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

/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
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /spoox/ - Paranormal, horror and the occult.
New board: /AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.

| Catalog | Home
|

File: 1608528143018.jpeg (32.45 KB, 400x367, Phil-book.jpeg)

 No.2014[Reply]

I've been doing a bit of reading on the economic aspects of Marxism, however it occurred to me that I don't know where to start with the more philosophical aspects. I've seen people post Stalin's, "Dialectical and Historical Materialism" and I've occasionally been recommended some works by Bukharin, however I really don't know what order would be best to understand concepts such as dialectical materialism or the base and superstructure or ideology, and so on. Could one of you anons help me figure out how exactly I should educate myself on such topics?
22 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.6365

>>6271
>Frankfurt School
>No Benjamin or Lukacs

 No.6366

>>6365
I don't think Benjamin or Lukács was part of the Frankfurt School. Then again, Debord wasn't either, so idk.

 No.6368

>>6366
Lukacs was simultaneously an intellectual forefather and early critic of the franky boys, and Benjamin's debates with Adorno are well documented.

 No.6406

File: 1626114803152.jpeg (25.44 KB, 400x602, images (95).jpeg)

Wiki said Lukacs 'repudiated' History and Class Consciousness, whatever that means, which doesnt make me so enthusiastic to read it.christian_communismChristian Communism

 No.6407

>>6406

It's one of the most important philosophical book of the marxian tradition. Love it or hate it, but def. unavoidable.

The repudiation come after the harsh criticizm his book take from the Comintern at the time (if I rermember right, espc. from Zinoviev and Bukharin). It nonetheless make Lucaks take a more "orthodox leninist" turn, that culminates in his "ontology of the social being".iwwIWW



 No.1851[Reply]

Any good documentaries for oogling at the wealth amassed by America's industrialists?

 No.2206

File: 1608528164605.jpg (195.04 KB, 1200x1014, D28JBBlUcAEObsK.jpg)

Like the Gilded Age?

 No.2287

>>1851
this one is quite good

 No.2288




File: 1608528126251.png (398.23 KB, 598x566, tweet1.png)

 No.1835[Reply]

but even if it's not, is this something that's possible? how do you develop the hermeneutics to read this fast?
9 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.2023

>>1835
WTF, you don't read at least 100 pages of information everyday? Repent, sinners. No wonder the civilization has decayed so much. Cease all the unnecessary normie activity everyday, instead focus on attain wizardhood

 No.2031

>>1835
skimming

 No.3046

>>2031
Given that he wrote notes on the side of the page often, I would reckon otherwise.

 No.3072

>>1835
You probably read an equivalent amount of content on your screen every day

 No.3095

>>1854
I think this is one of those rare brain conditions that is actually a positive benefit. My ex was diagnosed with it, but I can't remember the name of it.



File: 1608528123163.jpg (47.84 KB, 474x355, galaxy brain.jpg)

 No.1806[Reply]

Is IQ even real? Can it reliably measure someone's "intelligence"? What even is intelligence, and is it really primarily genetic? Is IQ really tied to race?

I keep seeing a lot of conflicting opinions on this but I'm too much of a brainlet to find a satisfying answer.
2 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.1816

>>1815
Yes, look at your own map, most blue countries/regions are descended from Europe: Canada, US, Argentina, Europe, Russia, Australia. China and Japan are outliers, if anything it proves that one can train for the test, and that is what they do, they literally train how to take these standardised tests. Both China and Japan have cultures where academic success is respected and something that people strive for, so of course those countries will have higher test AVERAGES, because there are simply more of them who do well.

 No.1818

IQ is a bit meh. Of course, there are various aspects to what is considered intelligence; so even if you have good measures for the aspects, it's somewhat arbitrary how you weight them. Extremely bad results can tell you whether somebody is disabled. We know IQ tests aren't perfect, the weighting issue aside. There are programs for solving IQ tests, yet this doesn't give us a general simulation of human intelligence.

The way IQ talk is used in political discussion – as a cause, not as both cause and effect – is asinine. If you are malnourished and live in a polluted area, you get brain-damage from that, no matter how great your genetic potential is.

