[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music ] [ meta / roulette ] [ GET / ref / booru]

/edu/ - Education

Learn, learn, and learn!
Password (For file deletion.)

New Announcement: IRC<=>Matrix bridge #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new every Monday : /meta/

| Catalog | Home

File: 1608528040563.png (529.46 KB, 1230x677, 1587833123216.png)


Not so much on race but why did those countries get so far ahead from other countries? what were the material conditions that made Europe the breeding ground for innovation?
31 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


For better or for worse (worse, mostly) English is the de facto language of science and the world. At this point, it is those who refuse to learn English, who sequester themselves in their own language that are holding back progress. Spain has it's own internet and language subculture, Germans and Russians too, Chinese and Japanese as well, French too. So now I am expected to learn Spanish, German, French, Russian, Chinese and Japanese fluently just so I could speak to those people instead of them just learning English? I'd be open to all of us learning a common language like Esperanto, but I don't see a big push for it.

And for the record, English is not my first language. I'm also not opposed to learning languages, I am learning one now because I live in a non-English speaking country that isn't my own. I also speak a little Spanish and I did five and two years of Italian and German, respectively. But I have no illusions that without years of intense study and immersion I could get close to a level in those languages where I can understand their scientific literature. Most people don't have time for that.

We can analyse history for why English is the dominant language but crying about spilled milk isn't going to change the fact that for now we're stuck with English. You can get with the times, or continue complaining that Chinese scientists only learned English and not every language on the planet.


"The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000" by Paul Kennedy is a decent materialist analysis of this question.

Free download of the book: https://b-ok.cc/book/1202051/0a82b6

The tl;dr answer is that the geopolitical fragmentation of Europe and constant wars helped to spur technological innovation (that has uneven benefits for different places, ex. Britain benefits more than Portugal from coal mining techniques used to drive steam engines).

Colonizing countries generally didn't get wealthy due to their colonial conquests, colonial conquest was generally the result of an economic and technological gap between Britain and the Mughals, for example, that had been growing for some time.


>Yeah so India has a low literacy rate compared to the rest of the world and somehow that proves how all the scientific advances made by the the rest of the world are unfair? How about India's literacy rate and scientific lack of achievement have the same underlying cause.

Yes, they do, which is the comparative underdevelopment of India, something only as recent as the last couple hundred years. If your argument is that this is due the inherent nature of Indian genetics then I encourage you to walk into the cafeteria of any large tech company or university in the United States.


it doesn't matter because IQ fluctuates with each generation based on environmental factors on pregnant women.
the reason the Mesopotamian got to civilization first is because they were on the fertile crescent, where farming was easy as fuck and they had loads of surplus resources to feed the brains of their offspring.
there are also events in history where women undergo poverty due to some geopolitical event and then their children come out brainlets.
basically IQ is epigenetic


Are you sure it’s not 97% female

File: 1608528038594.jpg (132.84 KB, 656x820, BestKorea.jpg)


>Soon after the founding of the People’s Republic of China, Chairman Mao’s policies of improving sanitation and medical access led to a population boom that was previously inconceivable due to wars, famine and disease. Some people were worried that such a large population would be difficult for China to handle, in response to them, Chairman Mao declared:

>> “It is a very good thing that China has a big population. Even if China’s population multiplies many times, she is fully capable of finding a solution; the solution is production. Of all things in the world, people are the most precious. Under the leadership of the Communist Party, as long as there are people, every kind of miracle can be performed. We believe that revolution can change everything and that before long there will arise a new China with a big population and a great wealth of products, where life will be abundant and culture will flourish.”

>Mao taught us that China’s expanding population was a good thing, and that population control was a tool used by imperialist powers to weaken the rising states. Subsequently, import of contraceptives was banned, birth control was increasingly condemned. A few years into this campaign, China saw a large hike in population growth, in 1955, some areas briefly re-allowed birth control, but fortunately this was curbed by the Great Leap Forward, in 1958. According to the secretary of Communist Youth League Hu Yaobang:

>> “A larger population means greater manpower, the force of 600 million liberated people is tens of thousands of times stronger than a nuclear explosion. Such a force is capable of creating wonders which our enemies cannot even imagine. Facts since the Great Leap Forwards movement have sufficiently proved this point.”


Does quantity truly have a quality all of it's own?


