[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/edu/ - Education

Learn, learn, and learn!
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon

| Catalog | Home
|

File: 1640891729727.jpeg (1.86 MB, 2057x2179, EEDwuFNWwAAU3Kh.jpeg)

 No.9123[Reply]

(I'm posting this on /edu/ because I think it's more of a discussion about self-education than leftist politics per se.)

To an extent, I think most people on this site are skeptical of journalists and academics. We can all recognize that "knowledge production" is not politically neutral, not free from bias or outside influence, etcetera.
On the other hand, even skeptics of these sources don't tend to be fully skeptical. One thing I noticed is that even when people practice skepticism of journalism, they tend to question the interpretation and presentation more than the facts. That is, they might point out how facts are framed in misleading ways, or important details are excluded, etc., but rarely accuse the media of outright fabrication.
This mimics a similar practice I've noticed in skepticism of science: you'll find people pointing out methodological problems and limitations, but rarely questioning the actual reported results of experiments. I say these practices are similar because they involve questioning the logic but never the premises; they take it for granted that the authors might be trying to mislead you but would simply do so through subtly faulty logic and never through outright invention.
All of which is to ask:
>Is there any reasonable justification for this? That is, is there a reason to believe knowledge producers would draw the line at actual fabrication?
>In general, to what extent can we actually trust the information produced by academia and journalism? If none at all, how can we even navigate the world?
>Is it ever reasonable to simply "trust the science" without even looking at the arguments?
I feel the need to note these questions aren't rhetorical in the slightest, they're genuinely thoughts I've been struggling with.

 No.9124

Always be skeptical. Even the most rigorous and principled people can make errors.
>Is there any reasonable justification for this? That is, is there a reason to believe knowledge producers would draw the line at actual fabrication?
There's plenty of history that they are fine with outright fabrication at times.
>In general, to what extent can we actually trust the information produced by academia and journalism? If none at all, how can we even navigate the world?
Review sources, methods, data if the claim warrants investigation. Try to corroborate the information with other sources, particularly those with different or contrary interests (if you can't find someone disinterested).
>Is it ever reasonable to simply "trust the science" without even looking at the arguments?
No, literally never. "The science" happens in a real social context with a political dimension and it has always been slanted by this. Even if the data collected is good and the study is valid in a technical sense it will often be interpreted (by the scientists themselves or by reporting) through ideological lenses that lead you into mistakes. Always be skeptical. Anybody telling you dude trust me is probably being dishonest and is self-aware of it. An honest person would tell you to check for yourself and validate what they're saying.

 No.9125

I don't think that's fair.

Scientists are sceptical about results, and it is well known and accepted that results are sometimes wrong. More often because of errors than malice, but deliberate falsification does happen. That's why scientific findings always have to be reproducible. If multiple, independent research groups repeat the experiment/study and find the same results, they are most likely correct. Repeating previous results is expensive and not very attractive and unfortunately it is not done as often as it should be. In most cases as an outsider you can't do it from your bedroom alone. That's why you usually see people attack methodology and other issues first, it is less effort and you only need to get the paper from sci-hub. If you are interested in a topic, try finding meta-analyses and literature surveys instead of individual papers, they are more likely to contain trustworthy results, as they aggregate multiple results.

In journalism it is a bit different, but you can (and journalists are supposed to) cross-check facts from multiple independent sources, when they are available. Then again, this is more work that just pointing out faulty reasoning, so outsiders don't bother. But serious, published works are supposed to have done this for you, and they are more likely to be more factual than some online blog masquerading as a news site.

I don't think your criticism is right, these are known issues and there are safeguards that are supposed to limit their harm. Of course they are not perfect, but the situation is not nearly as bad as you make it to be.

 No.9126

>>9124
>Review sources, methods, data if the claim warrants investigation. Try to corroborate the information with other sources, particularly those with different or contrary interests (if you can't find someone disinterested).
But what if, for example, there's an imbalance between the different interests? Few people have the resources to conduct large-scale nationwide polls, or access to advanced telescopes or particle accelerators, stuff like that. The ability to verify data might be concentrated in the hands of a few and at that point it's easier for their interests to align, especially when it comes to journalism.
It seems to me that the bigger institutions will tend to form a sort of "knowledge elite" that not only may align with the political elite but will also have its own independent interests (such as securing funding or maintaining its credibility) that will steer it a certain way.