There is some correlation between very good IQ results and doing well in school. But it doesn't make sense to obsess over two people being ten or fifteen points apart. IQ test results are NOT stable over life, that's a big lie that I suspect people tell who know better and who want to score above the herd. You can definitely practice for these tests and improve by twenty to thirty points. I don't think you can get from 80 to 150 though.

>>1810
Your argument about test-making and solving assumes a symmetry that isn't there. I can create a vocabulary test against a dictionary without having perfect memory about what's in the dictionary myself. I can set a higher time-limit for myself as a test-maker than I allow for the test-taker and I can allow myself to use certain tools that I don't allow the test-takers to use. I can make very hard puzzles about shoving pieces around by going backwards from the solution, that doesn't mean I can solve puzzles of similar complexity myself. It's easier to multiply prime numbers than to be shown the result of that multiplication and having to find the prime numbers from that.

 No.3036

>>1810
>IQ was designed in the same way, European (white) males are taken to be the standard against which others are tested.
I’m not incredibly pro IQ or anything but this is such a bullshit argument. IQ was created by the school board to identify students with learning disabilities.

 No.3042

File: 1608528253355.jpeg (7.94 KB, 190x293, mmm.jpeg)

>>3036
>IQ was created by the school board to identify students with learning disabilities.
The original IQ test as created by Binet, yes, it was meant to identify children with learning disabilities. But then the Americans took it, and created the Stanford-Binet scale, among others. That is the IQ test we talk about and know today.

I'm not talking out of my ass, I got my info from pic related. It's a good book and you should read it.

>Your argument about test-making and solving assumes a symmetry that isn't there.

My point is that the test (actually, in the beginning there were two tests, for literate and illiterate people, it's actually a very interesting story, but I digress) was designed in a way that it presented people with problems and then timed them on how fast they're able to complete the tasks, if at all. Now, why would the test-creator assign tasks that he himself cannot solve?

The original IQ test asked things about days of the week, about American culture, asked them about radio, etc. basically, it tested white, middle-class intelligence. Poor whites also did poorly on the tests. The test didn't test "intelligence", but integration into American society, it asked questions that the test-makers knew the answer to.

And I ask again, how can someone ask a question they themselves can't answer and then judge someone on the validity of that answer?

 No.3043

>>3042
>how can someone ask a question they themselves can't answer and then judge someone on the validity of that answer?
That question was already answered ITT, you are just too dumb to get it :/



File: 1608527983864.jpg (9.26 KB, 275x183, Man and Nature.jpg)

 No.502[Reply]

What makes us so special? What makes us different? Humans are primates, when I look at other people I see, in every sense of the word, an ape. We are animals,we look like animals, we smell like animals. Thinking of what we really are makes my head spin.

What makes us special? What makes us different? What makes our lives meaningful? Are we even special? Are we even different? Are we meant to be in an unending war for dominance of nature that inevitably ends in our mutual destruction? Are we meant to become stewards of the Earth, the next stage in energy usage for Life, living in harmony with the Earth as its first sentient aspect? Why were there no others, why only us? In 500 million years of animal life, why only Man? Can more come after us, if we go extinct? Is our purpose merely to choose for ourselves why we exist? Are we free, or are we slaves? Why do we individually seem so limited, and yet together humanity seems to be without limits?

What is the dialectical explanation for Man? His consciousness? His relationship to Nature? His drive to spirituality? Is it a misunderstanding on Man's part? Does Man not see that those aspects he has are those he shares with Nature? Gained from Nature? Marx wrote that many species engage in labor; yet seemingly only man labors first in his mind, then with his body. Why are We in this regard?

Our notions of honor, of courage, of willpower, of morality; only we created cultures. And yet, other species experience these emotions from which such ideas rose. Other species experience love. They feel fear. They summon bravery to conquer that fear.

The materialist relation between Man and Nature, between Man and Himself; why is Man, why are We?

These questions, they haunt me frequently, I wish to understand, to Nature we seemingly stand above as gods, and yet we are of Nature, not apart from it; and to us aspects of Nature, like our Sun, like our Universe; they seem yet greater than we could ever hope to be. Help me to understand.
35 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.1433

>>1012
Haven't crocodiles been around for longer than us?

