/edu/ - Education

Education, Literature, History, Science

Mode: Thread

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

(5.34 KB 238x212 download.jpg)
Comrade 05/25/2020 (Mon) 14:07:28 No. 1773 [Reply] [Last]
What if I wanted to read more or less "contemporary" philosophers like Sartre, Beauvoir, Adorno, Deleuze, Zizek, Badiou, etc.. but don't have the time and, dare I say, sufficient interest to go through Kant, Plato, Aristotle, and all the other classical authors of philosophy? How much do I have to lose? I'm willing to spend a couple of months reading Plato, but I think I'm only willing to go through secondary sources for Aristotle. Same goes for the philosophers that predated the "contemporary" ones mentioned above. I'd be willing to read a history and primer on German idealism and maybe even read primary enlightenment texts if I have to. So how much do I have to lose? People who are good at philosophy please answer.

Comrade 05/25/2020 (Mon) 13:51:54 No. 1772 [Reply] [Last]
What are some similar writers to Kaczynski, Ellul and Zerzan?

(808.47 KB 1700x2151 Hegel_by_Schlesinger.jpg)
Learning dialectical thinking Comrade 04/20/2020 (Mon) 21:07:50 No. 1211 [Reply] [Last]
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?
40 posts and 9 images omitted.
>>1407 >You have the absurdity of Marxists using computers What a shit way to undermine the rest of your post.
>>1727 The whole post is shit anon. Basically "I don't understand dialectics therefore it is obfuscation". The same shit we always hear from liberals.
>>1758 There is nothing to understand. Similar to magic. It's a pro-imperialist pro-Prussians guy's masturbatory fantasy.
Yo can anyone explain to me what's up with that coffee joke Zizek loves and why does he think it perfectly represents Hegelianism. Here's the joke: <The French existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre was sitting in a cafe when a waitress approached him: "Can I get you something to drink, Monsieur Sartre?" Sartre replied, "Yes, I'd like a cup of coffee with sugar, but no cream". Nodding agreement, the waitress walked off to fill the order and Sartre returned to working. A few minutes later, however, the waitress returned and said, "I'm sorry, Monsieur Sartre, we are all out of cream -- how about with no milk?"
>>1770 That everything is a word play or word/grammatical tricks that have very little to do with reality

(44.05 KB 960x639 ynu.jpg)
What the hell is a dialectic? Comrade 05/15/2020 (Fri) 11:55:42 No. 1635 [Reply] [Last]
Can you nerds explain it using simple language?
7 posts and 1 image omitted.
(30.27 KB 392x446 1576935422844.jpg)
>>1635 Yeah it's pretty simple. First, off let's list some of the things it is NOT. Dialectics is NOT the rejection of the law of non-contradiction. Furthermore is not inconsistent with formal logic. Dialectics are NOT a method. People often say dialectic when what they mean is critique or dialogue. Dialectics is NOT when two opposing views are reconciled making a better more advanced view. Dialectics ARE a particular pattern that appears in the result of any rigorous investigation of necessary relations. The word necessary is important here, and I mean necessary as opposed to contingent or sufficient. That distinction is not mysterious or hard to understand, but it is often overlooked. You can look up the definitions but it may be easier to just reflect on the way you use them. What does it mean if something is historically contingent vs historically necessity? What is a necessary condition as opposed to a sufficient condition? The reason this patter emerges is also not particularly mysterious. Once you wrap your head around it there is literally no way results of such an investigation could not present as a dialectic unless you where to make an error, or break with the method (the method being imminent critique). There is no one reason that this is the case, but in every example you can work through you will see that it could be no other way. That's sorta the thing about necessary relations. >>1668 I'm still trying to figure this one out.
(157.92 KB 280x280 jigglingatoms.gif)
>>1668 >what is dialectic materialism then? Explaining materialism: classical materialism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CNXoUjqWlU Labour purpose and structures https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuV9rvbM_hE Purpose and entropy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkx528BQPTs Thermodynamics and life (this one does dialectics without Hegel) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciuVSKyM0cQ

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

>>1635 He tried developing logic. He was solid for early 19th century, but we have much better things now.
>>1652 >They seriously believe that history is governed by some inhuman forces that evolve on their own. literally the opposite of what marxists believe. fucking retarded.