>>9125
I'm not that trying to suggest that we're in a crisis where most of the science is wrong, I'm just wondering how, epistemologically, we can justify our trust in the data that's presented to us.
I know replication and cross-checking exist, but as you yourself sort of pointed towards, they have their problems as safeguards on an institutional level. As I said above, the ability to verify might be concentrated in the hands of those with shared interests (or not even necessarily interests, but shared biases). This is especially the case with journalism where sources are often anonymous.

But I do agree now that there at least exist processes by which we can gain sufficient trust in the data, even if I don't think they'll always work.

 No.9129

just be critical, like >>9124 said

 No.9131

>>9123
Learn to think skeptically; the clearest introduction to this mode of thought is still Sextus Empiricus' Outlines of Skepticism.



File: 1626780285154.png (137.45 KB, 261x400, ClipboardImage.png)

 No.6507[Reply]

Post Military, Insurgency, General warfare and Military history and Insurgency history books and miscellaneous guides, preferably in pdf format, ZIP Files or torrents of these would also be apricated
32 posts and 17 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.8853

>>8814
Yet Brazil is still a capitalist shithole. I doubt there is any hope for them so as long as the US interferes in their domestic affairs.

 No.8854

>>8853
Friendo, I wish I could blame all of our faults on the USA, but the feat of having a food insecurity crisis worse than fucking Venezuela was achieved – mostly – by us and us alone:

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Brazil-Food-Insecurity-Hits-125-Million-Amid-COVID-19-Crisis-20210416-0021.html

https://www.fao.org/family-farming/detail/fr/c/1392789/

Please, someone get Xi In line and tell him to come liberate us immediately.

 No.9040

Does anyone have the CIA manual given to the Contras?

 No.9104


 No.9127

>>8810
Agreed. This got me really hooked for some reason.



File: 1640862477065.mp4 (5.84 MB, 1280x720, Heroes of Yesterday.mp4)

 No.9114[Reply]

What is conservatism? General concensus is that it started with Edmund Burke and Joseph de Maistre. A leftist concensus is that it isn't an ideology at all and just an attitude to resist change and progress.
But a lot of people say that conservatism is in fact an ideology like Liberalism or Marxism.

https://monthlyreview.org/2019/02/01/scholarship-on-the-rise-of-the-right/
I read this article and it inspired me to make this thread, because really there is hardly any socialists that analyse the "right" in its non-fascist forms and rather focus on liberalism which is to most socialists, the ideology of both american parties, which leaves little interest to analyse a conservatism that isn't even present in america. Hope this thread gives some good answers or book recommendations on "conservatism"
2 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.9117

>>9116
See you again tommorow :)
but seriously Burke is very much a liberal follow?

 No.9118

>>9117
What about the de Maistre?

 No.9119

>>9118
A reactionary
Not as a slur but as a description anarcho primitivism for example is extremely reactionary

 No.9120

>>9119
So there is a difference between reaction and let's say conservatism of the burkean type?>>9117
>See you again tommorow :)
I don't think this website or any imageboard in general has any staying power at this point. What keeps you here? The richness of leftist discussion provided by this community? Come on man…

 No.9121

>>9120
>So there is a difference between reaction and let's say conservatism of the burkean type?
Yes the burkean attitude of before you tear this thing down figure out why it's there in the first place doesn't necessarily mean the final conclusion isn't that the thing shouldn't be torn down



File: 1638939815618.jpg (21.1 KB, 322x250, walter audisio pepe.jpg)

 No.8862[Reply]

What are the best books that give a nuance look at the use of in history political violence. I was talking with my friend about the antifa guy who punched Richard Spencer, and he thought it was bad optics because it gave him more sympathy for his ideas. And that got me thinking about the potential bad optics the use of political violence can have. And what situations warrant the use of violence and what situations warrant an alternative method.

 No.8864

Zizek has written a book called "Violence"

 No.8865


 No.8915


 No.9099


 No.9100

Punching Spencer was good "optics"
Spencer was the first to provoke by openly being a nazi and punching him publicly humiliates him and popularizes ant-fascism



 No.6345[Reply]

I'm tired of people overstating Hegel's influence in Marx's theories and then fucking recommending secondary books because they "make Marx understandable by getting rid of all the Hegel stuff". You REALLY do not need to know Hegel to understand 99% of the stuff Marx wrote.