 No.1453

>>1416
Who says we don't?

 No.1454

>>1416
I've posted it before and I'll post it again. Read this all, gotta be a little patient though

 No.1801

>>502
My dear friend, the answer lies in material conditions and a philosophy. Please give it a read will ya'? I swear, I hate people who have existential crisis when they have learned that their higher being (or what many people call soul) is attached to material and will die once your body dies.

 No.1804

We labor, which then forms our inner monolog culminating in our consciousness. Animals don't labor.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1876/part-played-labour/index.htm



 No.1763[Reply]

Just saw this video on the Soviet Antarctic ice cruisers called Kharkovchanka, and thought it was pretty good.
And I remember seeing here and there in all manner of different threads stuff like Soviet nuclear icebreakers and massive scaled naval hovercraft.
So I figure weird and supercool Soviet vehicles like those would be a great topic for an /edu/ thread,
as well as any normal Soviet vehicles of course because they're cool too.

https://youtu.be/f6R-h06IsJw

 No.1785

this is also an interesting project that could have make a lot of things easier

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VOzKuEhrMY

I don't understand why people keep telling there's no innovation under socialism, the way I see it, there's only innovation that's actually needed. The only "innovation" capitalism came up with is technology that dumbs down the populations into obedient consumers.

 No.2073




File: 1608528118873.jpg (144.12 KB, 750x430, youtube.jpg)

 No.1761[Reply]

There's already a thread about Lindybeige but I find him a bit of an insufferable right wing anticommunist fuck, granted there's plenty of that kind of thing in the YT historian community, but we can try to pick out the diamonds, relatively speaking. I'm kind of afraid to give my recommendations since I've just been going off Youtube recommendations so I'll let you go first.
11 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.4724

>>4723
Didn't Luna make a Video, where she pointed out some Errors, he made in his Vietnam video?

I agree, that he is very good at keeping his biases in check, but there is still a Line he can't cross, otherwise he would be accused of Communist Sympathies by his retard rightoid Fans, who are probably posting in r/Historymemes

 No.4729


 No.4745

What do you all think about Historia Civilis? I think he paints an interesting picture of the late republic but I don't have a great reference for how accurate his videos are.

 No.4746


 No.4873

HistoryTime is the only one I really like



File: 1608528117999.jpg (166.04 KB, 1200x960, Graphene.jpg)

 No.1753[Reply]

I guess lots of people are somewhat skeptical it'll be anything, since a bunch of media outlets hyped it up a decade ago and nothing came of it,
but they were hyping up its discovery then, when it was still a whole world away from the production process.
From what I understand, silicon was much this way at first as well; groundbreaking discovery but a long time before they could figure out mass-production and implementation.
Now it seems at last the stuff is ready to be mass-produced and the actual production line is ramping up, and consumer products with marginal amounts of the stuff are already available.

So this thread will be for general discussion about what graphene is capable of and its implementations,
as well as for advancements in the production process and availability of graphene.

Some articles:
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/what-is-graphene/
http://news.mit.edu/2018/manufacturing-graphene-rolls-ultrathin-membranes-0418
https://phys.org/news/2020-07-solar-cells-graphene-armor.html
https://www.zmescience.com/science/graphene-clothes-thermal-regulation-18062020/
https://newatlas.com/bicycles/graphenlube-graphene-bicycle-lubricant/
https://www.knowablemagazine.org/article/technology/2019/graphene-2d-materials
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

 No.1754

File: 1608528118189.png (6.3 KB, 180x180, kuma_slurp.png)

I've been reading some of this and this just feels too unreal. Like it can do so much things better and faster and its like "press x to doubt". Nonetheless, it sounds exciting, especially with the solar panels, and how it will affect renewable energy. Also if you don't mind, do you have anything about the history of Silicon. I kinda want to see how opinions changed as it was being rolled out, like you described.

