/edu/ - Education

Education, Literature, History, Science

Mode: Thread

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 80.00 MB

Max files: 5


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

General Education for Brainlets Comrade 09/10/2020 (Thu) 16:15:58 No. 3916 [Reply]
A lifetime of undiagnosed learning disorders, educational neglect and unproductive escapism has reduced my grey matter into a vestigial organ. I essentially missed out on the entirety of highschool but was able to work with what I had and managed to get a GED plus a tiny smattering of community college. But I started to hit the brainlet wall again and I realized how spotty and full of holes my whole foundation is. I was too ashamed at the time to ask for help and I no longer have access to professional educators so I might as well ask an anonymous imageboard. Do y'all have any good resources or books for someone looking to restart their education from basics? Assume that I don't know anything aside from basic literacy and numbers. Maybe not even that.
3 posts omitted.
>>3916 Did you look into khanacademy's courses? They have math from the 1st grade all the way to the high school and college level as well as any other topic commonly taught in school Also check out this https://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki/Mathematics#Precalculus
>>3916 Try Howard Zinn's People's History of the United States ( https://www.historyisaweapon.com/zinnapeopleshistory.html ) It's easy to read and great at presenting at history from the point of view of the average person.
>>3916 It really helps if you specify what you're interested in (both in the sense of what entices you and what you think it would be useful for you to learn). "General education" is a meme outside of acquiring the most basic foundations. IMO it's better to pick something concrete and go for it
>>3919 >>3921 >>3922 Thank you very much. I will definitely check these out. I appreciate the time and effort you've taken to help me out, no matter how small. I even appreciate maths is fun's non-threatening child-friendly aesthetic. >>3923 Thanks for your guidance. To say that I've been unfocused is an understatement. So I have bits of an education here and there. I really enjoyed the history courses I took as an adult (mainly ancient history) because the professor was at least engaging and the content didn't have too many dates or dead people to remember. I also never really paid much attention in science. I'm not a flat-earther or anything but past a certain point I just don't really understand how or why the world functions.
>How to Read a Book >Atomic Habits >Make it Stick >Deep Work These create a foundation for consumption of information. Read these so that everything you read subsequently will be effectively absorbed. After that it depends on your interests. Like the other anon said, A People's History of the U.S. is a great start, but it's written with the assumption that you know the general U.S. propaganda history. How to Read a Book has a great list of books of the western cannon to read. It all really depends on your interests.

(841.69 KB 709x986 life.jpg)
How to get woke cheat sheet Comrade 05/03/2020 (Sun) 19:41:00 No. 1453 [Reply]
/Leftypol/ didn't bite, let's see if /edu/ acctually might read something. >Read capital and complimentary theory. >No! Really, READ capital and complimentary theory. >No, not like that! >Ok basically read this quote down below by fucking Karl Marx. >And at least read the text on point 1 down below. >Why? > To understand why your current party isn't even being shut down or disturbed by the Porky Police. >You are in your current state, totally harmless. >Let's not keep it that way. "It is all the more clear what we have to accomplish at present: I am referring to ruthless criticism of all that exists, ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be. Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner." - Karl Marx 1: https://www.krisis.org/1999/manifesto-against-labour/

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

bump, props cus scientific socialism.
Michael Parenti Videos in youtube
Huh OP that's Robert Kurz in the pic, have you read him? https://libcom.org/history/expropriation-time-robert-kurz
This thread should have been called "Critique of labor" or "Critique of the value form". Bump nonetheless.

(18.03 KB 500x500 dasdasdas (2711).gif)
Anyone have a PDF of Charles Fourier's "The Hierarchies of Cuckoldry and Bankruptcy"? I need it because reasons. Comrade 10/02/2020 (Fri) 18:49:04 No. 4742 [Reply]
We should make a general history guide for an overview on leftists history movements/people/thinkers that type of thing
Learn to use the catalog: >>2112 >>2169