There’s a great advantage in quantity, but at the end of the day, don’t you think it really comes down to the value of life? It seems that the more important thing Mao said was “Of all things in the world, people are the most precious.”

Sure, the high population is great for production, soldiers etc, but what Mao really wants is life to be abundant and culture to flourish


It's weird, this guy outright says it's natural and a violation of the natural order for men to not be ejaculating for the sake of reproduction, but nowhere do I see him attacking homosexuals outright. He instead goes after Porn, Prostitution, and contraception. But here's the thing, animals masturbate too, they just don't do it with pornography. You would think he'd call out gays or bisexual people for wasting seed but he doesn't.


So I wrote a pdf, on the reconstructed language of old Prussian. This language is actually going through a revival, from what I could gather. Since last year I found a YouTube channel where a family from Lithuania speak this language in a daily basis, and even their daughters speak it. So I got the dictionary of the language, read some posts on their facebook page, and listened to their speech. This pdf is mostly an overview of the language, I am not a linguistic or anything like that, I am just a random guy who likes languages.

So I wanted to post it somewhere, and I decided to post it here first, I think that there are some people here that would be interested in this.

The YouTube channel

The dictionary

A site with good resources


bump, that's impressive



File: 1608528036199.jpg (140.19 KB, 902x1280, IMG-20200422-WA0006.jpg)


I want to start making infographics for my college to use them as a way to spread Marxism and leftist theory

- Does anyone here studies Graphic Design or something Art-related?
- Which principles or rules should I follow when making these contents?
- Can you provide some links with examples of leftist media and design?, I'm aware of some artistic currents and their names (Like Soviet Constructivism), but I would like to know &lthow> to "use" them
15 posts and 14 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1608528148973-0.jpg (250.03 KB, 691x2052, colour theory.jpg)


File: 1608528149224.jpg (265.23 KB, 900x817, 1426350124220.jpg)

this is more related to art but I think it's a really interesting image
and I don't have a lot of books but here's a starter :

Aaaand I'm realizing I probably have a shitton of links bookmarked already
So here what I can find :


u r a cool person
thx :D


This is great!


OP here;
Thanks to all for your help, you guys have posted great stuff.
I really haven't been working a lot on my "artistic" skills, COVID kinda' botched my plans for this semester and other crap has popped up, lol

Keep the knowledge coming &lt/3

File: 1608528035128.jpeg (17.37 KB, 474x346, christiananarchism.jpeg)


Educate me on weapons
9 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


dont this this fucking retarded plus steady aim only recquires normal strenght


Something tells me the only retard here is you, though feel free to prove me wrong.


Yes, but not necessarily bricks. US Army had us use our canteens for example.


>Is it really that heavy/straining to aim with a rifle for a prolonged period of time that this is necessary?
Try it yourself. Hold something 5lbs (~2.25 freedom hating units) out with an extended arm for as long as you can. Isometrics will kick your ass.


/k/ is on >>>/hobby/

File: 1608528029712.jpg (808.47 KB, 1700x2151, Hegel_by_Schlesinger.jpg)


I'm trying to learn and understand dialectics, but I think getting some direction for this would be helpful.

Which works should I read to understand dialectical (Hegelian, materialist) thinking and in what order?
63 posts and 15 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


long winded rightoid garbage


>4 hours
I think I'll pass, thanks. lol


hilarious. I miss him, comrades. Is he still being insane?

Also, unashamed bump.


best explaination of hegelian dialectics so far
It's in German but with English subtitles just turn them on


>Daoism is the ideology of primitive tribal chieftains, who want to return to the simple time of primitive communism. It's not a accident that the more communist you are, the more dialectical you become

I like to think that about Jesus and his Christianity, but I don't see any evidence of dialectical thinking on his part, except maybe for the gospel of thomas, but I'll have to read that one again.

File: 1608528026308.jpg (57.26 KB, 616x440, MarkFisher-616x440.jpg)


What are some essential western Marxist works? Which work(s) would you classify as your favourite(s)
16 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1608528035808.jpg (924.69 KB, 1577x2541, 91rHVIJMOIL.jpg)

Anybody have any thoughts on this? Seems really neat just to get a different perspective. The way it reconciles marxist thought and the individual seems fascinating.



I guess being head of the Italian Communist party doesn't count.