 No.6358

>>6345
Absolute worst offender in this regard is Tony Smith and his book "The Logic of Marx's Capital"

 No.6360

>>6358
pdf?

 No.6362

Hegel is a philosophical encyclopedia. There is philosophical jargon that I didn't understand from Marx until after having read Hegel, and that's just a bit of Hegel.

 No.9091

actually i don't think it's stated enough
Marx took way more from Hegel than just dialectic, and people thinking they can just read The German Ideology and be finished with Marx's philosophical groundings is a huge cause of theoretical misunderstanding

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1837-pre/letters/37_11_10.htm
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/letters/43_09-alt.htm

 No.9093

To understand Marx's reasoning, to understand how he developed his ideas you need Hegel. No, you don't need Hegel to understand what the definitions of "surplus value" or "variable capital" are. Depends on what your goals.



File: 1640183585474.jpg (1.84 MB, 2048x1340, jwst.jpg)

 No.9043[Reply]

Once this thing launches it will be a massive step forward for astronomy. This thread is for any future discoveries it makes. Or for discussing the implications of any discoveries that JWST makes.

 No.9044

How is the simulation going to accommodate for this expansion of human perception? Worried that this is going to literally blow up the universe bros.

 No.9045

Can someone explain ?

 No.9055

>>9045
>The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is a space telescope being jointly developed by NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA). It is planned to succeed the Hubble Space Telescope as NASA's flagship astrophysics mission.
>It will provide improved infrared resolution and sensitivity over Hubble, and will enable a broad range of investigations across the fields of astronomy and cosmology, including observing some of the most distant events and objects in the universe, such as the formation of the first galaxies, and detailed atmospheric characterization of potentially habitable exoplanets.
it probably won't do much
the orbit is further out than the hubble telescope so less noise in the way, and its more sophisticated cooling systems let it detect infrared heat throughout the universe more effectively and sensitively



File: 1639968551587.jpg (185.42 KB, 1080x1356, NickLandUwu.jpg)

 No.9022[Reply]

I haven't read Land at all but i know that his 'book' (Fanged Noumena) is actually just a compilation of various essays, articles and blog-posts he wrote over time condensed together,

If i open up a .PDF of fanged Noumena are there particular sections that are above all else worth reading or is it more a holistic read?

 No.9029

shut the fuck up(Don't shit up /edu/)

 No.9039




File: 1639495140469.png (195.18 KB, 309x225, ClipboardImage.png)

 No.8892[Reply]

Communist/socialist parties were fucking massive in the 1900s. Now, there arent any left.

Where the fuck did they hide the books describing what they did to get so big? All you can find by googling is books on abstract theory, contemporary anarchist groups running in circles doing fruitless charity and lifestylism, showing up to protests that doesnt do shit or how to organise your workspace (if you already have a working communist party and non-shit union).

How the fuck did they build it in the first place? What should we focus on AS A PARTY, not as individuals? What should youth wings do? We have a group of people who know their fucking Marx, now what the fuck do we do in this neoliberal hellscape.
40 posts and 7 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.9013

>>9007
how are the SPD or Bolsheviks >>8982 any less of a dead-end for modern attempts to "overthrow the bourgeoisie"? at least councilcom evolved into building proper critiques of itself (i.e. situationists, theorie communiste, dauve, entire 68 movement and its aftermaths, etc) and actually scientifically looking for new avenues of proletarian praxis
social democracy and lenin's supposed heirs meanwhile are nothing but dogma that can only alienate pretty much the entire working class nowadays

 No.9016

>>9013
>working class
sorry, meant proletariat

 No.9035

Apologies for the late response
>>9004
Do you mind summarising the arguements of the book? Unfortunately I do not have the time to read everybook that comes my way, and I think if the book does a good job at explaining why Council Communism is at all relevent to modern times you can give a good summary.

>>9013
>"at least councilcom evolved into building proper critiques of itself (i.e. situationists, theorie communiste, dauve, entire 68 movement and its aftermaths, etc) and actually scientifically looking for new avenues of proletarian praxis"
Well that's not something unique to council communism considering many supposed "heirs" to Lenin also aim to provide proper critiques of Leninist theory and look for new avenues of proletarian power. One such example would be MLMs, critiquing past theory on its own doesn't necessarily make a tendency worth studying or following.