(1.64 MB mccannon1995.pdf)
Spanish Civil War Comrade 04/02/2020 (Thu) 08:26:40 No. 305 [Reply]
Thread for discussing the spanish civil war. I start the thread with a short paper on Soviet Union's involvement 1936-1939.
(77.43 KB 1180x585 Dare-Devil-Rides-To-Jarama-.jpg)
Morning Star review of an audio play about two volunteers in the Spanish Civil War. It might be worth a listen. (£2 per episode, or £6 for the whole thing.) https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/c/dare-devil-rides-jarama-pic-come
What do people here make of Orwell's interpretation of the war? His theory goes that the MLs shot themselves and the war effort in the foot by siding with the liberals instead of committing to full social revolution like what POUM and CNT were doing. He thinks if all the communists overthrew the Republican liberals, that they could've inspired a rural insurgency behind Franco's lines and eventually won.
I've been reading this recently: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/agustin-guillamon-theses-on-the-spanish-civil-war-and-the-revolutionary-situation-created-on-ju It has quite some hot takes about it and my general understanding of the events is not deep enough to tell how valid they are.

(18.78 KB 477x413 left-center-right.jpeg)
What DEFINES left-wing, centrist and right-wing Communism? Comrade 04/14/2020 (Tue) 16:24:42 No. 1043 [Reply]
I hear Deng and Bukharin be described as right-wing, Stalin as center, Bordiga as left -- but then where the fuck would people like Lenin, Trotsky, Mao and Cockshott fit in to this? Lenin had a big shift in positions (before vs after the revolution), Trotsky was clearly very similar to Lenin in positions after, but he often gets called "left" by Stalinists. Mao clearly was more sympathetic to Stalin than either Trotsky or post-Stalin right-wing revisionists, yet he is occasionally slandered as "ultra-left" (which is ridiculous), and then Cockshott went through "ML" (centrist, I suppose) parties, get kicked out for "ultra-leftism" and subsequently writes his seminal work TANS, including a critique of the scrapping of soviet cybernetics in the USSR, bourgeois elements of democratic centralism, and proposes to move towards communism immediately via the DotP through the revolutionary utilization of cybernetics instead of any market mechanisms (market mechanisms seemingly being supported by both right-wing and centrist Communists). To me, intuitively, it sounds like Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin and Mao, in hindsight, had more in common than they were willing to admit (all "centrists", but how would one divide them into center-left-, center and center-right?), while Cockshott clearly drifted left (toward Bordiga). I may be missing something, That's why I want to open it up for collective discussion with you all here on /edu/.
23 posts omitted.
Add Wolff next to Tito.
>>1193 Theorists and people who've never been in power shouldn't be on this list.
>>1193 Kim Il Sung: center-c Jong Il and Jong Un: center-r Laos: right
>>1193 Raul Castro and Khrushchev are more like center-r. They did not shift towards privatization as much as Gorbachev and Deng did.
>>1108 It depends when. He is about the same as old Bukharin, and to the right of young Bukharin.

Comrade 09/18/2020 (Fri) 08:26:10 No. 4215 [Reply]
everything feels outdated what the fuck do I read to understand neoliberalism and all this shit, what can you even do at this point?
7 posts and 4 images omitted.
>>4348 Foucault belongs but not for the reason of the one who made that. Foucault wasn't neoliberal but does describe it before it was really a thing.
>>4350 >they conveniently leave out Points like his Hatred of Landlords. This. It shits me to tears. Same as how Smith basically infers that education, health, and essential public infrastructure should be free and yet these drongos try to privatise everything.
There is no need to understand neoliberalism. It isn't a thing. It's just a word people use who want to say that this society is shit without saying that capitalism is shit.
>>4347 its probably not what you want, but ive been reading some psychology-adjacent shit, like "dare to lead" by brene brown, been psyching myself up to read deluze&guttari shit, reading lots of shit on them. Been reading anthropology, recently "against the grain" by james c scott. Just started another book of his, less anthropology and more a study of the faces we put on towards power, and how that influences the sort of superstructure i guess, like the accepted notion of how things are. Also been reading "the violent technologies of extraction" by alexander dunlap and others. id say thats some 10/10 shit tbh. The way that i think of it, capitalism is all around us, so if we go into different adjacent disciplines, we'll get another angle on capitalism. Same with neoliberalism, tho i get the desire to have a good history of it specifically. (oh yeah also read Understanding the F-Word by david mcgowan, its... okay/good). Like neoliberalism is just imperialism/colonialism by another name. Yes it has certain unique characteristics, but its also the same expansion that all states have done since there was rich stores of people, livestock, or grain to exploit. The parasite tries to spread and feed. And so personally i really love a sort of wider lens on what capitalism is... i dont think its totally distinct from previous social forms, except that it is more deterritorialized n shit. Its like democratic feudalism, which in turn was like a more horizontal empire. So its fun to see the changes through time, and also the consistencies, anyways yeah like i read lotsa marxian shit and economics when i was younger, and im pretty done with it. Last economics shit i read (but didnt finish) was some mutualist shit (it was good). all in all i think anthropology and history is maybe the most important to me, and then i try to look out for shit that explains capital more as this organism or self-perpetuating arrangement, rather than an ideology that people believe, because the latter way of seeing it is more restriction and gives a more inside view rather than a look at the whole beast, and its evolution through history
>>4367 (me) id also recommend foucault, (((tiqqun))), ellul, camatte. I dont say that i fully endorse them all, but that you can learn something important from them all maybe. Fuck frenchies tho god damn they cant write

