Humanities desk
< July 16	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 18 >

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 17

Regarding Japanese history.

Hello Wikipedia editors and contributors,

I would like you to answer a simple question regarding Japanese history, if that is possible. Are there any reliable websites and/or articles regarding European influence on Japan's culture, language and/or political development? If so, could you please show them to me? I would sincerely and greatly appreciate it.

Many thanks in advance,

― Ann _{( user | talk )} 02:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for the language, see Japanese language#Vocabulary, Gairaigo, Japanese words of Portuguese origin, Japanese words of Dutch origin. and List of gairaigo and wasei-eigo terms. Oda Mari (talk) 05:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abrogation in the Qu'ran; by date, circumstances or free will?

I saw the Channel 4 documentary Qu'ran on Monday and one of the scholars said that he believed that the contradictory passages were to give Moslems the opportunity to think and use free will.

I had not heard this idea before, is it widely accepted? I had heard that some Moslem's believe that abrogated passages should be decided 100% by the order that they were revealed and others believe that they should be decided by circumstance.

By circumstance I mean that passages given in time of peace should be applied in peace time, those given in time of war should be used during war, etc.

Which of these three methods of deciding abrogation are widely held beliefs and which minority views within Islam? -- Q Chris (talk) 11:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds as though belief 1 (thinking and free will) is the same as belief 3 (applying based on the circumstances). Both require freedom, flexibility, and some capacity of rational thought. Ergo belief 2 is likely to be more popular amongst zealots and fundamentalists whilst beliefs 1/3 are more common amongst your everyday Muslims. Like every religion, there is a continuum of belief, with some people being more serious than others. Plasticup ^T/C 12:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1 and 3 are not necessarily the same. If there is a rule "when there is an amber alert launch the doomsday aircraft" and a higher authority decides the state of alert then for the people following the orders there is no free will involved. The way that the "free will" decision was described was that there could be different rules that apply in a state of circumstances and it is up to the individual to decide. The commentator said "Islam wants you to think for yourself" or something like that. -- Q Chris (talk) 13:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting questions. I'll leave a message on Talk:Islam and the Islam wikiproject that there are questions here. There may be more arising from the TV programme. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's an article Naskh (tafsir)... AnonMoos (talk) 22:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shafi'i

Who introduced Shafi'i school of thought to Malaysia and Indonesia, which the malays and the indonesians claimed as Shafi'i Sunni Muslims? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.30.202.29 (talk) 13:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of flag-pin wearing by American politicians?

Is there any way of determining when the practice began? I see the US Flag Code 4USC8(j) mentions it "The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart." I suspect it started before that was added, whenever that was added. Шизомби (talk) 14:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recently according to Time magazine: [1] Rmhermen (talk) 15:03, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good article, thanks! Шизомби (talk) 04:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a question about nazi IQ

I happened upon this http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/grady/nazi.html - nazi IQ's as you can see. What about other WWII personalities - does anyone know of any data. What about historical figures in general - the bigger the list the better.87.102.86.73 (talk) 14:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simonton, D.K. (2006). Presidential IQ, Openness, Intellectual Brilliance, and Leadership: Estimates and Correlations for 42 U.S. Chief Executives. Political Psychology, Vol 24, No 4, 511-526 estimates the IQ of US presidents. Here is the main data, although please read the methodology before you rush off telling your friends your new findings.--droptone (talk) 01:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)--[reply]

the methodology was in the book right? and not on the internet? Thanks.87.102.86.73 (talk) 10:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a journal article, so the methodology is there. This looks like a copy. The purpose of looking at the methodology is so you can have a nuanced understanding of how they came to their estimates and this will hopefully cause you to be more cautious when making bold claims like president X was dumber than president Y.--droptone (talk) 11:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. quote "this will hopefully cause you to be more cautious when making bold claims like president X was dumber than president Y" - a bit presumptuous of you..87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I meant it generally, but yes, yes it is.--droptone (talk) 16:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I was hoping for a world-wide spread of (historical) leaders/figures . . I think I saw something like this a while a go (mostly estimated of course) - does anyone remember this - seems like the sort of thing Time magazine would do? anyones memory jogged??87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

law

what is the difference between appeal and revision? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.17.229.55 (talk) 17:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An appeal is a request for a change to a decision. Are you referring to a reversion, which is a type of contract? I couldn't find "revision" at law.com or at this legal dictionary. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 19:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How many governors of Virginia are there?

