Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2019 January 25
| Humanities desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < January 24 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 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. |
January 25
[edit]The vice of lowness
[edit]In the portal for Aristotle there is a fact posted that meantions that “meanness” used to be considered a “vice of lowness” but I can’t find what “lowness” would refer to. ARL153OK (talk) 02:28, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- "Low" as in "low class" or "low born". --Khajidha (talk) 02:36, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- See these Google Books search results for "mean birth". Aside from references to the mean (i.e. average) birth rate, the results use "mean" in this sense. Nyttend (talk) 02:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Those uses are of "mean" as a synonym of "low", but I think the original question was about "meanness" as a synonym of "niggardliness". Ebenezer Scrooge (before the visitations) was "mean", as he could easily spare money for charity but refused. This unwillingness to help was seen as being of very low moral standing. --Khajidha (talk) 02:54, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Where do you derive the "niggardliness" comparison? OED gives several definitions of "mean" as an adjective; the first relevant one, appearing as early as 1375, is "Inferior in rank or quality; unpleasant", which when applied to a person or persons indicates "Of low social status; spec[ifically] not of the nobility or gentry." The first one that could refer to pre-visit Scrooge but not post-visit Scrooge is "Of a person, a person's character, etc.: lacking moral dignity, ignoble; small-minded", which appears as early as 1665, and which is merging into the (originally American) colloquialism appearing in the sense of "You took away my ball. You're mean!" [edit conflict with the "I was going to suggest" comment] Nyttend (talk) 03:13, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- From the article meanness, where the quotation in question is used. --Khajidha (talk) 12:30, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Where do you derive the "niggardliness" comparison? OED gives several definitions of "mean" as an adjective; the first relevant one, appearing as early as 1375, is "Inferior in rank or quality; unpleasant", which when applied to a person or persons indicates "Of low social status; spec[ifically] not of the nobility or gentry." The first one that could refer to pre-visit Scrooge but not post-visit Scrooge is "Of a person, a person's character, etc.: lacking moral dignity, ignoble; small-minded", which appears as early as 1665, and which is merging into the (originally American) colloquialism appearing in the sense of "You took away my ball. You're mean!" [edit conflict with the "I was going to suggest" comment] Nyttend (talk) 03:13, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Those uses are of "mean" as a synonym of "low", but I think the original question was about "meanness" as a synonym of "niggardliness". Ebenezer Scrooge (before the visitations) was "mean", as he could easily spare money for charity but refused. This unwillingness to help was seen as being of very low moral standing. --Khajidha (talk) 02:54, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- See these Google Books search results for "mean birth". Aside from references to the mean (i.e. average) birth rate, the results use "mean" in this sense. Nyttend (talk) 02:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
I was going to suggest that we find the original Greek wording that Aristotle used when he said that, but in fact that wording in Portal:Aristotle#Did you know... is a quotation not from Aristotle but from the lead paragraph of the Wikipedia article on meanness. And the body of that article does not explain what it means by "lowness". Or for that matter by "meanness", not really. I don't think it's a very good article and I don't think it's a good idea for it to be quoted in the portal. --76.69.46.228 (talk) 03:11, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Cosmological orientation of the Royal Palace in Phnom Penh
[edit]Does anyone know which oknah was responsible for the cosmological orientation of the palace? Obviously it references the Tai-Lao and Theravadin tradition rather than the Sanskritic, but I'm wondering what textual basis this may have had, and how it may have been transmitted to the courts of Ang Duong and/or Norodom. I do hope someone can help.PiCo (talk) 07:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Does Symbolism in City Planning in Cambodia From Angkor to Phnom Penh help? Alansplodge (talk) 14:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- I have seen that, but it stops with Ponhea Yat's city in the 15th century. Yat - Ponhea is a title - was the last Khmer king of Angkor, and moved his capital to Phnom Penh about 1432, depending which chronicle you follow. His palace has long disappeared, but was probably underneath what is now the part of the city stretching from Old Market across the park to Vann's restaurant on the Wat Phnom side. So says George Coedes in an article in BAFEO in 1913. Coedes doesn't mention the orientation of the palace, but Lamant says it was oriented north-south-east-west - but I think Lamant might be making it up, as he ascribes this to Coedes and it isn't actually there. Not a lot of people are actually teriibly interested, you know. :) PiCo (talk) 08:52, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Hello everybody! What exactly is meant with the second sentence ("Often in the form of the process assumes a game-like appearance.")? Is there something missing?--Hildeoc (talk) 10:09, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Not missing as much as superfluous: the "in" should not be there, and I've removed it. Thanks, --Viennese Waltz 10:18, 25 January 2019 (UTC)