(33.18 KB 511x671 pepe biznes.jpg)
Comrade 05/22/2020 (Fri) 21:41:56 No. 1745 [Reply] [Last]
Does anybody have the pdf of Israel, A Beachhead in the Middle East: From European Colony to US Power Projection Platform by Stephen Gowans?
>>1745 here's an epub, OP
>>1752 t-thanks for the record, 3 hours after making the OP, I independently found a MOBI file and converted it to pdf but this is great for other anons regardless, highly recommend it's a great book

(21.43 KB 331x286 1570719182043.png)
Comrade 05/22/2020 (Fri) 19:30:01 No. 1741 [Reply] [Last]
Is there any Marxist historians you recommend? >inb4 Grover Furr
1 post omitted.
>>1743 This. Have a pdf OP.
>>1741 I only really have an art history background so Andrew Hemingway and Dave Beech come to mind.
>>1764 and here's an anthology book containing various essays, as well as another one of Hemingway's books on British Art in the 18th and 19th centuries

(65.54 KB 604x381 nigelaskey.jpg)
Can you help me debunk this wehraboo historian Anonymous 03/04/2020 (Wed) 23:08:29 No. 224 [Reply] [Last]
This guy Is called nigel askey, and is apparently a legitimate historian. He published a paper debunking TIK's claim that the K/D ratio of the soviets during WW was 1/1.6, instead claiming that the soviets lost over 4 more times as many combatants as the Germansduring WW2. Here is his paper. I'm not a qualified historian and I dont have access to acrhives or time to research, so I can't debunk him. http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Essay-alt-view-TIK-presentation.pdf I checked out his website and alsthough he does seem to be knowledgeable, he makes certain ridiculous claims that the "Vicors write history" in WW2, and the allies covered up how technologically and tactically inferior they were to the germans.
37 posts and 1 image omitted.
>>261 >While the Germans only put a tank in the list of casualties if it’s completely destroyed This is true of ALL German statistics, the Krauts only counted professional soldiers as casualties, that means that volkssturm didn't count nor did civilians, meanwhile the Soviets took Partisan and civilian casualties into account so of course in a war where SS units were wandering around behind the lines burning down random villages those "casualties" start to add up. German casualties are really just casualties* *some exceptions will apply.
REVIVING an epic thread. Is Europe finally awake?
Check /r/shitwehraboossay or /r/AskHistorians, those are usually good for debunking the usual arguments.
>>224 I'm no historian so I can't really address his claims. But just from a glance it seems his contention is mainly with the number of soldiers wounded? Having no knowledge about this whatsoever, do wounded count as "losses"? Because virtually every relative of mine who fought either in the Red Army or as Soviet partisans suffered some kind of injury yet continued fighting, so I don't see why it's considered good practice to lump the wounded in with the killed. I guess it makes sense if you're looking at combat performance, however. >>262 >that means that volkssturm didn't count nor did civilians so why is he including Soviet partisans lmao, makes no sense. Is it because the partisans were co-ordinated by the NKVD?
>>1625 >so why is he including Soviet partisans lmao, makes no sense. Is it because the partisans were co-ordinated by the NKVD? That's the big mystery. Maybe it's because the Soviets actually counted civilians losses since they cared about those numbers while nazis just cared about which meat got thrown into the meat grinder, maybe it's cause the Partisans were integrated into the Soviet command structure in 1943. Or maybe Nazi-humping fags are desperate to boost their numbers because there's no evidence to support them otherwise.

