Humanities desk
< April 15	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 17 >

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.

April 16

Were college students in the past pressured by their families to attend university?

The common portrayal of college students seems to be young adults, within the 18-22 age range, usually fresh out of high school, sometimes pressured to go to university because their parents went to university, and it is expected of them to get a respectable job, like a doctor or engineer. In fictional and real history, there were Victor Frankenstein, Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, and Thomas Aquinas. I read Frankenstein and the biographies of the real people, but they seemed very eager to go to university and were not some kind of senseless major, like "Undecided". How did "Undecided" even become a major in universities? Did parents in the past ever pressure their children to go to college? 50.4.236.254 (talk) 03:10, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and at one time birth order largely determined what you would do in life, with the first-born male inheriting the land or business, and the rest needing to find another way to make a living such as the military, church, or academia. Of course, poor families without titles had little hope of sending children to a university then. Women were mostly expected to marry somebody who would provide a living, or become nuns. StuRat (talk) 03:26, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hester Prynne was a seamstress. Laura Ingalls Wilder was a teacher. Surely, midwives were women. I bet some women went into prostitution or became servants and governesses too. Hypatia was a mathematician and astronomer and a teacher. 50.4.236.254 (talk) 03:44, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't until a couple of centuries ago that midwives were educated beyond informal apprenticeship. Craftwork usually did not involve schooling but apprenticeship.

It's really only been in the 20th century that university became seen as something you must do and not a privilege for the talented, dedicated, and/or rich. In the 19th century, even high school would have been seen as optional for most people (especially farmers). In some ways, medieval universities were comparable to high schools: students as young as 14 was not all that unusual, and they all expected to study the same material for six years (some of which, like arithmetic, modern universities take for granted you already know). However, again, they were seen as a privilege for the elite, not something that everyone is expected to do. The medieval, renaissance, and even early modern equivalent of "you need to go to college or you'll end up flipping burgers" would have been "you need to work as an apprentice for the blacksmith or you'll end up a (serf/sharecropper)." The Roman equivalent to would have been "go listen to those old men argue and try to get the attention of the smartest sounding one or you'll end up giving handies to a Patron to pay rent." Ian.thomson (talk) 04:21, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Medieval university you linked to provides this statement: "During this period of study students were often living far from home and unsupervised and as such developed a reputation, both among contemporary commentators and modern historians, for drunken debauchery. Students are frequently criticised in the Middle Ages for neglecting their studies for drinking, gambling and sleeping with prostitutes." LOL. Times really haven't changed. Even today, unfortunately, college students do crazy things - drinking (even though it may be illegal for anyone under 21), gambling (which may be illegal), and sleeping with prostitutes (which may be replaced by college hook-up culture because prostitutes are illegal). Fortunately, bright students, like Isaac Newton and Thomas Aquinas, were probably too pious and conscientious to do that. There is a story that Thomas Aquinas refused to sleep with a prostitute, even at the pressure of his family to deter him from joining the Dominicans, because his celibacy was more important. Isaac Newton was probably celibate all his life. And Albert Einstein had a girlfriend who became his wife. The girlfriend shared the same major as young Albert, but she didn't get a diploma because of grades. Well, at least she married Albert. That's a life path. Raising kids is a full-time job. 50.4.236.254 (talk) 12:05, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Einstein's marital history was not exactly successful. The article Mileva Marić doesn't cover it that well. 50.0.136.56 (talk) 20:23, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Résumé and childrearing skills

Some people may have a degree in early childhood education. They will probably look for a job that involves day care and preschool. Do these people list childrearing skills on their résumé if they also happen to be parents? What about stay-at-home parents who are out of the workforce temporarily and return and want to list childrearing as a skill? Would "Parent" be a job title and $0.00 will be the compensation? 50.4.236.254 (talk) 12:14, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Usually not... although some CVs contain a section labeled: "Related Skills" (or "Life Experience" or similar phrasing) where things like parenting could be mentioned. Blueboar (talk) 12:53, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not specific to childcare, but this British "career development" website has 6 Parenting Skills That Can Make You a Better Employee. Alansplodge (talk) 15:46, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since the nautical day ends at noon,

