/edu/ - Education

Evolution is just a description of what happens, it does not give purpose to anything. Nothing has "evolutionary purpose", it's a meaningless term.

>>7049
>why, evolutionarily speaking, do animals or organisms in general (including humans) keep on living after they are no longer able to reproduce due to age?
Older members of a community can provide guidance (think village elders and matriarchal/patriarchal familial structures), care (thanks tondecades of knowledge and experience in treating people, modern medicine is not very old), education, and so on. You see this in mammals, where the older members are the guides/leaders cause they know where the water is, food, shelter, where to move, seasons, etc.
>Wouldn't it be better for the survival of the species if they just died after they couldn't have kids anymore? Evolutionarily they have no purpose right?
No. Who'd protect the offspring? This is especially true for humans. We're unique in the animal kingdom because out offspring can't realistically take care of themselves for ten years or more.
>Is it just so they can help to raise offspring? But elderly animals continue to consume resources that could go towards young, so isn't it still a net loss overall?
Their value far outweighs what they use in resources. Some human cultures have practiced senicide.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senicide

>>7049
>a thread died for this
back to >>>/leftypol/

>Cuentos de amor de locura y de muerte
yooo thats lit
you finna check out picrel dawg that shit fire😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣crakkkas couped him tho crazy

I really like The Hour of the Star by Clarice Lispector. She was a Ukrainian-born Brazilian, idk if that counts.

Para contribuir con el hilo, to contribute with the thread, two books that I found
One from the indigenist author Arguedas and the other a compilation of tales by Ribeyro (from this one I recomend the At the foot of the hill) sadly, it doesn't have Alienation, one of my favourite tales from him.

>>6996
>>6998
>>7001
thanks for the recs

Thoughts on Bolaño? I kinda wanna get into him and read pic related, but it's just so fucking long…

Do you mean "colour revolution"? It is just a fancy name. Some of the events were named after colours but it is not a rule, see a list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_revolution#List_of_colour_revolutions

>>6944
I know this is late but OP is actually talking about quantum chromodynamics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chromodynamics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_charge

I'm not a physicist and i don't know shit about quantum mechanics but here's how i understand it:
The color charge is just like electrical charge in the sense that it causes objects to attract or repel
The electrical charge can have 2 types which is either positive or negative and its rules are very simple: opposite charges attract and like charges repel
The color charge can have 6 different types instead of the just 2 types (positive and negative) of electrical charge which is why is it's so damn complicated.
The reason why it's called color charge is simply an analogy to how these charges combine in a similar way to colors(see below) and has nothing to do with the actual color of the particles, remember that what we call a 'color charge' is just some property which causes particles to feel a force, because there are 6 types of color charge the rules for whether this force is an attractive or a repelling force is much more complicated.

The possible types of color charges are: Red, Green, Blue, Anti-red, Anti-green, Anti-blue
Note that Anti-red, Anti-green, Anti-blue are also called Cyan, Purple and Yellow respectively, see pic 1 and 2.
Now what are the rules for color charges? which charges attract which and which repel which?
When you combine a positively charged particle(such as a proton) with a negatively charged particle(such as an electron) you get a neutral structure(such as a hydrogen atom), effectively the positive and negative charges cancel each other, However the color charge doesn't work like that, when two color charges mix they give rise to a different color charge which is why they're compared to how color mix, here's how some of the different charges mix:
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>6990

Your understanding is correct, but I would stress that the main phenomenological law behind color charges is the fact that any "complete" particle composed of quarks we see is colourless (or white) - so for example a baryon (such as a proton or a neutron) which consists of three quarks one is red, one is blue and one is green - the sum of the colours is white. For a meson it must be colour + anti-colour.

It's very important to understand that free colour charges have NEVER been observed, it's not just attractive/repulsive.

>>6971
I'd be down

Sounds good comrade.

Why not just talk about it here?

i wouldn't post much but I would read it and ask questions

/sci/ room has bee created! you can access it here: https://matrix.to/#/#leftysci:matrix.org

This thread will now serve as an extension of this matrix room, you can discuss anything you want regarding the room here

>>7227
>they explicitly rejected the idea that a Kulak was merely a person that owned more then everyone else.
No, the Soviets rejectd that notion. The average peasant of the time, not yet versed in Marx and Lenin and relying on assigned officials to teach them this, had simpler concepts of Kulaks and their role. You can argue details all you like, but the reality is, Russian peasants of the late 20s and early 30s were ignorant, out of no fault of their own, if you live in a system repressing education for the people, even efforts like Lenin's push for literacy would not fix this immediately and many areas remained ignorant. Otherwise the USSR wouldn't have had to combat grain hoarding by Kulaks and ordinary peasants during 1932 either.
>Peasants writing in newspapers
>hundreds
recall that the USSR comprised over 100 MILLION people, even if 1000 people collectively all wrote letters that is still less than 10% of the population. Again you have to rely on the personal honesty of accusers
>No one had any issue with a "thrifty" farmer who had accumulated for himself a second cow or a nicer hut by having improved his harvest through ingenuity or personal labour
Because suddenly the existence of the USSR abolished things like envy, jealousy and grudges? The early Soviet government constantly battled opportunism and other disingenuous behavior and not for no reason.
>to be "thrifty" was something seen as only proper in the peasant moral economy
That doesn't mean that this excludes someone else disliking it or wanting to possess what others have. This is a common theme of Russian literature - jealousy and hate and envy leading brother to kill brother or take advantage of a situation to get rid of someone and get their things. Soviet media includes this too, and they attempted to address it constantly.
>farmers who obtained their wealth "dishonestly"
>they're Kulaks
Yes I agree, I'm just pointing out that this is vague enough that people may take advantage of it for personal reasons. Additionally, city officials could often be corrupt and opportunist. It's statistically impossible for this to not occur, even if it is Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

So are we done here?

