/edu/ - Education

>>26008
>because it's actually deeply flawed
The problem with Cohen's analysis is that he spends an absurd amount of time trying to formalize something which is secundary to Marx's historical materialism. Iirc, most of the argument is concentrated on proving the base/superstructure dichotomy, which is simply not that relevant to Marx's historical materialism

For starters, Marx doesn't build a "theory of history". He's not creating a teleology, precisely because he rejects Hegel's conclusion that the development of the state and society must follow reason. Instead, he analyzes the root of change in society and its condition. His argument in essence goes about
>Man exteriorizes himself in the world through productive activity (labor). He changes the world around him to satisfy himself, to provide for his needs, to develop his interests etc (self-realization).
>In doing so, he enters relations of production to produce more effectively and to develop the forces of production required for his reproduction/production of self-realization
>However, as the forces of production are developed, new possibilities of the organization of labor emerge. Some classes (defined by their role in the productive process) obtain the possibility to further develop their self-realization by changing the organization, whilst for some, these changes can constitute a challenge to the position which they benefit from
>this creates antagonism between the class, which opens the possibility for clas conflict
This is the fundamental mechanism for class conflict. It's the idea that society's Mode of Production is defined in relation to labor, which itself is a social and creative process by which humans self-realize.

On the other hand, the base/superstructure dichotomy is more or less an attempt at formalizing how ideology, laws, and social norms emerge. Here, Marx's argument is only that these norms can only build themselves upon a pre-existing social arrangement, which can only occur by the socialization of labor. In other words : you can't build laws if you don't have anything to be their subjects. The superstructure thus regulates the mode of production because it is its object.
This does not mean howePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Reality is not Marxist, that's just a clever quip. The truth is Marxism strives to understand reality and has made theoretical developments with strong explanatory and predictive power. That's the real meaning of the phrase.

>>25809
>I haven't read enough of my priors on dialectical materialism
You're misusing "priors", this phrase doesn't make sense.

Teleology isn’t scientific lmao

Marxism is just a system of analysis, a useful one, and one that holds up well to scientific scrutiny (other, more rigorous analysis) most of the time.

Meanwhile reality is simply there, not analytical itself but infinitely ripe for analysis.

>>25809
>Is this as wrong as I think it is, and if it's not, why?
Marx is an ecclectic thinker who wrote A LOT on many things. Dialectical Materialism (albeit pioneered by Engels but validated by Marx), historical materialism, class analysis, surplus value are all things on which Marx was mostly correct about, albeit modern developments have truncated some unnecessary elements. The reason for that is simply that he was the first to analyze society as a whole in its relations rather than try a metaphysical explanation of it. This is also why he's considered one of the founders of sociology.


>>26035
Marx never builds a teleology outside of political motivated texts like the manifesto.
Hegel did build a teleology, but Marx's entire critique of him is precisely that he's assuming that the development of society and the state must necessarily follow reason rather than material circumstances. In the German Ideology, Marx explicitly says that communism is a movement rather than a predetermined end state
<“Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.”

>>25711
>Arthur Kronfeld
>German-Jewish psychiatrist
>Founded the The Institute for Sexual Science
>He claimed that he had scared the living daylights out of those nasty Nazis.
LOL

>>25784
Nazis were and continue to be gay and insecure

>>25848
Fascism and MLism are brothers jackass

>>25850
and other hilarious jokes you can tell yourself.

>>25847
<He claimed that he had scared the living daylights out of those nasty Nazis.
Eh, no he didn't…?

Stop reading with your arse

A lolbert wrote this book on why he thinks education is bad:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_Against_Education

This just got out, however you need to find a free pdf either from Anna’s or zlib etc

>>25933
i hope this is a satire book, i know misandrists are fucking insane but this just genuinely retarded even for them.

>>25843
Having read some Dworkin, I don't know if she ever directly said that because it seems like she never directly says anything ever. All Dworkin does is complain about men, and all positions she is said to hold seems to be more inferred from the exact way that she is complaining about men in any given work rather than directly stated.