>He claims that they seek to draw a distinction between the theory of Marx and that of Engels.
Lukacs points out some differences between Marx and Engels in History and Class Consciousness (https://www.marxists.org/archive/lukacs/works/history/), for example:

>The statements of Marx and Engels on this point could hardly be more explicit. “Dialectics thereby reduced itself to the science of the general laws of motion – both in the external world and in the thought of man – two sets of laws which are identical in substance” (Engels). [5] Marx formulated it even more precisely. “In the study of economic categories, as in the case of every historical and social science, it must be borne in mind that … the categories are therefore but forms of being, conditions of existence ….” [6] If this meaning of dialectical method is obscured, dialectics must inevitably begin to look like a superfluous additive, a mere ornament of Marxist ‘sociology’ or ‘economics’. Even worse, it will appear as an obstacle to the ‘sober’, ‘impartial’ study of the ‘facts’, as an empty construct in whose name Marxism does violence to the facts.

&ltend notes: 6. _A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy_ , (my italics). It is of the first importance to realise that the method is limited here to the realms of history and society. The misunderstandings that arise from Engels’ account of dialectics can in the main be put down to the fact that Engels – following Hegel’s mistaken lead – extended the method to apply also to nature. However, the crucial determinants of dialectics – the interaction of subject and object, the unity of theory and practice, the historical changes in the reality underlying the categories as the root cause of changes in thought, etc. – are absent from our knowledge of nature. Unfortunately it is not possible to undertake a detailed analysis of these questions here.

The other work I see mentioned (although I haven't read it) is Marx and Engels: The Intellectual RelationsPost too long. Click here to view the full text.



Thank you anon! I will be taking a look at those.

File: 1608528023034.jpg (28.78 KB, 640x591, 1154754758732.jpg)


Are there any teachers here?

If so, how do you work with your curricula to insert your chosen beliefs?

And what is the most based methodology and pedagogy?

>t. Primary School, Y 4-5, we play "Red Leader" which is basically capture the flag but with special rules, and I put up lots of posters about "working together" and "team work".
59 posts and 9 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


I don't believe that anybody here would contest that those are propaganda. The question isn't what the ruling class does, it's what we should do.

Now it's possible that there's some talking past each other and that people are using words (like "propaganda" or "influence") differently. But I would say that (1) teachers can never be truly neutral even if they try (for instance they must select what materials students are presented with, and so on), but also that (2) there's a difference between teaching students to think particular conclusions and to think critically and , and that there's a danger in pursuing the former to the degree that it harms the latter.

The goal of critical thinking isn't to produce a truly "independent" thinker. A smart, reflective, curious, critical person who happens to be gentry in Song dynasty China is going to think a lot differently than a smart, reflective, curious, critical person who works in a meatpacking plant in nineteenth-century Argentina - or whatever. But their common qualities also mean that they're not just going to blindly and automatically produce what's given to them, either. They're going to, ideally, look at a wide array of what's in front of them and produce something new out of it. And we need this as a species a lot more than we need people who can repeat a slogan - even a *correct* slogan - for a teacher before going on to repeat another slogan for another teacher.


It looks like I'm going to be homeschooling my brother while he does online school this year

Any tips to encouraging independent work for 5th graders? He seems to get stuck a lot, constantly looking for direction, and I feel like I help him too much.


really great book. Is just as relevant for any leftist as it is for teachers


good luck!


Apply ZPD

File: 1608528020815.png (227.01 KB, 1000x1000, moom.png)


I saw this thread on leftypol and thought it would be very suited here. Did you guys go to university or any other forms of higher education? Why or why not? Did it help you achieve what you want to achieve? Would you go back in time and choose a different path?
55 posts and 16 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>Did you guys go to university or any other forms of higher education?
>Why or why not?
Because it is expected and you cannot get a job in my country without some sort of degree
>Did it help you achieve what you want to achieve?
No. I had no real goal and i hate the field i ended up graduating in.
>Would you go back in time and choose a different path?
Yes. Probably something in art or politics rather than STEM, i didnt learn shit in my course, 99% of what i know is pure self study.


STEM is more valuable for the Time being than a Degree in Art or Neoliberal Politics.
Mind if I ask which field you graduated in?


Software engineering

"more valuable" isnt much use for me if it makes me want to kill myself and i would rather try and make my living as an illustrator


Can you switch to a different Engineering major?
Or do you hate STEM in general?