>>7230
>Russian peasants of the late 20s and early 30s were ignorant

Those peasants were educated enough to end capitalism in Russia. Do you think they didn't understand what kulak - or a capitalist - meant? Come on now. They lived alongside those shits.

>Otherwise the USSR wouldn't have had to combat grain hoarding by Kulaks and ordinary peasants during 1932 either.

Ridiculous claim. Hoarding the grain is economically viable, it happened in kolkhozes, sovkhozes, farmers did it, kulaks did it as well.

>Yes I agree, I'm just pointing out that this is vague enough that people may take advantage of it for personal reasons

You stretch this "may" into a blanket dismissal of every attempt to combat kulakism as a jealousy, envy and grudges.

> It's statistically impossible for this to not occur

It's even more statistically - and logically, and managerially, or logistically - impossible for all of those repressions against kulaks being just cases of jealousy. Again, letters to authorities by themselves NEVER were a proof of a crime, it's not fuckng middle ages and witch hunts, where accusers got money for reporting! It's SOCIALIST COUNTRY, that was painfully aware of history of such things, and they did goddamn make sure that letters are investigated, but not used as a proof. Because that's how a sane person would organize statecraft.

>>7232
>Those peasants were educated enough to end capitalism in Russia
Imagine being this idiotic. As of the revolution 76% of the population could not read at all and had 0 formal education. So none could form written definitions or read said definitions, they could only know something by word of mouth.
>they didn't understand what kulak - or a capitalist - meant?
To the generation that fought the Revolution it got defined in Layman's terms; the rich oppressor, any further details got forgotten by most. You seem to think 1917 is a unique revolution, Peasant Revolts in Russia had been going on for centuries, repeatedly every decade, but Kulaks at the time were small fry to who they fought.
>those shits
Those shits usually were peasants themselves at one point.
>Ridiculous claim
No it is not, the Soviet government and any honest literature on the famine of 1932 pointed out that people did try to hoard or procure grain because they feared starvation. Again peasants fought the revolution for material benefits for themselves, to improve their lives and the lives of their kin, not because of "ideals of communism" that only a few people in Russia were literate enough to be even aware of. See pic 1
>oarding the grain is economically viable
No it is not, not in a famine, to repeat thngs I said beforee The government’s job in a famine is to freeze everybody in place; gather what food there is; ration it; distribute it. And guard the seed grain, that's what it did. hoarding grain sabotages this effort and sabotage economic production by preventing a balanced assessment of productivity.
>stretch this "may"
No I do not. You clearly have not spent a lot of time interacting with other people more than casually IRL. You clearly don't understand or truly empathize with
>blanket dismissal of every attempt to combat kulakism
I specifically said otherwise, cope more. Also Kulakism doesn't exist, it's not an ideology you twat, it's a name for a specific type of bourg in a specific country.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

This is supposed to be a popular introduction.

>>6904
Looks good, thanks.

I'll drop two I have

>uno

>>6918
>>6919
Thank you, I will have a look at it.

>>306
If you are into medieval weapons and martial arts scholagladiatoria blows them all out of the water and is not a retarded right winger:
https://www.youtube.com/user/scholagladiatoria

>>300
Speaking of Shadiversity please enjoy the HEMA thread >>>/hobby/3859

Dun dun da dun dun dun
Dun dun da dun dun dun
Dun dun da dun dun dun
DA DUN DUN DUN DUN!

>>6959
Jaws is that you?

>>6968
Nah that's
Duhh duh duhh duh duh duhduhduhduhduhduhduhduhduh

Ask Zemskov

>>84
what? it's not that hard to get access

you say you are doing research for a paper and that is it

>>89
That would imply Stalin's still alive.

>>82
>Pic 1
This is some Evangelion tier stuff.

Freud thought women learned to be devious because they had to hide their periods so nobody knew they could get pregnant so they got better at covering shit up.

>>14
I would bet that the association between women and working with textiles comes partly from women weaving fibers together to form linen and the like to soak up cooter fluids. I've heard historians referring to reusable menstrual cloth much like reusable diapers, so as far back as there was cloth there was probably menstrual cloths. Before that maybe they got creative with other shit like feathers. I know in rural India where cheap sanitary napkins are being introduced, there was a typical practice of shoving fucking dirt up there, but that's also in a culture where the whole subject is very taboo.

>>20
90% of the idea that hunter-gatherers were ooga booga cave men is the lack of hard evidence of their sophistication. Prior to monumental stone architecture, most of what they made and built disappeared completely over the ages. Shit, the idea that people were primarily cave-dwellers probably mostly comes from the fact that caves shield physical evidence from the elements. The kind of people who lived in caves back then were probably the kind of people who live in caves today - social rejects and those who were too lazy/stupid to build a longhouse or whatever. They were just as smart as us, but had less of the kind of knowledge we do, and more knowledge of how to survive in a less altered (but still altered) environment.

>>14
how the fuck do you think I know that? I'm a dude.
Let us all wait for a woman or a human waste historian to show up itt

>>29
What a story that is, your life and Christianity are quite intertwined

>>49
don't insult my boy puyi like that

>>47
Lol having different coloured facial hair is completely natural bro. I have brown hair but my beard is red.

There is a reason they called Vikings things like "Redbeard". You think that happened if he also had red normal hair?

>couldn't even organise his own coronation party without a massacre
>couldn't even consummate an heir
>couldn't win a war
>couldn't run an economy
>listen to boomer uncle and run counter to the grain of history resulting in the destruction of ancient royal line.

Nicholas 2 Haemophilia boogaloo is the biggest cuck in history

just gonna bump this for the lols this is gold

>>42
Uhuh, thanks lol