(4.49 KB 194x259 indir (1).jpeg)
Comrade 05/21/2020 (Thu) 18:04:43 No. 1735 [Reply] [Last]
Can anyone explain to me what Georges Sorel was about? I don't have means to get any of his books in where I live and I don't have much information about him other than Wikipedia.
>>1735 Can you not, look online? The only things I know about him was that he was a big theorist in the pre WWI Syndicalist movements and believed in like Voluntary Marxism but later a Nationalist of sorts and a supporter of the Bolsheviks. He was an odd fellow who inspired people from Lenin, Gramsci to Hitler and Evola. Again I'm sure you could find his writings online.
Sorel is usually seen as a heterodox thinker because he has been influential in radical movements which are politically very desperate. This seems strange to a lot of people, but once you study his work it starts to seem perfectly natural. He has a whole thing about the importance of myth and the warrior ethos. Similar to what Plato advocated in the Republic in some regards. I think his most influential point though is the one which kinda pops the "oh so mysterious" bubble around him. He wrote a pretty solid and widely read defense of political violence called "Reflections on Violence". Naturally, any movement seeking to justify street violence will point to this, since it has name recognition and is only vaguely tied to any one political alignment. I have attached a pdf of the aforementioned book. Unless you live somewhere with limited internet such that you can't access Russian servers though you definitely have access to Sorel's work (as well as most other books in general). Library Genesis is your friend.
>>1756 >desperate woops, meant disparate

(248.91 KB 934x900 stalin3.jpg)
Comrade 05/12/2020 (Tue) 17:53:47 No. 1569 [Reply] [Last]
Do you prefer physical or digital books /edu/?
17 posts and 3 images omitted.
>>1693 This. I love, and prefer paper, it's just not as efficient or cost effective, plus pdf downloading/trading is actual irl communism. maybe you don't retain as much info, but id need to see more studies, and to see how people, especially people raised with digital culture respond to it over the course of years, with controlled variables. I have a cheap tablet and I can get basically any book I want for free. Also, we're literally killing living beings for no reason at this point. If that sounds like hippy nonsense, I suggest you take yo' ass into the forest. Maybe drop some L or shrooms, but you need to see that they are quite alive. Pretty barbaric, and pretty fucking sad, but it won't really make you angry until you've connected with trees, only to see them ripped apart, brutally cut down, and left to slowly die on the ground so some porkie can line his pocket.
>>1716 cutting down rotten or dying trees keeps a forest healthy.
>>1569 physical, especially old and very old books. I like going to flea markets and look for them. you can find cool books for really cheap, especially in rural places
Physical for sure. Probably the biggest reason is if I am reading an actual book away from my computer I am not constantly tempted to be doing something else on my computer, social media, games or any other brainless but dopamine rewarding activity. Its also easier to get comfortable holding a book then a computer. I also love the feel and smell of books, especially old ones. I love all of my really old books, when I get a really old copy of like a communist book, especially one full of notes, it makes me think of all the other comrades who have read that book...
>>1569 No preference. I have a pretty sizeable collection of paper books which are nice because I can bring them outside. I used to prefer physical books because not being able to annotate makes processing theory very difficult for me. However, I have recently switched to a system of summarizing each paragraph and then writing comments in my paper note card box which I have found to be significantly superior to writing in the margins in terms of comprehension, and it more or less eliminates the issues I had with digital pdfs. Viva Libgen!

will translate any russian text under 20k words Comrade 05/18/2020 (Mon) 22:38:49 No. 1688 [Reply] [Last]
it should take me a couple of days max to do so. drop links, pdfs, images if it's larger than 20k lmk and i'll think about it i'll also do belarusian if needed
3 posts omitted.
>>1705 just saw this. should be finished by sunday.
>>>/leftypol/417827 What about something from Lev Chernyi? He seems to be interesting but it is hard to find anything from him in English.
>>1738 send me a link to something and i'll get to work
>>1690 finished. let me know if there are any issues.
>>1750 Thanks for the work comrade


no cookies?