[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/edu/ - Education

'The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism of the weapon, material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses.' - Karl Marx
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)
What is 6 - 4?
| Catalog | Home
|

File: 1726697748585-0.png (485.14 KB, 670x870, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1726697748585-1.pdf (10.69 MB, 180x255, capital 1 2 3 abridged.pdf)

File: 1726697748585-2.pdf (3.35 MB, 197x255, Karl Marx - Capital_ Volum….pdf)

File: 1726697748585-3.pdf (1.14 MB, 197x255, Karl Marx - Capital_ Volum….pdf)

File: 1726697748585-4.pdf (1.99 MB, 197x255, Karl Marx - Capital_ Volum….pdf)

 

drop them PDFs, we will rebuild edition
163 posts and 380 image replies omitted.

File: 1743519926166.pdf (6.71 MB, 170x255, Red Revolution, Green Revo….pdf)



 

Everytime you visit /edu/, post in this thread. Tell us about what you're thinking about, what you're reading, an interesting thing you have learned today, anything! Just be sure to pop in and say hi.

Previous thread >>>/leftypol_archive/580500
Archive of previous thread
https://archive.is/saN3S

Excuse me coming through
A quick note on the video @ >>>/leftypol/1538283
Also [vid related] for archival purposes

Around the 29 minute mark Peterson criticizes Marx and Engel's for assuming that workers would magically become more productive once they took over.

This actually happened historically, most of the actually effective productivity tricks work places use now were developed by Stakhanovites.

https://soviethistory.msu.edu/1936-2/year-of-the-stakhanovite/year-of-the-stakhanovite-texts/stalin-at-the-conference-of-stakhanovites/
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
369 posts and 101 image replies omitted.

Hi anons, I was thinking if the classic Marxist concept of alienation has any echo on the post modern "narrative" , has any post modern thinker written about alienation?


File: 1676963752756.jpg (764.52 KB, 2560x1440, 2560px-Plato_and_Aristotle….jpg)

 

What is the value of either of their works of thought under capitalism? What is their intellectual value to studious communists today?

http://classics.mit.edu/Browse/browse-Plato.html
http://classics.mit.edu/Browse/browse-Aristotle.html
43 posts and 7 image replies omitted.

File: 1743369243830.jpg (169.69 KB, 642x718, ea8.jpg)

>>24070
>science is something we do
yes, in the etymological sense of "science" being latin for "knowledge". the scientific method however (as i have already explained) is an historicised notion of induction, not a metaphysical standpoint by which we come to know (knowledge as a category is a priori, not a posteriori). in the general form of mechanics, science also bears an inherent relation to capitalist modernity, which is why britain as "the land of machinery" (as marx calls it), produces so many scientists, since the inductive method of reasoning and empiricism were "founded" amidst a global, colonial empire, which systematised its populace and colonies in similar fashion (capital vol. 1, chapter 33). from bacon's induction, to king james' bible, to locke's liberalism, to hume's empiricism, to newton's mechanics, to smith's political economy, to bentham's panopticon, to darwin's evolution, to turing's computing - these faculties of british power come to define the landscape of the world. english after all, is "the language of commerce". USA is even a child of the british colonies, and so it has conquered the new world on behalf of the father, and only usurped the father when the empire was foreclosed after ww2. the indebting of the father by the son began earlier however, where since the american civil war, the old world was displaced for the new, and now bare dependence to the latter to save it from itself. after france's rise and napoleon's defeat came the birth of europe ("weltgeist on horseback", as per hegel), which led to its own civil wars, and finally bore its timid unity, which sublated german power in sacrifice of its formal sovereignty. europe was always germany; the fourth reich - EU. yet by this, science is exported to USA, where "jewish science" displaces the old anglo order. this coincides with the rise of the zionist state, and other jewish arts like psychology and entertainment (social sciences). along with the phallic war comes the birth of castrated computing - nyx land speaks more proficiently on this in her "gender accelerationist" writings:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/n1x-gender-acceleration-a-blackpaper
computers are not merely mechanical, but also semiotic. they arePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>24075
The point being that you can do the best science possible, do everything right, and still be not just wrong but flagrantly wrong, and your method will tell you that you are obligated to be wrong. That's why you don't rely on Reason alone to describe the world, something that is very basic to philosophy and common sense. However capable your reasoning and however well it is grounded in the world we actually live in, it will never be able to possess the certainty imperious assholes assert. There's not a method nor any possible method to "solve" science for you. All of those things you mentioned are not advances in any form of science, but are advances in reasoning that may inveigh on what is done with science. You can prove by reason that a lot of theories are wrong, but you cannot prove that any one of them are correct. That is what was fundamentally inverted with Popperian faggotry and things like it, the idea that "you can't prove a negative". It is the exact opposite. The only things that can be proven are negatives, and positives are always in doubt… and yet, we know that there is positive knowledge, or else there isn't a coherent way this world can continue as we perceive it. Science as a method doesn't give the answers, but asks us how we can better pose the questions we would want to answer through science. It doesn't "think for us" in that sense. You're always going to have to ask if your experimental methodology is worth anything, and again, Popperian faggotry insists on telling you "this always works" to justify flagrant violations of reason a child can see through, so that science may be dictated imperiously.

