Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2017 January 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.

January 27

Defunct holidays

Are there any articles on Wikipedia about defunct holidays or independence days (i.e. the country it celebrates no longer exist)?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:12, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

We have list/overview articles, e.g. Public holidays in the USSR, Public holidays in Yugoslavia, and some of the articles linked from there might be what you are looking for but the articles that exist mostly seem to be about holidays that are still observed in at least one successor country. There is a section at Republic Day#29 November in Yugoslavia (1945–2002) about a holiday that ceased to be observed in 2002. There is no reason why we should not have articles about such holidays though, as long as sources exist, as notability is not temporary. Thryduulf (talk) 02:37, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

• I don't have a source at hand, but in my 400-level class on the Renaissance and Reformation (20 years ago) we were told that in some places in Catholic Europe there were so many saints' feast days that the average laborer had about 100 work-free days during the year. This was cited as an incentive for some in the higher classes to oppose the veneration of the saints. μηδείς (talk) 19:52, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

(I am all in favor of the new holidays, 4/20, May the Fourth, and Smunday. μηδείς (talk) 19:54, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

The Whitsun Bank Holiday in the UK was replaced in 1978 by the Late Spring Holiday. Whitsun (or Pentecost) falls 7 Sundays after Easter, and there was pressure from the business community to move to a fixed holiday, now the last weekend in May. Ironically, it put us at odds with the rest of Europe where Pentecost is universally observed as a public holiday; the change was introduced by Edward Heath, the prime minister who took the UK into the EU (or EEC as was). Alansplodge (talk) 22:00, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia's list of Roman festivals is pretty cool. I assume most of those probably aren't celebrated anymore, at least in their original forms. Animal sacrifice is just so messy, and who has the time? I feel like a lot of people have heard about Saturnalia, because of its connection to Christmas. I also remember learning about Lupercalia in school. Sounds like that was a real hoot: According to Plutarch, during Lupercalia, "many of the noble youths and of the magistrates run up and down through the city naked, for sport and laughter striking those they meet with shaggy thongs. And many women of rank also purposely get in their way, and like children at school present their hands to be struck, believing that the pregnant will thus be helped in delivery, and the barren to pregnancy." Bobnorwal (talk) 17:05, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Trying to recall shorty story/novella about buying land

I’m trying to recall the title of a shorty story/novella that I read about when I was young. I’m mostly certain that the story was written and set before WWII. Unfortunately I do not recall the name of the author but I do remember its plot details very vividly:

1. The protagonist is a man who is trying a buy a large plot of land in a rural area.
2. When the protagonist inquiries about land prices, the seller informs him that that’s not how land is sold around here.
3. Instead, you pay pay a flat fee and receive as much land as you can enclose by walking for 12 hours (starting at sunrise and ending at sundown).
4. The protagonist agrees and they meet again before sunrise at the agreed upon date.
5. The protagonist carries rudimentary surveying instruments and a shovel and starts his trek.
6. He uses the surveying instruments and the time in order to try to map out a square piece of land. The shovel is needed to dig out markers at periodic intervals in order to proof that he actually traversed there.
7. He manage to get back to the starting point before sundown and thus completes the sale.
8. He dies of exhaustion immediately afterwards.

ECS LIVA Z (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

How Much Land Does a Man Need? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:48, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

If you're interested, there are antecedents going back thousands of years. Matt Deres (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Item 3 seems wrong. There will only be 12 hours between sunrise and sunset, typically, for 2 days each year. See equinox. StuRat (talk) 17:51, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

In older time systems, hours were flexible, and there were by definition 12 hours of day and twelve hours of night, whose absolute duration depended on the time of year. As this (1886) story is by Tolstoy and consequently must reflect a pre-modern era, perhaps before the invention of clocks, it may be that its fictional milieu is understood to encompass that. (The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.12.94.189 (talk) 19:01, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

If they were unequal lengths, then you get a lot more land on the day when the hours are longest, during summer solstice, (assuming you could walk that long). Indeed, N of the arctic circle, or S of the antarctic circle, they would have up to 6 months to walk then. StuRat (talk) 17:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Land poleward of 84° is not bought often. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:47, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

1886 is well after the invention of clocks. Egyptians had water clocks in the 16th century BCE. Tolstoy was born within 120 miles of Moscow, where he could have visited the Kremlin Clock on the Spasskaya Tower, present since the 16th century AD. Your explanation that it's fictive is more likely, and your point about the flexible duration of hours still stands: but in the real world lack of clocks shouldn't have been the explanation. - Nunh-huh 19:58, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Could we please not nitpick the possibility of erroneous recollections by a poster who can't even remember what story it is that they have in mind? --76.71.6.254 (talk) 02:03, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't see the need to go by random recollections. The above article doesn't mention anything about 12 hours and as far as I can tell, nor does this English translation linked in it [1]. I can't speak to the quality of the translation but it does include some notes which me think it would have been mentioned if the translators removed the 12 hours to avoid confusion (or whatever). Of course it's possible the OP read a different translation. And to be fair, the OP hasn't yet confirmed it's the story they're thinking of, but the above discussion seemed to be assuming it was that story (except for StuRat) and the details seem strikingly similar. But I'd also note the OP's "recollection" is unclear anyway. Did they actually remember the story saying 12 hours, or do they remembering it sunbreak to sunset and they just called that 12 hours themselves? Nil Einne (talk) 16:06, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Social Science Quarterly

Where is Social Science Quarterly published, and in general how can I find out information like this? FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 03:47, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

The Social Science Quarterly page says it is published by Wiley-Blackwell - and that page gives you a link to the company website with all of the contact information you could possibly need. Wymspen (talk) 14:23, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