Council Communists have not once won political hegemony in the workers' movements, so the claim that they also alienate the working class with their dogma can also be thrown at them.

 No.9036

>>9035
>so the claim that they also alienate the working class with their dogma can also be thrown at them
autonomists are active in labour struggles in almost every country in the world, although i mostly only know about the US
https://endnotes.org.uk/issues/1/en/endnotes-afterword this basically summarizes that book

 No.9037

Apologies OP for sorta derailing your thread with this talk about council communists so here's a PDF of Mike Macnair's Revolutionary Strategy. Which is Mike Macnair writing a whole book about how do go from the current state of the left to building a mass party like socialists in the 20th century and overthrow the bourgeoisie whilst also trying to avoid the pitfalls of past experiments.

This book is very popular with the modern orthodox marxist/neokaut tendency, think the CPGB-PCC/weekly worker or cosmonaut/Marxist Unity Group.
Audio version too incase you want to listen to it instead, be sure to read the preface in the link
https://cosmonautmag.com/2021/09/audio-book-of-mike-macnairs-revolutionary-strategy/
>>9036
>According to this shared view, the transition to communism is not something that happens after the revolution.
>Communisation, then, is the immediate production of communism: the self-abolition of the proletariat through its abolition of capital and state.
>the proletariat does not generalise its condition to the whole of society, but dissolves its own being immediately through the abolition of capitalist social relations.

These lines about immediate abolition makes communisation sound very… anarchistic… and the article really doesn't make a clear case on why Council Communism is the way forward to overthrow and abolish the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie as opposed to other marxist tendencies.

>autonomists are active in labour struggles in almost every country in the world, although i mostly only know about the US

Firstly I think you're really exaggerating the influence and spread of autonomists, and even if they're active in labour struggles all around the world…. so what? Trots, MLs, SocDems, Anarchists, and every other tendencies are active in labour struggles across the globe, autonomists also being so doesn't make them special. Nor does it disprove the accusation that autonomists are also out of touch with the working class.

Interesting that you go from talking about Council Coms to talking about Autonomists (no theyPost too long. Click here to view the full text.



File: 1634409565975.png (405.67 KB, 750x467, Bro.png)

 No.8125[Reply]

How can I stop this? It's bad….really bad and I know should be preparing for uni, but I just keep on procrastinating. Does somebody have some ritual or set of tips that help combating it?
8 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.8134

>>8133
Sorry, I don't speak the burger language. Eh "college" was it with you right? Anyway thanks for the pomodoro recommendation. Guess I will try it out

 No.8135

>>8134
I am not a burger or a native speaker. To me "preparing for uni" sounds as if you were not in university yet and were preparing to start it. If it is just assignments, I would say you are preparing for class. But maybe this is just something coming from my native language.

But yes, that was what helped me the most. It's also nice if you have all your course requirements, dates and deadlines organized, I would always start my semester collecting these and putting them in my calendar. Most of these cannot be done in the last minute and many of them needs to be done for the same week (for me it was usually the middle of the semester that was always full of tests and assignment deadlines). If there are subjects that you are enthusiastic about, or even just don't dread, it can be very helpful to do the assignments as early as possible to free up more time for the other assignments.

 No.8136

>>8130
Does this work for tasks that don't require stufying? Like drawing for instance

 No.8140

>>8136
I don't see why not. Local drawfriend Hardkoba seems to use it (or something similar), from what I've seen on a stream.

 No.9034

>>8130
I've started using this method and it has actually been helping me a great ton.



File: 1637786936672.jpg (42.37 KB, 647x506, China CIA Baizou.jpg)

 No.8757[Reply]

Simply put, a thread to document and explore China's relationship with the CIA.

Here we collate sources, examples, etc, which document China's friendly relations with the CIA and its objectives, in places like Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Angola, The Philippines, Israel, etc.
48 posts and 7 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.9018

Kek, sage and his simp are pretty funny. They're deliberately misreading documents and cherry picking quotes. Typical internet debate bro faggotry.

 No.9019

>>9018
the only misreading is the guy pretending Pakistani islamist groups are Maoist

 No.9020

>>9019
Holy shit dude, read your fucking sources. Don't keep digging yourself deeper.

 No.9021

>>9020
which specific parts are you pointing to

 No.9032

>>8992
>China funded Moaists, a faction of the communists, to overthrow another communist faction
Couldn't they work together or something.



Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]
[ 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