File: 1743469966571.jpg (75.55 KB, 1200x1200, scientsimidol.jpg)

>>24081
>and your method will tell you that you are obligated to be wrong
the issue is that science has no fixed method, since by the law of power, it cannot contradict its foundational myths. you have a romantic idea of what science must be, and so suffer the errand of imagining a transcendent objectivity breaking apart fallible subjects. your position is from science proper; science as an object. my position is from scientists in particular; the subjectivity of its process. it would certainly be nice if people could freely admit that they are wrong and then move on to better theories of the world, but even as kuhn discusses, the intellect is entirely prideful, and scientific cultures form cliques, which gatekeep and torment. many people have recently discovered this about medicine. doctors are people like you and me, not ascended beings. what then is "science" as you ask: >>24082
science is what scientists do. thats it. but what do scientists do? a lot of them do great things, but most dont, because how could they? after all, they are like you and me, mostly mediocre. thats life.
i think an issue you have also is that you dont seem to grasp the concept of necessary evil. the price of knowledge is suffering, as we see from the original sin. history's gears are oiled by blood. our stomachs are filled with corpses. but this is also life. so science can be your god if you want it to be, but at least accept that it mostly has false prophets, and thus what we hear is most often a false prophecy. when humanity is extinct and science is gone, the world will still be here - so i dont put my faith in men, but prefer eternity and its wisdom.

>>24083
Science has no "foundational myths". That is Germanic faggotry. The point is that science, at a basic level, only produces more questions and preliminary findings. The judgment of facts is not accomplished by "science". It is done by human beings for their purposes. Science eliminates things which are obviously wrong, but it provides no "Absolute Knowledge" that you have to accept, no matter how much these braying retards insist that is the point.

Without science, we never ask the appropriate question to even make judgments of truth regarding the material world. We might invent something that isn't science that asserts something about the world, but this invention doesn't do anything. Science is something we do from the simplest possible starting principles, and it is contingent on the practitioner recognizing metaphysics is a trap unless accounted for.

I'm saying that even if you do everything right in science, even if you carry it out as thoroughly as you reasonably can, you'd still be left with a wrong answer, or worse, you'd be stuck with a framework that produces a wrong answer but explains everything else about the world. I think of how much pseudoscience there is in physics today and how everyone has been obligated to conform to insane declarations like "time dilation" in the public discourse. If that is a narrative for public consumption, it has ensnared far too many academics who are lied to and told to lie to themselves and to the public, and nothing new is discovered. A whole false cosmology was built around the "Big Bang" and upheld by imperious assertions and then the destruction of scientific thought. If you look at the actual theories, the truth is that all of the physicists in the early 20th century were making it up and hoping someone in the future would solve the greater questions, of which there were many. Instead of that, Satanics took over and declared that there is no more science as such. Yet, the honest scientist is either stuck working within this broken paradigm, or must repudiate a large body of knowledge and find himself working with little more than someone 400 years ago possessed. In some ways, he has less, because scientists in the past were not hobbled by this mind-destroying ideology.

