/edu/ - Education

>>10475
That's exactly it. Thanks, anon.

>>10766
>>10767
You mean >>>/leftypol/987310

https://blubrry.com/wdtatw/42848798/episode-86-sinning-quietly/

>>10481
I really enjoy the Deprogram podcast. It's not particularly informative, it's just comfy. It's with Hakim, Yugopnik, and Second Thought.

Someone shilled it in the /isg/ and I've been listening to it since. Good for when you just want to chill.

I also listened to a bunch of History Of Philosophy Without Any Gaps. It is also comfy but requires more active listening. Great podcast.

>>10768

Thanks.

>>10769

>Less about the parasocial more about the signal.

>Less about subscribing to an individual podcast, more about listening to individual episodes and why that episode resonated.

So which episodes were memorable to you and why?

>>10770
Fair enough. For history of philosphy, the entire arc of Plato was really cool. They are very short episodes.

https://historyofphilosophy.net/classical/socrates-and-plato

Really any episode of a Platonic dialogue is a very fun listen. I liked Gorgias, Parmenidies, and the episode on erotic love. I don't agree with Plato, or rather I'm not a platonist, but his shit is very fascinating and thought provoking. The dialogues are literally dialogues between two or more smart characters making compelling cases for their arguments regarding the point at hand.

The dialectical method of exposition is a very powerful one which IMO has been largely lost. The book Gödel Escher Bach is a nice return to that tradition btw.

Regarding Deprogram, I recommend Episode 20, where the editor for Mint press is a guest. He has an interesting perspective on media that I haven't seen much outside Chomsky and an interesting book on Mexican think tanks I picked up once (Conocimiento y Poder, Alejandra Salas-Porras for the curious).

Really good episode of This Is Hell on Jihad as it is currently understood (Islamist holy war) being a modern phenomenon caused mostly by neoliberal policies: https://thisishell.com/episodes/1385

additional reference

Shouldn't you post this in the >>5576 or >>4210 theads?

>>10747
where do those picture quotes come from?

you don’t need to debunk every last thing some idiot says on the internet

>>10759
not OP but this particular idiocy pops up again and again so I think it's worthwhile

>>9849
>>10302
oh yeah i found an archive of the original thread but forgot to post:
https://archive.ph/LSgow

Consciousness is formed by the environment.

>>10757
Awesome. Thanks so much.

>>10757
>https://archive.ph/LSgow
Damn, reading my post from nearly 2 years ago feels weird.

>>10765
thats your post?

Its a CNN report on supposed Russians executing civilians in march. The event revolves around the dealership being controlled by Ukrainians and Russians at different points and it's hilarious how much they have to grasp stitching together disparate footage in incoherent ways full of plot-holes, even with complete editorial control, omitting all the relevant information and so on, to make it seem like it is the Russians arriving in the spray painted "V" "tank batallion"/RUS" white civilian van who then kill the owner and ransack the building, before the wounded dying guard calls to the heroic Ukrainian resistance , which upon arriving forces the Russians to leave in their armored transport , which the civilian van has presumably morphed into.

<Video shows Russian soldiers killing 2 civilians before they ransack a business
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/11/europe/ukraine-video-russian-soldiers-shoot-civilians/index.html

I'm being facetious, but even disregarding how reaching and dishonest and cherrypicked the various footage is… well the timeline makes no sense and it's blatantly fake.

The Yellow car is present and in the same place when the Totally-not-ukrop Van arrives, when the Totally-not-ukrop soldiers talk with the owner and check his jacket and later in (2:22) when the Totally-not-ukrop soldiers, which are in matching clothes with the ones ransacking the office, are seen approaching the dealership from the guard post.

This last moment, linked by the yellow car to the rest above, is tagged by the camera as 18-03-2022 Fri 16:32:03, while the footage of the actual Russians, getting out from the armored transport in the back camera which later they leave into(and has marks) is actually from (1:44) 19-03-2022 Sat 13:XX:XX. Though if we look at the monitor at (0:55) you can clearly see the scene of the Russians arriving while the civilians prepare to meet them, actually narrowing it down to about the same time 18-03-2022 Sat 13:48:53.