>>25844
Yeah I mean the other problem is that Dworkin is a coward. Dworkin's conclusions are trivial and she is afraid to state them outright.

too much of the criticism agaisnt dworkin is just using token anti zionism and pointing out the fact that she isn't the "infallible uberwoman genius" that terminally online radfem like to potray her as and thus fully discarding ANYTHING and EVERYTHING she has EVER said (or at least the strawman version of her) and continuing to feel confident knowing that there is absolutely no need to interrogate or self introspect their deeply held views, opinions, and habits

>>25830

sophie lewis is (mostly) unnecessary and sometimes just horrid from what i know of her and her writing

>>25839

>The very term "women's liberation movement" in this time-period and in a Western context (that she is almost exclusively referring to) is so retarded as to be fucking comedic, if not for the fact that there are stupid entitled burger-women and men that actually subscribe to this ideological bullshit.

semantic bs

>Women are not a separate class, but an identity. Take off that Soviet flag, you bring shame to Marxism-Leninism.

bro dosen't know about the womb or the role of the housewife💀
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>26028
>fully discarding ANYTHING and EVERYTHING she has EVER said
The more I read of her, the more my criticism of her actually becomes that she never actually says anything ever. She just writes books complaining about men and any positions she is said to hold come from inference about the exact way that she is complaining about men.

Which makes some of the more frustrating discourse around Dworkin more understandable. When you try to talk about some of the more radical implications that Dworkin gestures at, the Dworkinites will come out and say that she never actually said that, and they're not wrong because Dworkin never actually says anything. For instance, the only conclusion you could possibly come to when you read Dworkin write about sex and rape is that all heterosexual sex is rape, but there is absolutely no passage anywhere where she actually says that directly. She complains about men and the implication of the way in which she complains about men is that all heterosexual sex in rape, but she never outright says it.

>>26023
im by no means and expert on judaism or whatever so i probobly should just stay quiet on this BUUUT if i am gonna say something based on the things that i already do know it feels a bit TOO reductive to frame the entirety (not saying thats what you're doing) as a "racialist religion" but like i said im not very familiar on that stuff so i could be wrong or whatever

>>26023
the concept of a "chosen people" is reactionary
cutting baby penises is reactionary

>>25447
The only bible that has my imprimatur is the skeptic's annotated version. I even have a hard back copy.
https://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

>>25741
I love you

God isn't real. Stop this retardation. All religions are false made up inventions, only useful to the modern world as a cautionary example of how large numbers of people can be fooled by manipulative ideas. Eventually the whole world will be atheist and this retardation won't even be studied as a historical curiosity because it's so boring.

>>25950
People will never stop believing in metaphysical bullshit
We replaced angels and demons with AI and other brain worms

But tbh I don’t think people believe in God as a literal cosmic anthropomorphic sapient but rather as a psychosomatic effect

>>25950
>Eventually the whole world will be atheist
I highly doubt it

Interest in market analytics on financial and CSPAN if your spouse is also interested in the same for his job.

Your child has no sign of gender dysfunction, even if insisting due to puberty signs of sport; however, watches television intended for wealthy men's careers, and you are not; the blue collar divide.

Your son or daughter hates National Geographic; they like "Discovery", and are applying private economics and history lessons from school specialist programs as elementary students.

Your child has a discipline problem called a single detention, that the father finds concerning; however, refuses to act on it in any manner.

Your child is raised as Thomas Edison's factory workers; a "Menlo", Stonewall Jackson sayings placed as Abraham Lincoln; Michelle Obama.

not interesting

>>25994
> If it is held that man is "by nature" an uninventive tribesman and an inventive businessman, a submissive slave and a proud craftsman, an independent hunter and a dependent wage-worker, then either man's "nature" is an empty concept, or man's "nature" depends on material and historical conditions, and is in fact a response to those conditions.
I am yet to learn about a "result" from evolutionary psychology that was not discredited by actual archaeological evidence. It is nothing more but a bunch of charlatans looking at what already exists and trying to justify it based on what must have existed before, all while ignoring what actually did exist in the past.

>>25998
Then you haven't read. Dismissing a field by stereotype is lazy.
>actual archaeological evidence
archaeology guesses from trash piles lmao

>Meanwhile, 6ft 4 charismatic chads get perfect grades and enter the nation's best colleges for law or medicine.

Maybe because those Chads also have super intelligence but are also socially graceful.
Not all chads are subpar intelligence

>>25994
Most evolutionary psychology is based around pop culture impressions rather than reality though

>>25978
>>25972
>>25977
This

What’s even more intrinsic is that the rationale for modern schooling is “socialization”

A lot of adults who agree with compulsory law for public schools say that school should be about socialization because otherwise “you end up as a loser in the adult world”

Yet a lot of adults end up social recluses in time

And socialization ins chills are micromanaged too the point of sterilization

Schools willfully neglect to teach life skills
Their idea of life skills is forcing kids to do group projects