is there a nautical Easter that starts at noon on Saturday? Is there also an astronomical Easter that ends at noon on Monday? (not to be confused with the proposal to replace the March 21st equinox and heuristically derived Full Moon dates with the actual ones) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the good old days (before the mechanical clock) the day ended at sunset. So no. Aspro (talk) 18:57, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Only for cultures with young Moon-based calendars. The Roman day ended at midnight and the Egyptian day ended at sunrise. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the nautical day was only used for navigation purposes - for the day-to-day running of the ship they used "civil" time ending at midnight. Our article explains. Alansplodge (talk) 22:12, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And both the nautical and the astronomical day starting at noon were abolished pursuant to Resolution 6 of the International Meridian Conference in 1884, though it took a while to actually happen. --76.71.6.254 (talk) 01:58, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

76.71.6.254 Most of the astronomical "epochs" still start on noon of January 1st (currently noon of January 1st 2000, according to our article, formerly often noon of January 1st 1950 or noon of January 1st 1900). AnonMoos (talk) 12:22, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

a telling omission

can the omission of some fact by a source you know is partisan or biased be taken as evidence that that thing didn't happen? like for example when X is accused of a certain (outrageous) cultural practice and a source which is anti-X doesn't mention it. or for example when country A is accused of staging a massive hoax involving one of the Earth's natural satellites, say, and country B which is their adversary not only doesn't bother to expose the hoax but actually confirms country A did do it (meaning it was no hoax.) what is the technical term for it? Asmrulz (talk) 16:22, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on that. DOR (HK) (talk) 17:08, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

that's a nice overview article you've linked. argument from silence seems to be what I was after, thanks Asmrulz (talk) 17:49, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note that an opponent might withhold harmful info to use it at a later date, when it will have more effect. For example, somebody with anti-Trump info might wait until either the midterm Congressional elections or next Presidential election to make it public. StuRat (talk) 04:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to note this is sort of the opposite of the Criterion of embarrassment, which is the speculation that if the speaker says something embarrassing about himself, it is more likely to be true. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:08, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unless they say something embarrassing but relatively trivial in order to cover up or distract attention from something more serious. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.217.249.244 (talk) 18:41, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, admitting to a lesser offense is a time-honored and often successful way of lying, but I don't know if there's a Latin term for the ploy. μηδείς (talk) 04:02, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find a latin term for it, but there's a TVtropes page on it [1]. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:17, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the examples mentioned in the TVTropes page are played for laughs. In Naked Gun 33⅓: The Final Insult (1994), protagonist Frank Drebin is retired and feels unhappy with his current life. He jumps at the opportunity to help his police colleagues with a case against a terrorist plot, and lies to his wife about his current activities. When she figures out what he is doing and gets angry about it, he tries to convince her that she is wrong about him. By confessing to having an affair with another woman. Dimadick (talk) 16:52, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What are the battles/wars in which Egypt took part in, under Cleopatra's rule?

For example, any war that Cleopatra could have remotely been connected to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeb1818 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We have a great article on Cleopatra that will answer almost all your questions. Blueboar (talk) 19:56, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is the OP's 5th Refdesk question about Cleopatra: either our article on Cleopatra is woefully lacking, or the OP lacks the skills to extract information from it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.217.249.244 (talk) 02:51, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Egypt got involved in Caesar's Civil War (49-45 BC), and the campaign box seems to be omitting the Siege of Alexandria (47 BC) and the Battle of the Nile (47 BC). Then Egypt was part of the Final War of the Roman Republic (32-30 BC), which resulted in the end of the Ptolemaic Kingdom and loss of independence for Egypt. I don't know how more plain to make it. Dimadick (talk) 17:10, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Study on the psychology between the rich and poor