Also, there is no "necessary evil" inherent to existence itself. The world, frankly, has little regard for the evil, for the proposition of the evil is for it a strange obsession. There is a lot of evil in the world, much of it far greater than anything humans can summon which is saying a lot, but the evil is cosmically close to irrelevant. Most of the universe is dead, and what exists has no particular malevolence about it. Also, suffering is not evil. Humans should suffer if they look at the nature of their race and their conduct. Humans were given every opportunity by the world to alter their conduct, even if they cannot change the origin and nature of their race. Humans managed to change their conduct enough so that we can actually tolerate existence, because we had to, even if that conduct falls far short of any redemption. They didn't need to insinuate a "balancing act" with the evil of the eugenic creed. The eugenists insisted on their particular morality, just as aristocracies and nobilities always have their special morality to justify their deliberate shitty behavior.


File: 1743201993268.png (263.31 KB, 830x495, Screenshot 2025-03-28 6.46….png)

 

Found out my Poli Sci professor has a lot of books on Marx and his relation to gender and such. Has anybody read "Marx on Gender and the Family" by Heather Brown? I couldn't get a PDF rip online and I want to know if she's a lefty or not.

>>24065
>I want to know if she's a lefty or not.
you are mentally retarded. you can perfectly understand marx and even write books analyzing his ideas without being a leftist. you don't need to agree to understand why do I have to explain stuff to you as if you were 10?
the point she makes is that marx didn't pay that much attention to it in his writings, but the few times he did he had a more nuanced and dynamic approach than the determinism of engels. that marx mentioned in a few essays and articles for newspapers the oppression of women, specially of working class but to some extent even of those in the dominant bourgeois class. and that he advocated for an active change of women's place in society and the replacement of the bourgeois family, even if still under capitalism, instead of passively waiting for technology and revolution to do everything

honestly I don't know why this good woman is trying to squeeze feminism out of a few passages when she understands and describes at length that marx was much more focused on the economic critique of capitalism and working class political activism. I mean, it was an interesting read but otherwise useless, I guess it could work as a base to develop a feminist line from a marxist perspective

>>24068
>you are mentally retarded.
who shat in your coco roos?

>I don't know why this good woman is trying to squeeze feminism out of a few passages
She's offering a class on family and gender through a socio-political lense, and I wanted to know if I was going to get an unessecary rehash of neoliberal feminism or an actual interesting perspective on gender. Thank you for the summary, apologies for using the wrong words to describe my intent. Will be taking her course now that I know I can actually learn something.

File: 1743526047245-0.png (187.92 KB, 831x579, Heather Brown.png)

File: 1743526047245-1.pdf (2.62 MB, 167x255, Marx on Gender and the Fam….pdf)

>>24065
Here you go, anon. It looks like she writes fiction, too


File: 1743434697724.png (31.75 KB, 300x250, h9LEsbjnAB-2.png)

 

Following from
>>24081

So, how do we go about defining science, and what good is "science"? The key break for modernity for me was the German idealists putting a stopper in genuine science and inquiry and insisting that science was something entirely alien to what it had been.

The chief purpose of the scientific endeavor is not to attain "absolute knowledge" but to eliminate enough of the known wrong paths to arrive at the least-wrong, which for our purposes is as close to the truth as the scientific approach is capable of. Science has no particular necessary philosophy or existential claims to be "science", but metaphysical and philosophical claims are necessary to establish the models that communicate any scientific inquiry, and two scientists can talk past each other by entering into an intractable metaphysical argument. The point of science is that there is a claim between the participants that there is a world outside of us or any conceit about it, and this is the only way there can be such things as facts. It is possible for the scientist to render the metaphysical and philosophical positions of any claim in language that is compatible with some other metaphysical framework, and so there is no singular metaphysics that has to be accepted for something to be "science". The only requirement is that everyone agrees that they are referring to the same world that is the only meaningful subject of inquiry.