The video is a mess of inconsistencies like this, but that alone dismantles the narrative that the Russians were there first and then were forced to retreat. Strongly indicating that the real Russians, the ones who come and leave in their armored transport arrived after the totally-not-Ukrops.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>10756
based shitty infowarriors

>>10756
There is a small mistake that I made:
<0:55 – 18-03-2022 Sat 13:48:53 V8_KPP1/V8_KPP2
should be
<0:55 – 19-03-2022 Sat 13:48:53 V8_KPP1/V8_KPP2
and references in the post to that moment should also be to the 19th, whch comes from the clearly visible date on (1:44) and the clearly visible time on (0:55) which are linked by the former camera being seen on the monitor.

>>10504
latour is a meme philosopher

Somebody will find this interesting.
https://www.illiberalism.org/guillaume-faye-1949-2019-at-the-forefront-of-a-new-theory-of-white-nationalism/

>>10729
i have found it interesting, thank you

>>9365
>Part 2 recommends you follow up that with shit like Tolkien, Ted Kaczynski and fuckin Ayn Rand LMAO
That's what I was thinking too. Who in their right mind would think it would be a great idea to read any of that garbage in Part 2 after reading Das Kapital, Hume, Kant, and Nietzsche? It would like trying to tell yourself some lie that you well know it's bullshit.

Seems like the person who even made those two images just found book recommendations for a college philosophy class for part 1 and put them there. For part 2, seems like he just got them based off of some shitty /pol/ thread. I doubt he even read the books himself.

Mod note: Reposting. Removed due to false positive previously.

im not sure you’d find much literature on it since merely suggesting the idea that russian identity and nationality was forced onto different cultural groups instead of it being the result of everyone holding hands and singing kumbaya is pretty politically incorrect, has been for a long time and is probably even more politically incorrect now

>>10745
Can you elaborate on that? Because to me it‘s still ambiguous in what sense it‘s politically incorrect. In the sense that it‘s a lie and therefore rejected? Or that it‘s the truth that is being suppressed?

>>10474
I’ve been using this too and it’s great.
Also Hyppolite and the Bernstein lectures seem very good.

>>10492
i just finished the third and yeah it feels like he starts off super strong, then goes in circles for a while (maybe necessary ones), then picks the plot up again at the end and drives it home, tho i was still left wondering wtf was the point even
beyond "Hegel was a logician, so he reduced everything to logic, btw it's just the nature of science to do this" or smth.

I mean this is really diminishing it though, it's an amazing book so far and i feel like a lot has been solidified for me which i was only speculating on before, since i never read any hegel, only marx+lenin+stalin lol.

I'd say it cured my desire to read hegel (because i feel like i understand the core of his ideas, i dont need the whole history of thought part) so that's a plus.

I could share parts i highlighted but maybe it'd be better in another thread. Anyways 10/10 book.

>>10650
Sounds really cool. I was reading a secondary source for Hegel's science of logic and it got too convoluted at some points. Some sentenced read like parody. If you're not familiar with the way words are used "indeterminate being is nothing because it lacks any determinations and hence is nothing which is immediately being" is just mumbo jumbo.

Just finishing the fourth essay and yet again the author is repeating himself ad nauseam, but the last few pages of the essay get really interesting. I'm too much of a brainlet to put it into words yet, but there is some point to be made about Gödel's incompleteness theorem and Hegel's dialectics. Perhaps material dialectics.

>>10712
5 pages to say "he's a logician so he sees everything from a logician view" and another 10 to say "M-C-M' is what hegel thinks"

tbh it makes reading very fast though, when there's only a few novel ideas in the whole essay. I was like speed reading cause it was so un-dense.

I get what you mean about Godel's incompleteness thing, well i dont totally cause i looked up what that even is the other day, but i think you mostly refer to the part where he's saying Hegel's main critique of positivist logicians is that they can't prove their own starting theorems?

I liked the part where he talked about how the law of non-contradiction and identity gets contradicted as soon as they end up equating qualitatively different things with each other, but tbh i didnt get it much cause i'm not a logician :p