscript of a book entitled "Jewish Religious Observance by the Jews of Kaifeng China" (and am currently looking for a publisher). Simonschaim (talk) 07:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I was recently asked on my talk page to better define my question. By their religious identity/faith I meant exactly that: someone who still clings to their faith and thinks as themselves as Jewish. And as for adversity, the setting doesn't really matter because Jews in both Christian and Muslim territories were faced with the choice of conversion or death (and sometimes expulsion depending on the circumstance). A more extreme example of this are the Ashkenazi and Karaite Jews during the First Crusade. These Jews would rather die than convert to Christianity. A less extreme example is when the Jews of Yemen were being threatened by their Muslim rulers during the time of Maimonides. These Jews were told to persevere by Maimonides in his Epistle to Yemen. This is the type of community I would expect a scholar to write about in a paper on Jews clinging to their faith. This is, of course, all dependent on whether someone has actually written a book chapter or research paper on the subject.

Concerning the Kaifeng Jews, scholars believe they were cut off from other Jewish communities by the year 1500. By 1600, they already began to adopt Confucian rituals into their practice. These was even more so evident by 1700. If you have anymore comments about the Kaifeng Jews, please leave it on my talk page. I only used them as an example. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 19:09, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Two phenomena are relevant:

• Martyrdom in Judaism, the extreme extent of Kiddush Hashem ("sanctification of the [Holy] Name" rather than its profanation) is maintaining one's Judaic faith and resistance to forced conversion in the face of a death sentence.
• Crypto-judaism, notably the conversos of the Spanish Inquisition era, are examples of taking Judaic observance and faith underground in the face of such prohibitions.

There doesn't seem to be much in the English Wikipedia but websites on Judaism and the history of the Jewish Diaspora might offer more material.-- Deborahjay (talk) 19:20, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

The OR answer, to paraphrase Tony Blair, is education, education, education. Traditionally, Jews have been prepared to suffer all kinds of privations in order to ensure the next generation is well educated. Rejection of the religion by those well-steeped in its knowledge has been and is comparatively rare. It also strikes me (more OR) that the all-encompassing aspect of the religion - it also has strong elements of ethnicity and culture - make it hard to really part from, hence the phenomenon of "Chicken soup Jews". --Dweller (talk) 16:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Jealousy

why am i jealous? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.22.179.18 (talk) 11:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

See Jealousy. It will explain every possible doubt you have. --151.51.156.20 (talk) 14:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I have to disagree with that - its a poorly done article that contains a lot of original research. 92.15.0.178 (talk) 19:48, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to work on improving it. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

It seems to me like something that would be useful from a natural selection standpoint. If you feel bad whenever some other person in your social group has lot of resources or a good mate, you will likely try to acquire the same, which will increase your chance at procreation. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 02:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

It will also increase your chances of breaking several of the Ten Commandments. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

because your focus is on others, and what they have, instead of on the things you do have. Thankfulness is a good remedy. Also, depending on what you are jealous of, you may only be looking at the positives of something, and not the negatives. (i.e.: People with tons of money have problems that come with that which poorer people don't.)Somebody or his brother (talk) 21:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

See also; Seven deadly sins, Saint Paul in his letters gives a good remedy: "Always think of the other person as better than yourself, and nobody will take the credit..." MacOfJesus (talk) 02:40, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

It usually begins with Low self esteem, then comparing yourself to others. The remedy: seek something to achieve and be single-minded in going out to achieve it. MacOfJesus (talk) 09:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Is there a clear distinction here between jealousy and envy? I'm not convinced that the responses are making the proper distinction (or for that matter, whether the OP means the one excluding the other). To put it simply: "jealousy" is my distress that someone wants what I have (e.g. my spouse, my job) and perhaps fear losing (and that perhaps I don't deserve, therefore can't hold, etc.); "envy" is when I covet something someone else has that I lack. -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

The OP was extremely vague, so the responders are doing the best they can. The two terms are often used interchangeably. And neither jealousy nor envy is very good or useful, in general. Only as incentives to work on getting one yourself. Like a car, for example. Your neighbor gets a new car. Do you steal it? No, you work at getting enough money to buy one for yourself. If it's a spouse, though, if your spouse is intending to run off with someone else, your being jealous up front will do nothing but hasten such an event. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I think the kind of Jealousy meant is found in article page: Seven Deadly Sins. We can use the word again differently in; "God is a Jealous God...." MacOfJesus (talk) 00:45, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Doug Nye

How can I contact him by email? Kittybrewster ☎ 12:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Probably the best way is through one of his publishers or try asking a magazine he writes for like http://www.motorsportmagazine.co.uk/contact/ MilborneOne (talk) 19:20, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Japanese socialist literature

Anyone knows if there is any online archive/website were one can find scans of old Japanese socialist publications, such as Shinkigen? --Soman (talk) 16:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Education in Stretham, Cambridgeshire

I am researching Stretham education starting with Pugh (ed.) (1953) Victoria County History: Cambridgeshire Vol. IV p. 158 (via British History Online). His information is tantalising but seems incomplete so I am looking for his original sources. For example, all on page 158 ...

