Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2014 January 11

= January 11 =

Discourse ethics
I've been looking at Jürgen Habermas' discourse ethics and his oddball student's argumentation ethics. I've read that their both based on hermeneutics. Are these also constructivist? — Melab±1 &#9742; 01:04, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * See Constructivist epistemology for the relevant article. I personally wouldn't describe Habermas' views as constructivist, as he assumes that there is a real, normative set of moral/political standards that can be discovered by the analysis of discourse, while the typical constructivist (such as J. L. Austin) is only interested in the discourse itself, and either ignores or actively denies any sort of "Platonic" truth to be found behind it.  But I'm not an expert, and I'm sure others more knowledgeable in the field will comment. Tevildo (talk) 16:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I am no expert either. I agree with Tevildo, on the same grounds. I am just curious on what grounds you would suggest that they might be constructivist? DanielDemaret (talk) 17:07, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * By trying to argue by "performative contradiction". (Kind of a bad way to argue, too.) — Melab±1 &#9742; 17:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Creative C's
go to get help with Creative C's and guided help creating a profitable program. edits and help from others — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachaelhollis (talk • contribs) 15:13, 11 January 2014
 * Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. Looie496 (talk) 17:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I think you're asking about Creative Commons and how to get help developing commercially successful collaborative software. Wikipedia does use licenses produced by Creative Commons, but the two are separate organisations.  You could try asking at one of our other reference desks which can help with general knowledge questions, or you could  visit the Creative Commons website or the the Creative Commons wiki where there may be more information. -  Ka renjc (talk) 10:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

How could an anti-semitic person befriend a Jewish person?
I read Columbine (book) by Dave Cullen and I read Eric Harris' admiration for Nazism and some of its ideology but at the same time he was close friends with Dylan Klebold, an American Jew. How could that happen? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.178.160.191 (talk) 17:28, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It's basically the inverse of Linus said in a Peanuts cartoon: "I love mankind.  It's people I can't stand."  People are inconsistent; that's all there is to it. Looie496 (talk) 18:04, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * (ec) Many of us admire in Nazism: the MG 42, a beautiful toy still in usage, the standard machine gun of the Austrian Armed Forces etc. In short for some reason this guy did not want to have his interest forwarded further than in decorum, the better specialty of the Nazi's capability for the "mise en scène". --Askedonty (talk) 18:14, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Does this actually mean something? Paul B (talk) 19:12, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Possibly I'm using "decorum" following a slightly different meaning compared to the proper usage of that term in English. Are you thoroughly familiar with the details of the Nazi Kultur yourself ? --Askedonty (talk) 19:20, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't really understand the question. How thorough do you require my knowledge to be? I have published academic articles on the subject. Well, one academic article anyway. Is that enough? Paul B (talk) 19:25, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It would all depend on the article. Using only basic and common knowledge you will perhaps agree that decorum is the primary attractive angle of that scenery for young teen-agers looking for a field and subject for their gaming. If otherwise, what else ? --Askedonty (talk) 19:46, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It's about Norcicist racial theory. Are you saying that teenage boys are excited by the idea of being a ruthless member of a superior-race? Yes, I agree. Being excited by Nazism is like imaging living in Grand Theft Auto but also being the police. Paul B (talk) 19:56, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, and that superior-race stuff also is a contemporary disease: having put Nazi Germany down although America could have preferred to remain neutral. I certainly agree with your suggestion of a subjacent although inaccessible role of 'being the police'. --Askedonty (talk) 20:43, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * It's the same psychology as those who are suspicious and wary of other races in general, but may have some "friends" in those races who they consider "OK" because they know them. There's a term for that seemingly self-contradictory mentality, but it's not coming to mind just now. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:58, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Cognitive dissonance, perhaps? --Nicknack009 (talk) 19:11, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It's in that neighborhood. The closest I can find at present is the old saying, "Some of my best friends are..." [as per Jack's version, below]. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It often comes under the header of "I couldn't be anti-semitic. I know many Jewish people", or similar. --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  19:05, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * There's nothing unusual or inconsistent about in admiring aspects of Nazism but not being influenced or impressed by its anti-Semitism. It's possible to be a militaristic uniform-loving, democracy-hating, gun-obsessed sub-Nietzschean jerk without hating Jews. Paul B (talk) 19:12, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Countless Volkswagen products have been sold, without the buyers necessarily knowing or caring that this was a Nazi product. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Not entirely sure how the VW bug is a "Nazi product", other than that Hitler promised cheap abundant consumer cars to the German public, but when the time came built tanks and planes instead. The VW bug was basically a concept car until after the war... AnonMoos (talk) 00:35, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hence this illustration. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:55, 12 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Not the answer in this case, but I suppose if a Jew doesn't know the other's antisemitic, and vice versa, they could have a ton of other interests in common. Probably wouldn't happen with best friends. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:53, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * The OP says "some of" the Nazi ideology. Nazism was about a lot more than just hating Jews. Is there any indication that Harris hated Jews? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:00, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Adolf Hitler himself had Jewish friends and associates, protecting some such as Eduard Bloch and helping Emil Maurice remain an SS officer despite some Jewish ancestry. People are often contradictory and inconsistent.  --Amble (talk) 02:26, 12 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Does the book claim Eric was anti-semitic? Far from all nazis were. DanielDemaret (talk) 08:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Based on what's written on the Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold page, it seems the latter was raised Lutheran and his so-called "Jewish identity" consists of some family traditions that came down from his maternal grandfather. This is marginally Jewish "heritage" but far from "identity." Unless it can be shown that Dylan Klebold identified personally with his Jewish ancestry -- as "an American Jew" or "Jewish American" in the face of his Protestant upbringing -- I'd say the question as posed here is far-fetched. -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes. Unless Klebold's maternal line going back some distance was all Jewish, traditionally he would not be considered to be Jewish. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:38, 12 January 2014 (UTC)


 * There is an pertinent exchange in Methuselah's Children by Robert Heinlein: after a particular group of families have been 'outed' (it doesn't matter here what as) somebody says "Are you saying that I'm suddenly in danger from my friends and neighbours?" and somebody else answers "No, but you are from my friends and neighbours, and I am from yours". --ColinFine (talk) 20:42, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Futurism & Entartete Kunst
Futurism is often seen as the "official" artistic movement of Fascism and, even if it isn't totally accurate, it was somewhat endorsed by the Fascist regime. That said, what was the position of Nazi Germany regarding it? Was it considered degenerate art? --151.41.217.98 (talk) 21:45, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The first statement isn't really true - see Futurism. Marinetti himself was a Fascist, but the party didn't approve of modern art - according to the article, "right-wing Fascists introduced the concept of "degenerate art" from Germany to Italy and condemned Futurism." Is there such a thing as a left-wing fascist? .  The official Nazi Entartete Kunst exhibition was confined to German artists, and there wasn't a significant body of German Futurist work. Tevildo (talk) 22:36, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Apparently Degenerate Art exhibitions included among the others works of art of non-German people such as Marc Chagall, Wassily Kandinsky and László Moholy-Nagy. --151.41.217.98 (talk) 23:02, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The Freie Universität Berlin's database "Entartete Kunst" gave me a couple of Futurist works of art the Nazis had confiscated from a museum in Erfurt as part of a portfolio titled ""Neue europäische Graphik. Italienische und russische Künstler"", such as prints by Umberto Boccioni, Carlo Carrà, and Gino Severini. Another drawing by Severini, Mon portrait, was confiscated from the Provinzialmuseum in Hanover. Not much of a "position", but that's what I found. ---Sluzzelin talk  02:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)