The South Pacific Times

A newspaper published in Callao, Peru, by British expatriates between 1868 and 1879. Any ideas (or suggestions) on where an archive or collection might hold material from this newspaper?--MarshalN20 ^✉🕊 15:40, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

The National Library of Peru might be a good place to enquire. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.12.94.189 (talk) 19:05, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Already have; no results. Any other good thoughts/leads welcome. Thanks.--MarshalN20 ^✉🕊 04:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Psychological experiments similar to Stanford prison experiment or Milgram experiment

Are there other (not necessarily that well-known) experiment that would induce aggressive behaviour (not necessarily among humans)? Especially, is there any experiment where the roles between the participants were symmetric? --Hofhof (talk) 18:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Asch conformity experiments? The Trier social stress test? You could also search through Category:Human subject research to see where it leads you. --Jayron32 18:21, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

This was a more invasive experiment in the news recently but it seemed cool. The experiment described at Discrimination#Game_theory produced dominant subgroups in a population that started out equal, not exactly aggression but maybe of interest to you. A survey of similar experiments is here. 50.0.136.56 (talk) 06:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Probably you already looked at this, but just on the off-chance that you haven't noticed or read it, see the section of the very article you quote, Stanford_prison_experiment#Similar_studies. Eliyohub (talk) 15:28, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

There is also the Robbers cave study. --80.187.98.124 (talk) 18:06, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Taxation as theft

What is the consensus among philosophers (if there is one) regarding the idea of taxation as theft? Benjamin (talk) 18:34, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Does taxation as theft answer your question at all? 209.149.113.5 (talk) 19:01, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

No. Benjamin (talk) 19:28, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

It could depend on what a given philosopher considers to be the supreme law of the land. In the US, it's the Constitution, which authorizes tax collection. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:35, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Then I'm not sure this page can do more than that page. (also, it's not theft, hope this helps) --Golbez (talk) 19:36, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Theft would be the illegal taking of others' property. If it's legal, it might be "wrong" on some level of argument, but it's not theft. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Did you check Robert Nozick ?--Hofhof (talk) 19:38, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

• Just as a counter-point, Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. had some important things to say on the matter from the opposite point of view. --Jayron32 19:46, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

There is a consensus among philosophers that taxation is not theft. The view that taxation is theft prevails mainly among anarcho-capitalists and objectivists, and neither of those groups has any standing in the philosophy academy. In addition, the idea that taxation is theft is fundamentally unsound, because a theft is the taking of property, but most property rights are dependent on the existence of government to enforce them, and government must be financed in some manner. (It could be financed instead in ways other than taxes, such as ownership of productive property, but most of the property-is-theft crowd find those solutions equally unappealing.) A few philosophers accept the idea of taxation in principle, but are opposed to redistributive taxation. However, this is a minority view; see the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Redistribution. John M Baker (talk) 21:10, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, well, the salaries of the representatives of the "philosophy academy" are largely paid by taxes, so there's that.... --Trovatore (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

You may be joking, but historically, that is not true. Philosophers were either independently wealthy (or at least wealthy enough - compare Markus Aurelius and Diogenes) or relied on private sponsors (as e.g. Niccolò Machiavelli or Voltaire). For more modern examples, both John Rawls and Robert Nozick were professors at Harvard University, at least theoretically a private institution. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 23:02, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Suppose some people find themselves in a place with no law, and Alice says "I made myself a spear but Bob stole it." Is Alice abusing the language? —Tamfang (talk) 08:34, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Proudhon famously introduced the idea that Property is theft!; literally, the deed for any piece of land traces back to the person who took it by force of arms, and the one who takes it away from him by force of arms, whether government or terrorist, establishes a title of equal validity. Wnt (talk) 22:15, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, yes? So what type of dwelling did he live in? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:21, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Why would that be at all relevant? He may be able to describe the system (and its moral shortcomings) without being able to escape from it - compare Thomas Jefferson and slavery. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 22:26, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Did Proudhon admit to being a party to this "thievery"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:03, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Our article stipulates that his notion of "property" was different than the more simplistic version you're likely using. --Golbez (talk) 00:19, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Different enough to exempt himself from his own criticism. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:37, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Well yes, if one's an inveterate cynic. --Golbez (talk) 00:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Maybe the world Proudhon was born into was harsh (IMO more probably education was harsh). Anyway the Gauls were conquered by the Romans and then under the rule of the Franks. Then later the realm strenghtened itself widely to the detriment of the peripheral provinces. This could explain in some way Proudhon's ideas. Besides the conditions of life of the working class at the time were very often visibly appalling. --Askedonty (talk) 22:45, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Oups! I forgot to mention the practice of requisition, the very frequent way of financing marching armies, citizen corps etc, during the French Revolution, like during the previous wars. That must have given the lead theme, alsthough the theory properly is extended compared to it. --Askedonty (talk) 00:09, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Proudhon did not actually mean that "property is theft" is a valid generalization. However, there are people who actually believe that taxation is theft, notwithstanding the internal contradictions of this view. John M Baker (talk) 01:44, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

There is no internal contradiction if you consider property to be a matter of natural law rather than positive law. --Trovatore (talk) 06:44, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Even people who hold that view (most prominently John Locke) have a hard time accounting for the creation of property. Locke has a philosophically interesting view (property is created by intermingling ones labour with goods from the public domain), but lhis model leads to the counterfactual of an infinite usable public domain - that was wrong in his time, and is obviously nonsense in ours. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:09, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

That is a possible criticism of the view, but not an internal contradiction. --Trovatore (talk) 10:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Internal Autonomy Day

Can someone help me find more reliable sources to expand Internal Autonomy Day like when the holiday was adopted, etc and what people do on this day?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:09, 27 January 2017 (UTC)