• Note 25 he says "Bp.'s Mun., Ely, G 2." which according to here means The muniments of ... the Bishop as 'Bp.'s Mun.' The arrangement of the Episcopal manuscripts is described in A. Gibbons, Ely Episcopal Records. The capitular manuscripts are housed in one room but are not permanently arranged in shelves or cupboards: the numbering used here is that found on the documents when they were examined in 1949-50., so I guess I cannot access these
• Note 26 he says "Bp.'s Mun., Ely, B 6." ibid.
• Note 28 he says "Rep. of Nat. Soc. 1846–7 (priv. printed)". I believe from here this translates to "Result of the Returns to the General Inquiry made by the National Society, 1846-7 (1849)". When I google book search that term I get modern works such as The Census and social structure:....
• Note 32 he says "Archives of Nat. Soc." which means what? The National Society for promoting religious education? If so, they are not digitised

I am trying to find out more about the education (from as early as possible) in Stretham, Cambridgeshire. VCH is a good starting point (see above), but does not give enough general information. VCH references are obscure (to me anyway) in any case. What is going through my head is something like "early (? 15 century) through to the mid 19 century education of the poor in Stretham was led by the church or guilds and feoffees (i.e. charities) as it was in all of England. There were attempts to centralise such education via national societies". I do not have any references or clues if any of that stuff is real. Help me find information on education in Stretham, Cambridgeshire please --Senra (talk) 17:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Your best bet is probably to contact Cambridgeshire Archives. They have plenty of knowledgeable staff who will try and help you, even if you can't get there yourself. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:28, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Which Ukrainian stringed instrument

... is in this photo? It's unclear whether a plectrum is used, but I'd suppose so. I'd think the multistringed outer portion resembles a zither of some sort, but the neck would seem to allow fingering (chording?) with the left hand. -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:31, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it's a type of bandura. I don't think the bandurist pictured in your image is using a plectrum. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Freehand Drawings of the (50) United States

I recently saw one of several available online videos of Senator Al Franken drawing a freehand map of the United States. He begins by drawing a mostly straight line which forms the northern borders of Washington, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, and Minnesota, then finishes drawing Minnesota, where he's from. As a kid, I was also extremely interested in geography, and by the time I was 10 or 11, could draw a similar map (although not so well, and not in 120 seconds). Anyway.... I found Mr. Franken's drawing interesting because the first state he finishes drawing is Minnesota. When I draw a map of the United States, I start with Utah, where I grew up. This has made me wonder if other people from other states begin their maps with their own state. Just curious and would love to read everyone's input. Thanks! Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 19:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I would guess not those who are from Hawaii and Alaska... Googlemeister (talk) 19:49, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Ha. Good one. But then again, the certainly could start with one of those two, even though they don't directly border any other states.... Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 19:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

When drawing a map of the countries of Europe, I usually start with my native Norway. (Sort of like drawing Alaska first when drawing the US, but maybe not quite.) Jørgen (talk) 20:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

(Pure anecdotal evidence alert) I have to admit, I haven't drawn the outline of a country or continent in I don't know how many years. I did notice that I'd usually start somewhere at the "top" (or north, like Norway and Minnesota, but unlike Utah which doesn't even participate in the outline!!!). I generally start drawing things (maps or other) somewhere at or near the top, often with a distinctive feature (Norway) or somewhere in the middle of the top (Minnesota). I don't draw very often or well though. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, sorry, I should have watched the clip before answering. Franken doesn't just draw the outline, but all the state borders too! I don't think I've ever done that for any political entity. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Is drawing on graph paper cheating?--Wetman (talk) 21:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Only if you're drawing an outline of Colorado, Wyoming, or Utah. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I am in Pennsylvania, but whenever I do this (yes, I actually do draw freehand maps like this sometimes), I tend to start with Maine, do all of New England, work my way down the East Coast, then head west. — Michael J 22:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Right-handers probably prefer to start at the left-hand side, because then they can more easily see what they have already drawn. Left-handers probably prefer to start at the right-hand side, so that they can more easily see what they have already drawn. (Where do ambidextrous people prefer to start?) Everyone probably distorts the last drawn features the most, because of too much or too little space having been allowed for them.—Wavelength (talk) 22:03, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

See http://www.wikihow.com/Draw-a-Map-Of-the-USA. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:34, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Franken begins with the straight line which defines what the scale of the map is going to be. If you start with Utah, you have to make it the right size or you might run out of paper. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

True, but with a little practice, this problem goes away. :-) Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 11:15, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