It's stupefying to me how this is missed, and "science" has been commandeered by the most imperious statements and decrees, recited as dogma and a presumptive monopooly. I really wish people would stop doing this or encouraging this, without saying "science is the problem". No shit, science can be conducted badly. Humanity's scientific endeavor, all taken together, is not replicated by any other area of human activity. If someone produces obviously wrong results, the entire purpose of the scientific discourse is to eliminate those who are obviously malicious actors like the German idealists.


File: 1743388001862.jpg (90.6 KB, 735x824, 486716111_3062052560631431….jpg)

 

The Magnificence of Jesus Christ
What are we to make of Jesus Christ? It seems to me that people don't take this question very seriously these days. After all, they say, we live in the twenty-first century. Jesus Christ lived a couple of thousand years ago. Surely, we've advanced beyond Him.
This, of course, does not really make sense. No other figure in history has so profoundly influenced our culture as Jesus Christ. More books have been written about Him than about any other. He has furnished the theme for more songs than any other. Quotes from Jesus Christ have become common knowledge. The principles He taught have influenced the constitution and laws of many lands. We date all the events of history from His birth.
Nevertheless, Jesus Christ is the most underestimated, undervalued figure in history. To many, Jesus Christ is merely a profane interjection-a name to say when you hammer your thumb or when you're shocked by unexpected news. To some, Jesus is a myth. He never lived, they say, ignoring the testimony of the Scriptures, history, and common sense. To many, Jesus is simply an excuse for merrymaking at Christmas time. "Who can't use another holiday?" they reason.
To many, Jesus Christ is the man whose portrait hangs on the living room wall. To those who hold to the liberation theology, Jesus was a revolutionary with fire in His eyes. To those of the counter-culture, Jesus was the first anti-establishment rebel. To some, He is a baby in a manger, or a corpse on a cross.
Perhaps to most, Jesus is a good man, a great teacher on the order of Buddha or Confucius or perhaps even greater, but surely only a man.
These visions of Jesus all have one thing in common: they are too small! The magnificence of Jesus Christ outshines these popular notions like the noonday sun overwhelms a nearly dead flashlight. Somehow the human race has forgotten who Jesus Christ really is. I'd like to share the true story with you as it is recorded in the Bible.
But one caution first. As we attempt to examine the character of Jesus Christ, we face a problem. He is simply beyond us. As the noonday sun overwhelms our unprotected eyes, so the magnificence of Jesus Christ overwhelms our puny intellects. We may look at Jesus, we may see His flashing brilliance, we may even fall awestruck at His feet, but as for comprehending Him, that will have to wait. In eternity, when God enlarges our minds, we will much more fully grasp His majesty. But for now we muPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Ok

>>24077 If a person that is guilty of a crime goes to court, his only hope is a plea for MERCY and not justice. If he gets justice according to the law, there is no hope for anything but the maximum penalty. Friend, if you received justice for your crime, you would not be walking free on this earth. Your crime has nothing to do with the laws of the land, but with THE LAW OF GOD.

THE WHOLE WORLD IS GUILTY.
"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God."

ROMANS 3:19.
God says you are guilty.

You may say, "I don't FEEL guilty." God has a WRITTEN case against you.

Trying to lead a good life and keep the commandments won't work.

The Bible says, "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." JAMES 2:10.

THE CHARGE AGAINST YOU.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Cool

BORING!!!!! where are my big tittied six-armed elephant god gfs at? muh freaky shrine dwelling ghosts? your religion boring as fuck smh my head


File: 1743183519249.png (8.96 KB, 500x250, Oekaki.png)

 

Serious question:
Why do adults always say that newer generations are less literate when kids nowadays read and type more text than any other era?

Also, most adults are incapable of remembering let alone appreciating any academic material and they're not held in contempt for it. Yet kids are morally burdened with the task of academic fulfillment.

We are living in an age where young people spend more time in school than every before. Compulsory laws and extensive additions to curriculum make every youngster a student.

Yet schoolteachers are unappreciative of this.
Meanwhile, we are seeing less industrial and social skills present in the prime age population.

Because they are not reading and typing the correct things. With issues about kids, it's always about control.