I already graduated. I realised that my depression wasnt caused by anything inherent but by programming too late.
So im just winging it atm and doing teaching.

File: 1608528018689.png (3.17 MB, 7016x9921, nadezhda.png)


Does someone have to be skilled/proficient in a subject in order for their teachings to be taken seriously? Can you be mediocre, or even bad at something, but great at teaching it? Should you listen to someone of a low skill level in that subject?

Does this answer vary among subject matters? Like do you have to be a good artist to be able to teach art? Do you have to be proficient in writing to be able to teach that?

This is a continuation of the drawing thread I derailed on /hobby/: >>>/hobby/8436
5 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Based. Tank you anon.


Knowing the formal rules, though processes, steps to take, fundamental principles conciously is not the same as being able to apply those things on autopilot.
The former makes a good teacher, being able to explain exactly why and how, through concious effort, the latter makes a skilled person.
You can have the former without the latter or vice versa. Often people who are very skilled have internalised the rules to such an extend they cannot seperate the rules from the whole and are thus unable to teach. Also often the people with the theoretical knowledge spend most of their time formalising those rules than applying them in day to day work, and as such aren't as skilled.

So no you don't have to be a good mathematician to teach maths, you don't need to be a good programmer to teach coding. Being a good programmer is applying all those rules instinctively, quickly, without effort, you have to feel instinctually that a piece of logic is "not nice". But teaching requires the ability to apply all these steps conciously, out loud, step by step, formally, not quickly. Same for a mathematician, same for an artist, same for any job.

Skill is not neccecarily knowledge and knowledge is not neccecarily skill.


Does everything have to be explicitly said for the student to learn? You can learn a lot about good programming by carefully reading good programs, you can learn a great deal about dancing by carefully watching experts dance. In workplaces a good deal of training is often done simply by observing more experienced colleagues working.


You can learn by trying to decipher what makes other works good but that is not what you pay a teacher for. It takes many times longer to get a feel for good code, and even then it's total bs to think you can learn good code from experience alone.
Good code is build on strict principles, database designs have hyper formalised definitions to ensure it meets all qualities of good design. Solid dry and other quasi buzzwords have to be explicitly taught in order to be applied, even if the programmer later forgets which of the 20 buzzwords made him consider that choice.

You could try to learn to draw or learn to code just by watching other people draw or other people code, but in reality that is not what happens. In businesses were programming happens, new colleagues are corrected with explicit mentions about why a certain choice is better than others. When drawing, or any other skill, trying to decipher the reason behind a choice will just lead you to 20 wrong ends. The total accumulated decisions obscure the reasoning and in trying to immitate it you end up with people who exhibit cargo cult mentality.
Just look at people who for no reason try to apply certain coding patterns everywhere because "he saw someone else do it" or all the artists drawing horrible shaded drawings because "they saw other artists put in highlights".

You can't learn well from just observing the end result. You have to know the reasons for all choices, so you know why it's there, so you know when to break the rules. That is what a teacher is for.


Relational databases have well-understood mathematical properties but even those can't tell what a good database design is, only pinpoint some obviously bad ones. For example, you can calculate how much redundancy you store, but some extra redundancy may actually be desirable to speed up critical queries. It's not as black and white as you make it to be. There are some similar metrics for code but I don't think anyone actually makes use of them, since blind conformance to metrics is a sure way to ruin your code. Programs are written to be read, not to satisfy "cyclomatic complexity" targets.

Design patterns are a good counterexample, because often they are taught to be a silver bullet for good programming when in fact they are not. They are just common solutions to common problems. Students will mindlessly try to apply them to every problem they come across even when there is a much better solution, because they were taught that this is what they should be doing. I never heard of this actually happening because "they saw someone else doing it", like you claim, but I can recall many cases where they did it because they were taught to. Maybe in drawing it is different, but I am sceptical. The problem with teachers is that they become the sole arbiters of what is considered good/desirable/acceptable and thus rob the student of their confidence in their own judgements. In industry if every code review you give ends up in a small lecture of coding practices, there's a good chance your poor colleague will forever remain a junior programmer because you don't even give them the chance to explain their reasoning. Anyway, they are going to learn a lot more from reviewing your code than from your code reviews.

> You can't learn well from just observing the end result.

Experience says otherwise.

Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music ] [ meta / roulette ] [ GET / ref / 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