I have a vague recollection about a specific psychological study that rich people are more likely to give back surplus money, but it is also acknowledged that poor people are more likely to be empathetic and compassionate. I wish to find the original study. On a personal note, I was in 8th grade Spanish class, and like the other students, I did my homework and participated in class. I earned pesos from the teacher, because of my work; and I didn't really have a reason to spend it. One day, another student asked me for 5 pesos, because he didn't do his homework or forgot to bring it; and he would get a zero on his homework assignment, unless he had 5 pesos. I had a ton of pesos in my binder, but nevertheless I refused, because I thought it wasn't fair that he could get exempted from not doing homework. He borrowed pesos from other students instead, like a social welfare system. This experience has made me think of how real-life relationships work. Perhaps, rich people believe that they have earned their place, and that poor people deserve to be poor. Also, rich people can pay for their own troubles. If I accidentally didn't do my homework one day (not likely to happen, because I kept all the due dates in my planner notebook), I could have easily paid it off with my own pesos. Meanwhile, poor people require the help of others through a social welfare program, because the individual cannot afford it. Anyway, I would like to find that research study. Maybe it'll talk about in detail about the psychology of the ethical decisions between the rich and the poor. 50.4.236.254 (talk) 17:28, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This? The book "The Natural History of the Rich: A Field Guide" was also interesting about the different approach to life sometimes taken by those who can afford it. 50.0.136.56 (talk) 20:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. The New York Times article is about reading faces. And that book is about the rich's approach to life. I'm pretty sure there is a scientific study about the generosity of rich people with surplus money and how they are more likely than poor people to give back surplus money. 50.4.236.254 (talk) 21:22, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ruby Payne may be a good place to start looking. She may have not done the study, but it sounds like the sort of thing she would have cited in her works. --Jayron 32 00:49, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note that any study on generosity should be income adjusted. That is, it's not all that generous to give $100 when you have a million, but it's extremely generous, to the point of recklessness, if that's all you have. StuRat (talk) 04:19, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See http://planetsave.com/2013/12/23/a-rigged-game-of-monopoly-reveals-how-feeling-wealthy-changes-our-behavior-ted-video/.

—Wavelength (talk) 05:00, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, rich philanthropists are not that rare and there are some strange examples. Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919) was a robber baron who was known for ruthless exploitation of his workers, anti-union activities, and attempts to use the press for propaganda purposes. He is one of the guys responsible for the bloody developments in the Homestead Strike (1892), in an attempt to break the union. Carnegie devoted the last two decades of his life to philanthropic causes, massive investments in education and public libraries across the United States and the British Empire, patronage of the arts and sciences, attempts to achieve world peace, and even worked to improve the living conditions of African-Americans.

According to a biographer: "Maybe with the giving away of his money, he would justify what he had done to get that money." Dimadick (talk) 18:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ruthenian (Byzantine Catholic) Easter Dinner and Passover Seder plate

Is there any good source addressing a comparison between the Jewish Passover Seder and the Easter meal of Ruthenian Rite Catholics?

Most of the sources I can find on this are folk/anecdotal. I'll mention the recognized Jewish traditions and the Ruthenian "variations". I emphasize that so far as I know, most of my Ruthenian relatives are entirely unaware of the Jewish parallels, and I am not sure if some of the differences are intentional, or from a loss of traditional knowledge.

(The double-indented, italicized comments referring to "our" means Ruthenian".) The six traditional items on the Seder Plate are as follows:

Maror and chazeret — Bitter herbs symbolizing the bitterness and harshness of the slavery the Hebrews endured in Egypt. In Ashkenazi tradition, either horseradish or romaine lettuce may be eaten in the fulfillment of the mitzvah of eating bitter herbs during the Seder. Sephardic Jews often use curly parsley, green onion, or celery leaves.

The first course of our dinner is horseradish, mixed with a small amount of beets, giving the "color of the blood of Christ" but retaining an intentionally bitter taste.

Charoset — A sweet, brown mixture representing the mortar used by the Hebrew slaves to build the storehouses or pyramids of Egypt. In Ashkenazi Jewish homes, Charoset is traditionally made from chopped nuts, grated apples, cinnamon, and sweet red wine

A rolled desert cake of chopped nuts and poppy seeds is our traditional snack, served before or after the main meal.

Karpas — A vegetable other than bitter herbs, which is dipped into salt water at the beginning of the Seder. Parsley, celery or boiled potato is usually used. The dipping of a simple vegetable into salt water, and the resulting dripping of water off of said vegetables visually represents tears and is a symbolic reminder of the pain felt by the Hebrew slaves in Egypt.

A salad of chopped onions and cucumber with salt and pepper marinated in vinegar is served with our main meal.