It's not always said. It's a stock fascist talking point to justify fascist power grabs, and self-congratulation of those in education who locked us out of a future. Of course they're going to confirm the stupefication they wanted to come true, whether it's true or not, to "prove the theory". Pedagogues are always like that so that they can justify everything they do. Selecting who lives and who dies is their core function. If they give that up, they will be removed, since the kids do not need "teachers" who exist entirely to hold them back and tell them from cradle to grave that anyone not given permission is retarded.

I've found the people who repeat this line are themselves stupid men and women, always given over to fascism, and they always say this as if they're bragging about what they've accomplished. A Satanic race cannot change.

There are adults who bemoan the terrible condition of the world and what the kids are taught, but they always make clear that the origin of the malfeasance is the corrupting influence of adults and firms. It is insane to blame children for things that are very far removed from their control. Now, though, the fascists won and will violently recapitulate this until it is "100% proven". A Satanic race cannot change.


File: 1621348899602.png (45.43 KB, 300x300, chem.png)

 

Let's have a thread about chemistry. I can't be the only amateur chemist on here. To please the mods, everything in here is purely academic. Check local laws before you embark on your projects. And before you do anything, make sure you have appropriate safety equipment. Think about the worst thing that could happen to your reaction, because chances are it will. Don't be stupid.

Resources
https://www.sciencemadness.org/ The go-to site for amateur chemists
Wiki: http://www.sciencemadness.org/smwiki/index.php/Main_Page
Forums, require email registration: https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/

Archive.org has plenty of old chemistry textbooks. The most useful ones for me are those meant to teach youngsters from the early 1900's.

YouTube
NurdRage, the OG channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/NurdRage
NileRed, the internet's premier piss chemist: https://www.youtube.com/user/TheRedNile
NileBlue, secondary channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1D3yD4wlPMico0dss264XA
Explosions&Fire, energetic materials: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVovvq34gd0ps5cVYNZrc7A
Extractions&Ire, secondary channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvFApMFo_AafXbHRyEJefjA
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
85 posts and 19 image replies omitted.

>>20977
Nivaldo Tro - Chemistry A Molecular Approach


Tom investigates yellow powder

File: 1720356580023.pdf (376.42 KB, 67x118, yellow powder full paper 5….pdf)

>>22411
here's the paper by one E. Fire

Tom continuing the large-scale cubane series


File: 1742971009232.jpg (333.52 KB, 1600x2416, 1742861308014492.jpg)

 

The way that we would do it is choose a date every week and then get into a voice chat together and have one member read through a portion of PoS followed by something like Kalkavage's Logic of Desire (or Hegel's ladder) and then talk about it together. We'd have a reading session every week until we finish the book. Everything would be contained within the session.
2 posts omitted.

>>24044
threads are slow here yeah, also there's a matrix chat. Users here don't like using discord for infosec reasons.

>>24046
I get that, I've tried matrix but it seemed dead to me (or maybe no one wanted to respond to me lol). I have no attachment to discord, if there are people who want matrix (or other apps) I'm fine with that, I chose discord because it's normie friendly.

I made a matrix server too https://matrix.to/#/#reading-group:matrix.org

>>24047
You could also think about bridging the matrix and discord. Seems quite simple if you have anywhere to run the bot https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-appservice-discord#end-user-documentation

>>24049
Good idea, I'll look into it if there is a significant amount of members on matrix.


File: 1742949506042.png (57.64 KB, 181x278, image_2025-03-26_003813259.png)

 

Title. Have been reading into Soviet history for a while now and have recently came across his works. Halfway through both his overaching Soviet works and have thought them brilliant thus far in their fairness toward all parties involved in the experiment.

Can anyone offer any further laudations and/or criticisms? It's far too monumental of a task to verify it all alone, though from what I've seen it's mostly accurate.


Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]
Previous[ 1 /2 /3 /4 /5 /6 /7 /8 /9 /10 /11 /12 /13 /14 /15 /16 /17 /18 /19 /20 /21 /22 /23 /24 /25 /26 /27 /28 /29 /30 /31 /32 /33 /34 /35 /36 ]
| Catalog | Home