For an additional challenge, the artist can add the state capitals.—Wavelength (talk) 00:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Interesting side-note. I remember seeing a study where Canadians from different places were asked to draw a map of Canada, and a lot of people greatly overestimated the size of their home province, especially people from the small Atlantic provinces. I'd bet that a lot of people from geographically small states like Massachusetts or New Jersey would do the same. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 02:21, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I've drawn political maps of Canada and more general maps of North America and the world for my daughter. My map of Canada starts on the west coast, the southern bit of BC. I then draw it mostly clockwise, finishing with the handy horizontal line separating us from the wildlands to the south. Unless I was specifically trying to convey something about the arctic archipelago or the Atlantic provinces, they'd be very rough and (in the case of the arctic) quite generalized. I live in Ontario, though I don't think I draw its borders at any particular time. When I'm drawing North America, I start basically in Baja and go clockwise. I couldn't draw a US political map without some help, though I have no problem identifying all the states on an unmarked map. For a world map (very rough), I do North America first, then do SA, starting at the joint of Panama and going clockwise. For Eurasia, I start in Scandinavia and go counter-clockwise. Matt Deres (talk) 13:48, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

See Circle of latitude#Other notable parallels, 94th meridian west, 100th meridian west, 102nd meridian west, 103rd meridian west, 104th meridian west, 109th meridian west, 111th meridian west, 114th meridian west, 117th meridian west, 120th meridian west, and 140th meridian west.

—Wavelength (talk) 16:59, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

The exercise involves both memory and eye–hand coordination. -- Wavelength (talk) 00:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Jury question

What happens if in a jury of twelve (like in most trials in America), 11 are for imposing the death penalty on the defendant while 1 is for life without parole. --190.178.176.120 (talk) 22:35, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

The sentencing rules vary from state to state. We have articles on sentencing and sentencing guidelines which I have not looked at yet. A quick survey of google suggests that if the jury can't decide on a sentence within a reasonable time, the judge will recommend a sentence and then they will vote on it. Presumably that kind of negotiation would go on until a decision is reached. The defendant has already been found guilty, so he can't get away without a sentence unless the judge overturns it on the spot, as sometimes happens. I think in some states the judge determines the sentence and the jury simply determines what the guy is guilty of (i.e. murder, manslaughter, etc.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:14, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

How about a reference, here on the Reference Desk, instead of guessing? Here is a comment on deathpenaltyinfo.org stating that all US states that allow the jury to decide on a death sentence require a unanimous death sentence vote. (In the United States, death penalty trials are held in two stages: First, a trial to determine guilt or innocence; and then a sentencing trial. Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia are key cases.) To go further to answer exactly what happens, if the jury jury in the sentencing portion of the trial remains deadlocked at 11 to 1, it's called a hung jury and there is considered to be a mistrial for the sentencing portion of a trial, and the whole sentencing trial has to begin anew with a different jury. Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

But a mistrial of the sentencing, not of the conviction, right? And are you absolutely sure it's done the same way in every state? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:11, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you absolutely sure it varies? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:38, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Considering that there would be something like 33 states, plus the federal government with their own version of death penalty laws, it would seem more likely that it varies then that it would be uniform. Googlemeister (talk) 13:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I get the impression from google that there may be certain standards imposed by federal courts where capital cases are concerned. But as you suggest, every state has its own laws about whether the death penalty is even an option, and each individual state defines its sentencing rules in general. For example, some states have the "three strikes and you're out" rule and some do not, so the sentencing options would differ from state to state on non-capital felonies, at the very least. I'm sure it must be mind-boggling to some non-Americans that we have 50 sets of rules about so many things, but that's "states' rights", constitutionally protected as long as those individual states' rules don't violate the constitution or interfere with things the feds are allowed to regulate, such as interstate commerce. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:51, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

"Are you absolutely sure it's done the same way in every state" — I am speaking in generalities, and of course every state has its own laws about the conviction of a criminal; but when it comes to death penalty cases, the two US Supreme Court cases I cited above set out the standards that are required in order for a death penalty verdict to be constitutional; and that includes separate guilt and sentencing phases; and a judge can't assign a sentence of death; it has to be a jury; and as I cited earlier, all states currently require a unanimous jury verdict for a death penalty sentence. "A mistrial of the sentencing, not of the conviction, right" — yes; google "sentencing phase" mistrial for many examples. Some states do allow a judge to enter a (non-death-penalty) sentence if there is a mistrial in the sentencing phase. Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:34, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

So the answer is that there are certain federal regulations, but there is still latitude for certain things, and it does vary from state to state. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:52, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

The fundamental answer to the original poster's question does not: There is a mistrial in the sentencing portion of the trial. How this is handled afterwards varies, yes. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:38, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I can't work out what you're saying, Comet Tuttle. Seems to be a word or two missing. "Does not" what? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

"Does not [vary from state to state]" ... was Comet Tuttle's reply to that of Baseball Bugs immediately prior. (64.252.34.115 (talk) 01:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC))

No, Bugs. There are no federal regulations. There are Supreme Court rulings. And there is no variation, all states must abide by "separate guilt and sentencing phases; and a judge can't assign a sentence of death". 75.41.110.200 (talk) 04:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Semantics. A Supreme Court ruling amounts to a federal regulation. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)