Zeroa — Also transliterated Z'roa, it is special as it is the only element of meat on the Seder Plate. A roasted lamb or goat shankbone, chicken wing, or chicken neck; symbolizing the korban Pesach (Passover sacrifice), which was a lamb that was offered in the Temple in Jerusalem, then roasted and eaten as part of the meal on Seder night. Since the destruction of the Temple, the z'roa serves as a visual reminder of the Pesach sacrifice; it is not eaten or handled during the Seder. Vegetarians often substitute a beet, quoting Pesachim 114b as justification; other vegetarians substitute a sweet potato, allowing a "Paschal yam" to represent the Paschal lamb.

The meat served is almost always ham, a seemingly intentional violation of kashrut. Again, beets are used, and a cake of butter (again, in violation of kashrut) shaped as a lamb, with peppercorns for eyes, is served with our meal as a whole.

Beitzah — A roasted hard-boiled egg, symbolizing the korban chagigah (festival sacrifice) that was offered in the Temple in Jerusalem and roasted and eaten as part of the meal on Seder night. [I]t is not used during the formal part of the seder, but some people eat a regular hard-boiled egg dipped in saltwater as the first course of the meal.

Salted hard-boiled egg is served with our main meal.

The sixth symbolic item on the Seder table is a plate of three whole matzot, which are stacked and separated from each other by cloths or napkins. The middle matzah will be broken and half of it put aside for the afikoman. The top and other half of the middle matzot will be used for the hamotzi (blessing over bread), and the bottom matzah will be used for the korech (Hillel sandwich).

Challah bread (called exactly as such) is served, this being leavened (a violation of kashrut) is served. It is broken, not sliced.

Further elements are that the meal is eaten before sundown on Easter, not after, that the parish priest blesses the basket of eggs, butter and bread at the church; the butter, pork and leavened bread being expressly treif.

Thanks if anyone can point me toward an objective scholarly treatment of this, especially in book form, as what I have found journalisticly seems far too reconciliatory and ecumenical. μηδείς (talk) 23:28, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My sister is a Roman Catholic and brought home from the Easter service a service sheet headed Hagadah. I understand this to be a Hebrew term for the ceremonies of Passover, but in Catholic terminology it relates to the devotions between the evening of Maundy Thursday and early on Easter morning. 86.176.19.41 (talk) 11:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Or Haggadah. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My overall question is, do these traditions and deviations from them reflect divergence from a common tradition, the effect of Jews who have converted to Christianity bringing in their traditions, slow deviations from past similarity because Christians have lost the original meanings, intentional cultural appropriation and/or mockery, or a mixture of these factors and others? A comparative historical study would be of interest. μηδείς (talk) 20:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The connection between Christian traditions and Jewish ones regarding the passover is that the Last Supper is usually taken to be a Passover Seder, and as such, some denominations will perform a Seder/Haggadah service (often on Holy Thursday/Maundy Thursday) in connection with that. I don't have any specific guidance from the denomination you note above, but here and here are two discourses from a Protestant point of view on The Passover, and here is a catholic perspective. --Jayron 32 13:49, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not so much interested in an exegetical or theological interpretation of events based on what is taught at church or ideas people have of introducing their children to the Jewish roots of Christianity, but in the purely bottom-up traditions of at least Byzantine Catholics passed on by tradition, within the family. There was no instruction from the Church to families (women) to follow these traditions, no expectation by the Church that parishioners do so, and certainly not any theological or ideological impetus to "get back to one's Jewish roots".

To my knowledge, this was community-wide, matrilineal, and accommodated by the Church only in so far as it was announced at what hours the priest would be available to bless the Easter baskets of challah, eggs, and butter shaped into the mould of a lamb. (I highly doubt the food was inspected or itemized--what was brought was blessed.) But the parallels to the seder meal are uncanny given the lack of instruction.

Given I know my mother's mother's mother was indeed Jewish, I have to wonder if this syncreticism is not the result of Jewish women marrying into Eastern Christian households but bringing their traditions with them, in the sphere they controlled, the kitchen. Best source I have found so far is http://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/easter-and-passover/ written by a Rabbi and mentioning the Byzantine rite, but no concrete traditional details such as I am looking for. μηδείς (talk) 19:52, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]