/edu/ - Education

>>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.

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

>>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.

I started reading "wages of destruction".

>>24003
And then we have the final aspect of Eugene's typical theatrics, to declare, in total doom, that anything he dislikes (or, in most cases, misunderstands) is ontologically evil and going to destroy or set back the human race to a disastrous degree. Just more paranoid conjecture being shoveled as a blanket statement down our unwilling throats.

>>24004
Now go 'filter' yourself, retards.

>>24003
Typo corrections since this site has no editing feature:
>less concerned with *ecology
>an effect *doesn't cease to count
(oh, and on that note, the contradiction, in case it wasn't obvious, concerns your original statement against the premise that 'all is life', as by your own standards any activity in existence would now constitute the threshold of categorical life)
>if the basic level *was merely a non-thing, it would remain inert
>as *purely being the reflection of cognitive interfacing
>*born out of cognitive *consequence
>of the *thing's innate intelligibility
>would mean *that they are phenomenally symbolic and contingent upon interpretation, i.e. the very *premise you're now attempting to discredit
>all attempts at defining life will bode symbolic registration, to *hope otherwise would be to exist outside of language and cognition
>by anything other than where your own standards would leave *you
>In *an *a-posteriori manner
>the presence of particulars does not mean *reducibility to their essentialization
>operating *according to causal interrelations
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>24003
Oh sweet Jesus, I do not care about your bullshit.

Everything you say is a giant sand castle erected to defend the central conceit of "the gene" as an unknowable-yet-imminent foundation of life, and by extension all that exists. It is you who needs to uphold the almighty "gene" for petty and stupid reasons. If genetic material does not conform to an insane and contradictory outcome to possess a "master key" to justify this ruinous social order, then the theory must be thrown out until "history is corrected".

I'm trying to break out of the ruin of stupid thinking like yours. It is probably impossible, because anything contrary to the eugenic creed is automatically inadmissible in this Satanic world-system. But, we can speak among each other, for what little good that does.

I don't need to know much about this new theory you present because I've heard the hectoring and the excuses a million times before. It always exists to uphold the imperious claims made about "life", which are immediately used to justify invasion and pressing the nerve. A Satanic race cannot change.

To bring this back to the original topic, the point I'm making is that "life" does not entail the loaded definitions of such that are presented ad nauseum in the academy, always with a pseudo-religious fanaticism. I say "pseudo" because we know the only religion these people believe in is Eugenics, and every false theory that is erected is a lie for public consumption rather than anything anyone uses. Eugenics itself makes predictions about reality that must become true. If "genes aren't real", then there is no Christ as far as they care. It would be the end of everything for them.

My point is that life simply doesn't mean what the ideology requires it to mean, and speaking of living things is a very limited proposition. I would say based on that that viruses aren't living, because by definition the virus is inert material until "activated". At most it would be a highly abstracted "life-form", and at some point you have to ask if it is the virus that lives or some disease or outcome of the virus's activation that is granted its own force in our theories of knowledge. The root of the question comes back to the original genetic myth and beliefs in essentialism, rather than anything life does or any way we can speak of life-forms.

The human being isn't just "genes" or a carrier for genes. The development of its body, its bones, and the history of a human, has its own existence apart from "genetic purpose". The same is true of any life-form, even if the life-form exists primarily as an abstract notion of such, like speaking of a particular disease as a "life-form" perpetuating itself. Most diseases, though, aren't life-forms at all or entities with their own existence. Diseases inhabit hosts, and what a body does in response to a disease is primarily that body's response to a condition, usually to "process" the disease. Something like smallpox never leaves the body, and that's why it confers life-long immunity, but the ailment passes after some time. Perhaps the disease leaves a permanent mark on functioning, but the immunity arises because you're still carrying it. Not every disease does this, but the smallpox family does. When you look at the "holy genome" of a human body, you're going to find a lot of alien material that isn't "supposed" to be there.

I recon they're part of the logistics part of production. Like they enable the ones that are directly producing commodities to do so in some form or another.

Fuck Stalin

我也来自中国。这个网站让我体会到了一些更本土化的东西，不是被什么逆天营销号或者反动自媒体转述的东西，算是拓宽了视野吧。这个地方对中国人来说真像一个荒地，你可能遇见别的中国人，但是你们只能说再见