I'm working on List of Governors of Virginia. There are generally four classes of governor: Ones chosen by the state legislature, ones chosen by the voters, acting governors, and military governors. In toto, there have been 81 distinct terms of governor, served by (if my math is right) 66 different men. Ten of these have been acting terms, and two were military terms. Eight or nine were chosen by the legislature.

My dilemma: The official numbering of Tim Kaine, the current governor of Virginia, is 70th. His official website plainly states that he is the 70th governor of Virginia. I am having great difficulty getting the math to work out on this. The only way I can find for there to be 70 governors is if:

We ignore the ones chosen by the legislature (popular vote was instituted in the 2nd constitution)
We include military governors (so far as I know, no other Southern state does this)
We include all acting governors
We exclude second distinct terms by people. (that is, if someone served 4 years, then was off 4 years, then served again, we only count him once)

That way, we come up to 70, but that's a pretty roundabout method; most states that exclude second terms also exclude acting governors, and excluding the ones elected under the first constitution also seems odd - especially since many sources mention both Patrick Henry and Beverley Randolph as the first governor of Virginia. (Henry was under the 1st constitution, Randolph was under the 2nd). I sent the governor's office an email but I think their server broke, as all I got back was a blank response. Does anyone know perhaps anyone who works in Virginia history who could pose this question? --Golbez (talk) 17:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of your problems is that you are trying to do original research in coming up with the "correct" number. To the extent that this question is to lead you to the correct number for the article, you need to take whatever the most reliable published sources say about it. (Verifiability, not truth) If this question is just a matter of personal curiosity, there may well be someone reading here who knows the answer. It is a puzzler all right. ៛ Bielle (talk) 17:33, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, there are no published sources that I can find online which number the governors. The numbering is solid back to #36, since none of the ones since then have been acting or second terms. But before then is when it gets wonky. And even better, when I google for "2nd governor of Virginia", I get Thomas Jefferson (who was the 2nd one under the first constitution), but when I go for "3rd governor of Virginia", I get results for Thomas Nelson Jr. (3rd under 1st constitution but 4th after an acting governor) AND Robert Brooke. (3rd under 2nd constitution). Sigh. --Golbez (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting question that you should continue to research. It's certainly not "original research" to figure out how Gov. Kaine got to be considered #70, if its properly sourced. (Original research would be if you, for example, decided that he's really #73, or if you gave in the article an educated guess on how they arrived at the number.)

My wild guess is that the numbering emerged in a haphazard way, and only became "official" through conventional usage rather than any system. I know, for example, that some early historians of Virginia didn't realize that William Fleming had briefly served as acting governor. They probably didn't count him, but perhaps did count some acting governor they were aware of. Who knows? If you don't get a good response here, your next step is implied in your question: you say "there are no published sources that I can find online which number the governors." Sounds like it's time to consult some sources that are not online! The Internet and Google Book Search are great, but most—and I do think it's most—sources for serious historical writing can still only be found in the quaint ol' library. —Kevin Myers 03:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea, I'll do it when I can ... unfortunately, our library was under ten feet of water a few weeks ago and is still generally unusable. :( The world is conspiring against me completing this list! --Golbez (talk) 13:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The state of Virginia has great consideration of history, in general. Look to official state sites, and historical associations, who have tabulated the governors. During the American Civil War there were two governors for some states, one elected by the Confederacy voters and one installed by Union military forces. They should probably both be listed as "governors." I'm not sure if Virginia suffered thus as did Kentucky and Tennessee. If the same person was governor in two or more separate non continuous terms, then the terms should be counted separately, like the U.S presidencies of Grover Cleveland. Edison (talk) 04:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No site online, official or historical, bothered numbering their lists. We would be the first! And sending an email to the governor's office again resulted in a blank autoreply, so I have no faith they got it. --Golbez (talk) 13:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Early terror bombings: Bombing of Frampol and Wieluń in English works

I am trying to find English sources discussing the following events from early WWII period: Bombing of Wieluń, Bombing of Frampol. They were one of the first terror bombings performed by German Luftwaffe in WWII; however it seems that they are marginalized in non-Polish sources. Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For Wieluń: Bekker, Cajus. (1994). The Luftwaffe War Diaries. pp. 31-3. OCLC 30353222. Unfortunately page 31 missing from the google preview.—eric 23:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if this is related to this.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:47, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]