Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 August 19

= August 19 =

oil paintings
i was given 4 paintings, that i was wondering about.they are called the four seasons by v. diaz, can you tell me anything about these? i have tried looking them up, but am unable to find anything, of course, i'm not sure which era they are from or anything.

please help? 98.21.57.212 (talk) 02:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)mistymorningtears98.21.57.212 (talk) 02:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It would be impossible to give you help on such scant information: the Four Seasons have been a classic subject for sets of paintings, sculptures etc for many centuries. --Wetman (talk) 03:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You need to speak to an export. An art conservator most likely. Ask a local museum for a referral. --S.dedalus (talk) 05:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Say, human trafficking is illegal, even if they're just art conservators. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 07:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Your best bet is start by tracking down information on the artist, rather than the paintings themselves. Unfortunately, Diaz is an exceedingly common Spanish name. Although I doubt it's the same person, you might want to start by looking into Narcisse Virgilio Díaz and Daniel Vázquez Díaz. Talking to an art appraiser may also be helpful. Good luck. -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 19:41, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Quote!
Who gave the quote 'The government is of the people,by the feople,for the people'?Anyone to answer is heartily welcome.117.201.98.78 (talk) 05:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I know of no quote with those exact words, but Abraham Lincoln used similar ones in the Gettysburg Address, the last sentence of which is:
 * It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. --  JackofOz (talk) 05:28, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Jack's absolutely right--just an added note that, if you're interested in where Lincoln developed the phrase from, we have some potentially interesting information at Gettysburg_Address. User:Jwrosenzweig editing as 71.231.197.110 (talk) 07:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Why do many men prefer blue eyed, blonde women with pale skin?
I have nothing against women having such properties, but I prefer brunette women to blondes. Despite this people on discussion forums disagree with me. Can this cultural phenomenon be explained?--Whatever She Sings, We Bring (talk) 08:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * And on a somewhat related note why does a google search for "scandinavian women" bring me to Stormfront within the first couple of pages of results?--Whatever She Sings, We Bring (talk) 08:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Uh, because racist dicks make a big deal out of having blue eyes and blonde hair? -- Captain Disdain (talk) 08:19, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Why bring bigoted detectives into this? DOR (HK) (talk) 01:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Why not? They gotta be somewhere, might as well be here. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 06:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know but it seems like people on other forums are saying "this is what is best" and if you don't agree, you're weird, or something.--Whatever She Sings, We Bring (talk) 08:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I can only suggest that you choose a better type of forum, I guess. Anyway, if you're going to express a certain preference, you're going to find people who express a different preference. I don't think it's not a cultural phenomenon of any significance any more than some people choosing chocolate ice cream over vanilla, it's just people having their own preferences. It's pretty much a non-issue, and just because some people on some forum are loud, that doesn't make it any more significant. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 08:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Have a look at Face perception and Face perception in particular. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 08:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Is the cultural phenomenon you want explained, the fact that many men prefer blue-eyed blonde women, or the fact that people on discussion forums disagree with your preference? I'm in no position to answer the first one, for more than one reason.  For the second one: many forum participants treat such places as venues to vent their spleen, and telling them that you happen to have a different viewpoint or are attracted to different types then they are is an invitation for open warfare.  Such places do nothing to elevate the human spirit, so you might consider severing your connections to them and spend all your available spare time improving Wikipedia - besides, there are limitless opportunities for discussion here, on every topic imagineable, and open warfare, while not unknown, is frowned on.  And anyone who disagrees with me is wrong, and they had better be prepared for a fight to the death.  :) --  JackofOz (talk) 08:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It wouldn't be much of a discussion forum if everyone agreed with everyone else. You can find loads of mutual appreciation societies where everyone agrees with everyone else as well and I'm sure there's some with your predilection. People are different from each other, I don't think one can call this disagreement a 'cultural phenomenon'. Dmcq (talk) 09:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Blue eyes and pale skin are actually somewhat maladaptive traits which are hard to explain by natural selection. They may have come about by sexual selection. You may also be interested in the handicap principle and of course human hair color and eye color. Haukur (talk) 09:24, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

A theory I have heard is this: Both Blonde hair and blue eyes are more 'rare'. This rareness makes those people 'stand out' as different from the general population. People are attracted to difference at least as much as they are similarity, and so people are attracted to these people as they are rarer than brunettes. Certainly the obsession with blonde hair/blue-eyes seems more noticeable whenever i've gone on holiday to countries where the general population has olive-skin and dark hair - again i've heard this being put down to rarity. Also aren't most babies born with blue-eyes? I suspect that could be a reason for the liking of blue-eyes too? I'm also more of a brunette man - as for the forum people, i've never understand why people can't just accept that people like different things to each other and that's there is no wrong/right version of beauty/perfection, only that which we think is so in our own minds. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Neoteny seems to be a factor in the development of the human brain and why people look like they do nowadays. I'd guess evolution has had to mangle the brain too so there's a preference for all sorts of babyish things in a mate rather than people still falling for the gorilla look when they grow up. Dmcq (talk) 15:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * not all of us. I like brunettes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 16:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * One theory I heard was that it's easier to spot illness with pale skin (if you're slightly jaundiced, for example, it will show up more on paler skin), so if you pick a mate with pale skin you can be more confident that they're healthy. However, I'm going to join the apparent majority of Reference Desk participants that prefer brunettes, which may suggest that actually blondes aren't preferred, people just think they are. --Tango (talk) 17:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Or perhaps it just suggests something about the character of RefDeskers... - EronTalk 17:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Who cares about their hair colour, as long as they certain parts in large proportions... More seriously tho, is there any evidence that men do prefer blondes as opposed to all other hair colours including red hair and brunettes? I'm talking about all men here. How about African men, East Asians? South Asians? Arabs? Indigenious Australians? Native Americans? Nil Einne (talk) 19:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

