Humanities desk
< November 1	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 3 >

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.

November 2

Clerks

If a clerk has only one year under "terms served" on oyez.org does that mean that they only served one term? Are the oyez records complete? 32.214.93.47 (talk) 00:19, 2 November 2014 (UTC)thankshttp://www.oyez.org/justices/stephen_g_breyer/#more[reply]

It is an area where they might be giving only approximate coverage. They could name only one term, e.g the first, for privacy concerns regarding the other clerks and every clerks. --Askedonty (talk) 11:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for short story about sports journalist

I'm looking for a humorous short story about a sports journalist that's sent to the opera or the theatre. He writes a review as if it was a sports event. It might be by Mark Twain, but I haven't been able to find it. Sjö (talk) 14:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You might try Ring Lardner - that's his sort of turf. -- Deborahjay (talk) 19:19, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The "New Horizons in Music Appreciation" piece on The Wurst of P. D. Q. Bach is a Beethoven symphony with sports commentary... AnonMoos (talk) 22:31, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Life skills

Is it true that the base to every skill and competency in life is confidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.41.238 (talk) 15:17, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. Well, maybe yes. I'm not sure; my opinion is pretty worthless here. As is anybody's. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 16:12, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "the base"? Obviously one also needs physical ability, training, practice, understanding, and possibly other relevant skills. Many people get by without confidence, but in most cases it helps.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:14, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You could check out the hierarchy of needs pyramid, which is reflected in Admiral Kirk's comment that "Survival is the first order of business." Once survival is ensured, you can start moving up the pyramid. Doing so can help build confidence. Experience improves confidence. With the old caveat, "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:34, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Confidence can be misplaced, as in the case of the "unsinkable" RMS Titanic.

—Wavelength (talk) 18:51, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

is this Maslows hierarchy of needs linked to Erikssons stages of psychosocial development? 194.66.246.26 (talk)

19:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Only as they were adjacent chapters in my psychology textbook when I did my first degree. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:15, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the inquiry I would have to say that it depends. Can you give an example or two of what "life skills" you are referring to? Bus stop (talk) 20:27, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I recall once seeing a documentary about prisons. The warden said that self-esteem (i.e. confidence) is not a problem for hard-core criminals. What they lack is a conscience, or empathy. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:17, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There can be a disconnect between confidence and skills if they are in different areas of a person's development. I don't think one can really generalize without greater specificity of knowledge of the sorts skills under examination. Furthermore we need to know more about the "confidence" under examination. A confident person may feel free to question their assumptions. Is that confidence or doubt? The Wallendas' skills are specific. If they have confidence it may and may not spill over into other areas of their lives. But it is surely not confidence alone that keeps them on their highwire. And every adjustment in their balance can be seen as a very good response to a lack of confidence. Bus stop (talk) 21:47, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nik Wallenda, who is set to attempt a couple more death-defying feats this very night in Chicago, has attributed his success to absolute, total concentration on what he's doing. Focus and persistence have long been regarded as the key to success in any field. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've been watching videos of Nik Wallenda. I wouldn't encourage him to do what he is doing. On the other hand, I'm impressed. Bus stop (talk) 22:46, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aaaaand... He just finished both walks - the second one blindfolded. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:06, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, watched it live on Discovery Channel. Amazing. Bus stop (talk) 02:11, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The hour and a half buildup made the actual first walk almost anticlimactic. Maybe 10 minutes. And the blindfold walk took maybe 2. Now there's a confidence-builder. But you're right, it's not to be recommended as a popular trend. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:15, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Crimes in the US military

When a crime is committed in the US military, they (the military) follow a completely different criminal law system than that of the average everyday crime in the USA (i.e., a crime not committed in the military). My question is: are these criminal hearings and trials open to the public and the media, just as any regular crime in the USA would be? Or are they completely closed off, private, and not open to the public (and/or the media)? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:39, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Manual for Courts-Martial, rule 806, is pretty clear: "In general. Except as otherwise provided in this rule, courts-martial shall be open to the public. For purposes of this rule, “public” includes members of both the military and civilian communities." Further rules provide some exceptions, but the emphasis is on public trials as in non-military trials. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 16:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A-ha. OK, thanks. That's helpful. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As far as we know, the only major secret court in the US is the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. And, as far as we know, they don't do trials, just warrants. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:50, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"How to write fiction" books

In English there are countless "How to write fiction" books, some of them even focusing on particular genres. I was wondering if there were any of such books in other languages, especially in French or German. Could anyone give examples? --BorgQueen (talk) 20:43, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

French example: Comment écrire un roman (Devenir Écrivain Simplement t. 1)

German example: Wie schreibe ich einen Bestseller: Geheimnisse, Techniken und Erfolgsformeln von Bestseller-Autoren 184.147.131.89 (talk) 21:49, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! So they do exist. Hmm. --BorgQueen (talk) 22:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Presuming such books are written by successful authors, keep in mind this axiom from Dogbert: "Beware the advice of successful people - they do not seek company." And if it's not written by a successful author, how could you trust it anyway? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:38, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do we know whether any author (or entertainer, musician, actor ....) is "successful"? It's a serious question. Being talked about a lot in the media (which is not necessarily any better than not being talked about, eh, Oscar) is no measure. For example, is Rupert Murdoch successful? Sure, he's made a lot of money but his personal life is a catalogue of disasters, and he probably has to pay people to sleep with him or keep him company. Some authors/artists produce lots of stuff, but are perennially broke because their creations have a limited audience or their artistic temperament doesn't lend itself to sane money management, and they have to do other work to make ends meet. Is that being successful? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:27, 4 November 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Very well said, Jack. If money was the sole measure of literary success, Stephenie Meyer or E. L. James would be excellent role models. But I don't think their novels are exactly masterpieces. Far from it, in fact. --BorgQueen (talk) 23:21, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]