 No.1756

>>1754
In all honesty I might've just gotten confused and am overexaggerating Silicon somewhat.
It's really hard to find articles so I've genuinely no idea where I got my history of it to begin with.
Regardless, Silicon was invented in the 1820s and it wasn't figured out that they make computers good until like the 1950s/60s/70s.
The issue I'm thinking of might not have been the mass production of silicon itself, but rather the mass production of the integrated circuit, which silicon was of course quintessential in enabling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_of_the_integrated_circuit
http://www.mobileranger.com/blog/a-very-small-big-deal-the-history-of-the-integrated-circuit/

Now ignoring the fact that it was discovered in the 1820s,
if we just take the timeline from when they figured out how it could be used in an integrated circuit to when it actually became commercially available en masse, it amounts to about 15 years.
Though even then it still took far more time for it to be cheaply available.

 No.1760

>>1753
A graphene battery (phone charger) released awhile ago, but it was a little underwhelming. It had clear advantages, yes, however perhaps not enough to warrant aping the market.
https://youtu.be/dnE1nO6o-do
I am going to give the benefit of the doubt that it's being underutilised in this product.

 No.1762

>>1760
Yeah this is just the beginning of what's capable;
they just added like a sheet of it to already existing battery architecture, and that alone has improved charge time from 1.5 hours to 20 minutes, as well as slightly improving capacity.
Actually designing electronics architectures around graphene and incorporating the material in every facet of the device is what will offer the truly immense improvements.



 No.1711[Reply]

By marxist standards, I do not provide labor, I own capital. From what I understand, the commie concept of wage labor is "exploitation" in the sense that we take the surplus value you produce. Since this board allows non-leftists to ask questions, mine is, why do you think you have the right to the full product/end result of your labor and not just a small compensation?

If I were to pay my wagecucks the full amount, or give them control over my company instead of paying them a pittance, I won't be able to stay competitive and maximize profits.

In capitalist philosophy on the other hand, exploitation requires the use of force. A worker is not forced to work for me for example, they are 100% free to go find a different job or start their own company. I just wanna know your point of view, and why you think you are entitled to your surplus labor.
11 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.1725

>>1723
(cont.)
I want to say an additional observation, which I think you wouldn't find frequently in Marxist literature. I call this the Golden Law of Socialist Economy:

~ In the condition of good environment, the lower GDP of a socialist country is, the better efficiency it will achieve ~

 No.1726

>>1720
>Why can't someone start a business though and go from rags to riches?
Such examples are rare, but in any event even if they were more common that would not be the relevant point. An enterprising peasant in the Mughal empire could become a zamindar - whether people change the positions they occupy doesn't change whether those positions are exploitative.

>The market values assets because of demand, and if you are able to fulfill this demand, you get rewarded

This might be a plausible account of CEO pay - that investors pay CEOs much because they know they're so good at their jobs. (There are of course other explanations, but we're not worried about that issue right now.) However, when you buy a company's assets, you're not buying the CEO's time - you're buying the assets. This can be seen most clearly in the purchase, valuation, and payoffs of securities which don't have to be actively managed at all. (If you're a Nazi this is proof that bankers don't do "real" work but factory owners do, but if you think through the logic of the market at all you'll see that people who own shares of each sector are collecting rent on it in similar ways.)

 No.1732


 No.2487

File: 1608528188980.jpg (60.59 KB, 664x627, 1587972799704.jpg)

>>1711
>In capitalist philosophy on the other hand, exploitation requires the use of force. A worker is not forced to work for me for example, they are 100% free to go find a different job or start their own company.
Man, you have got to read Marx.

 No.2489

>>1711
>A worker is not forced to work for me for example, they are 100% free to go find a different job or start their own company.
Good job outing yourself as a high schooler. Literally no adult with a mature brain believes in that myth.



File: 1608528114241.jpg (776.84 KB, 1521x2337, tt.jpg)

 No.1704[Reply]

Where does one go after reading Tristes Tropiques? I have heard The Savage Mind is the way to go, but the English translation is supposed to be erroneous

For those unfamillar: CLS was a Marxist/structuralist anthropologist and ethnologist

 No.1729

Haven't read much of CLS yet, but I suppose Structural Anthropology is the next important work after Tristes Tropiques.

Also check out Maurice Godelier, he was a student of CLS but developed Marxist Anthropology.
CLS was a structuralist first and foremost, him being a Marxist is not that relevant.



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 ]
[ 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