In China, blue eyed people were thought (pre-modernization) to be able to see treasure or gold buried underground. And, pale skin even today is considered a sign of the elite throughout East Asia, since those who have to work outdoors tend to have darker skin. DOR (HK) (talk) 01:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You might find Whiteness studies interesting. Julia Rossi (talk) 02:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

1911 Encyclopedia Britannica
Is there any place online where I can read Encyclopedia Britannica 1911 edition? If there are sites which contain entire 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, then which of them is most reliable? The article Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition gives two links, but states these two site may contain errors.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 12:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia's sister site Wikisource has some elements of EB1911 transferred at 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica along with TIFF images of every page at wikisource:User:Tim_Starling/ScanSet_TIFF_demo. Archive.org also has a complete copy here. Nanonic (talk) 14:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You might be interested in this article about the 11th edition Immortal Encyclopedia? by Craig Stark Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 20:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If you are interested in EB1911, come on over to wikisource and help out. Pick an article, read it in the scanned TIFF version, and transcribe it into a Wikisource article. I have only done one such article, but if enough folks do one article apiece, we will get there eventually. I wanted to add an article on Michel Baron to Wikipedia. I found the EB1911 article TIFF, but no Wikisource article, so I created The Wikisource article first, and then created the Wikipedia article. Alternatively, you may find a Wikipedia article that derived from an EB1911 source that does not have a corresponding Wikisource article. In such a case, you might decide to read the original EB1911 article to see how the Wikipedia article has evolved. This might inspire you to create the Wikisource article. -Arch dude (talk) 02:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Poverty and prosperity
I always wonder why such a big gap between human beings in terms of prosperity(wealth,health care,standards of living etc etc)exists just because people are living in different parts of our common mother earth.In todays world there are so many universities and institutions doing research in various fields of social sciences.Why are they unable to find a answer for the above question? Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.70.74.134 (talk) 17:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * They are unable to find an answer because it is an incredibly complex question. Just to begin, how to measure prosperity? You listed three items but as you note with the etc., there are many more. Which ones are more important? Then there are all the different factors that may affect prosperity: availability of natural resources, population base, climate, infrastructure, social cohesion, public institutions, laws, etc. etc. And these factors are often interconnected.
 * These things can be studied and people do come up with all sorts of theories about them. But how can these theories be properly evaluated? Societies are poor laboratories for experimental proofs. So theories are generally measured by how well they explain existing and historical societies. However, as these tests and comparisons are not rigourously controlled, they cannot really "prove" that the theory is correct - only that it seems to explain some situations. - EronTalk 17:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think one major contributing factor is that it's much easier to create wealth when you are already wealthy, so once a small gap develops a big one usually follows. The cause of that small gap can be absolutely anything - random fluctuation would probably do it. --Tango (talk) 17:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree that we can't find the answers. I don't think a lack of answers has ever been the problem. Sure, if we were to try to come up with a comprehensive plan to solve all of the worlds problems we'd certainly fail, but if we allow solutions that are proven (enough) or are believed to probably work move forward then we can surely go much further and faster toward a more just world than we have been. We have more than enough food to feed everyone, and so on. I think some (super-rich) people bend/break/change the rules to work for them and come up with solutions that work for them but that they wouldn't accept for their families if they were on the other side of them. Thankfully in market economies you're enabled to make every effort to stop giving people your money when they step on other people. -LambaJan (talk) 19:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Researchers have found answers for most of these questions, and we know many of the steps that could be taken to improve life for the world's have-nots. The problem is that real solutions would involve a reduction in power and income for those who are most powerful and affluent, since their income tends to derive at least in part from conditions of severe inequality.  For example, the world's wealthiest people live largely from their investments. Their income depends largely on the profitability of multinational corporations.  Multinational corporations' profit depends increasingly on minimizing pay for producers, increasingly located in poor countries where pay is lowest, and maximizing sales in countries where pay is higher.  That is, many companies' business models depend on sharp inequality, in theory the sharper the better.  Also, aid programs to benefit the poorest would have to be funded from taxes on those who are better off, but those who are better off want to minimize their taxes.  Because improving the lot of the poorest would require trimming the income of the wealthy and powerful, improvement is unlikely to happen, because for most of the wealthy and powerful, maximizing their individual income is more important than, say, reducing infant mortality in Africa.  Marco polo (talk) 20:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I find measuring prosperity / poverty to be relatively easy (index for the number of calories and protein consumed; longevity; literacy; access to safe water and sanitation; and a few other items such as medical care and personal security). What usually happens, however, is that researchers either can’t get adequate data or want something measured in “headline” dollar amounts (major headache).  As for inequality between societies, geography is a huge factor: either your land is fertile or it isn’t, either you have a port or you don’t; either you have nasty neighbors or you don’t.  After that, I’d say religion is next most important: either it support change or it doesn’t.  The main reason no one agrees on these issues is that we can’t control for variables and experiment. DOR (HK) (talk) 01:37, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Esso & CAA
Hello. Why do Esso's and the Canadian Automobile Association's logos look similar? Both have ovals outlined in blue and red letters. Was there a logo trend? Esso was annexed from Standard Oil around the same time that CAA was founded. Thanks in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 23:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure it's just a coincidence. They both use a different font, and they look a little bit different. Paragon  12321  23:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)