/edu/ - Education

Education, Literature, History, Science

catalog
Mode: Thread
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


(99.95 KB 1160x945 model.jpg)
3D modeling Comrade 05/20/2020 (Wed) 13:36:11 No. 1722 [Reply] [Last]
Anyone want to journey with me into 3D modeling? I was going to follow along with a blender youtube tutorial, and see where that leaves me at the end of it. Blender is free! https://youtu.be/TPrnSACiTJ4?list=PLjEaoINr3zgEq0u2MzVgAaHEBt--xLB6U Feel free to post others or talk about modeling in general.
There was somebody who made a hq porky model. You might wanna look for them because I don't remember where to find it
>>1722 I'm in!! I've been trying to get seriously into Blender for ten years but never made something good. Also I don't have any GPU so it's going to be hard.
I know a couple visual fx professionals, they utterly adore blender, it's a really useful thing for 3d modelling, any questions in particular I could ask them?
(339.33 KB donut.mp4)
I have completed the tutorial
(2.06 MB 1920x1080 0310.png)
I made this once.

(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.
1 post omitted.
>>1774 Thanks, hearing that it was a foundational text for Deleuze gives me some relief. Don't most contemporary philosophers today tend to have non-orthodox order of reading?
(22.49 KB 267x400 1272186.jpg)
This is also the book I'll be using to brush up on German philosophy and the intellectual development during those era. Any more recommended secondary sources will help.
Drop the philosophy nonsense. Read some political economy anon.
>>1773 Here's a good book on French literature. Take a look. If you want a guide through philosophy, /lit/ started a helpful little project here: https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/pub Don't worry about the chan influence too bad because the author is a postmodernist and a Marxist, so I can assure you won't get bullshit shoved down your throat. In any case, knowledge of the classics is precursory to the intellectual dearth that is French academia. This is due in part to the thinkers Nietzsche and Heidegger, the latter of which sought to return to a much simpler discourse unburdened by the weight of hundreds of years worth of philosophic terminology. Unfortunately despite this endeavour, he himself is a hard author to wrap his head around. Nonetheless he is a premier philosopher who inspired the likes of Sartre, Foucault, Derrida, and other. You would be forgiven however if you don't decide to read him since he his fair amount of criticism. Something to note is that there are various strands of philosophy which take you one or another depending which author you read. I would say that you should at least tackle Spinoza before the German idealists. Immanuel Kant is practically one of the most important asides from Hegel. Feuerbach is a good last stop in German idealists before you engage with either Marx or Nietzsche. Anyways, what you have to lose ultimately depends on your circumstances. If you want to become an academic within the the Humanities, then you have everything to gain. If you're a neet, it can be an interesting, yet frustrating hobby due to the lack of colleagues to talk about it with. However, if you're a regular working man, it would be best to take something like the Greeks lightly. Read at your own pace and to your own needs. It can be a rewarding journey, but the fruits of its labour may not be readily apparent.
>>1779 I've read that guide before, I just thought it was too much for what I want. After some thought, I guess my main interest is mostly towards critical theorists, some contemporary existentialists like Sartre, and other "outward" philosophers like maybe Macintyre. I've always been fascinated by them, through my professors, through my adjacence to the left, to the thoughts and literature of existentialists. I've read Society of the Spectacle and I wanted more of that, but of course I've read sort of other "philosophical primers". I don't expect myself to be a philosopher, but I want to delve into the ideas of the people I'm interested in headfirst. I know it sounds arrogant, but I believe that I'll read and study Nietszche, Heidegger, Kant, and even Hegel once I'm done fully indulging myself with their successors, and once I believe the best way to understand contemporary philosophies is to delve deep in the past. So far, my arrogant "curriculum" looks like this: Reading Plato (am doing this right now, I actually expect to be finished reading in two months, since I'm pretty disciplined, and I think I'm capable of comprehension) Another two months of Aristotle's foundational work. Then I wanna read the liberal/enlightenment era philosophers, Hume, Rousseau, Locke, Hobbes, etc and a bit of Frege since I'm a STEM student. For some reason I expect it last two months still. Then I'll brush up on the history of German idealism and French philosophy in the books listed in this thread, and finally modern critical theorists, post-Marxists, existentialists, the whole shebang. This one has no time limit, since I'm pretty much reading for "leisure" now. If it ever takes longer than that, I'll adapt my timeframe, but whatever happens next, like studying Hegel or Nietszche himself for example, is dependent on what I learn or wish to learn after reading such works So basically, the question on "What do i have to lose?" is not about the value of the knowledge itself, but rather the impact of me skipping in depth studies of past work. Thanks for the input though, I hope this post also gets a reply.

Comrade 05/25/2020 (Mon) 13:51:54 No. 1772 [Reply] [Last]
What are some similar writers to Kaczynski, Ellul and Zerzan?
(24.09 KB 680x383 grug.jpg)
Caveman wall drawings. Semi-serious answer: Jacques Camatte, Fredy Perlman.

(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 NOT ONE CRIME
>>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!

Delete
Report

no cookies?