(201.95 KB 500x356 918921.jpg)
NEP and collectivisation period Comrade 09/21/2020 (Mon) 15:53:01 No. 4309 [Reply]
Does anyone have some good things to read about the NEP period and the collectivisation period and the transition between the two?
a quite popular narrative among anti communists, the so called resistance narrative that presents the soviet collectivisation of agriculture as a mostly or completely unpopular policy on the part of the peasants. The resistance narrative draws on OGPU reports and peasant letters and (mis)takes the peasant protests during winter of 1929-30 and passive resistance in the collectives as proof of widespread resistance to collectivisation. I go through the nature of the sources this narrative uses, the scope and nature of the peasant protests, and annual grain produce in the collectives during 1930s to show it is false. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1LlMjPsGFY
>>4331 Anyone know what happened to BadMouse's videos?!
>>4332 He took them all off. I don't know why he quit. The official line was that he was fed up with Breadtube not doing Praxis in real life and they only care about aestethics.
>>4336 Fuck that sucks. He had quite a few god videos debunking Prager U that were very handy

(71.02 KB 1280x720 ev.jpg)
Anonymous 09/15/2020 (Tue) 14:40:18 No. 4101 [Reply] [Last]
How do dialectics explain evolution?
68 posts and 7 images omitted.
>>4169 https://invidious.tube/watch?v=JWaukcx-upg Math arises as a tool to aid humans in changing the material world. Like a shovel or a bulldozer, math too is material.
>>4326 Bitch, stop posting this. I already responded to that shit several times. It's trash.
Evolution isn't real. Read Marx >Human anatomy contains a key to the anatomy of the ape. The intimations of higher development among the subordinate animal species, however, can be understood only after the higher development is already known.
>>4330 Lmao, he says the opposite

(134.08 KB 474x640 Man_thinking_on_barbell.jpeg)
Does math describe the world or is math the world? Comrade 09/26/2020 (Sat) 07:38:10 No. 4335 [Reply]
This question has been puzzling me lately. In my view because the most "raw" understanding we have of the world is our experience, which isn't mathematical (color, feelings, etc) which means that the world cannot be purely mathematical. I think then what we have is a "materialistic" world which can be described as mathematics. The maths isn't what is really happening, but it helps us in manipulation. Kind of like moving an desktop icon to the bin on your screen is just a metaphor for execution of code inside the computer. It would be a mistake to assume how the computer really works is icons on some screen, even if it helps us in manipulation. Furthermore what makes me believe this more, is that sometimes scientific discoveries can have multiple interpretations. Quantum mechanics has like 4,and all of them are valid logically. Which one you chose depends more on your preference then anything. If that wasn't the case, you wouldn't have scientist debating the exact same theory. You may say one is more clean or beautiful or intuitive, but previous scientific discoveries did not care about that. Some weren't symmetrical as people wanted or intuitive, some were. So it's just speculation. Where this bothers me though is simulations. Assume we model a person inside a computer by describing every particle in him through code. Would he "think"? Obviously I expect him to behave a certain way like a human do, but so would a simulated model of a tree, even if it wasn't really a tree. It does not mean the simulated person thinks. He just fools us, but has no understanding of the world himself. What even gets me more confused is the fact that thoughts, as in consciousness and direct experience play a role in our behaviour. We all know the famous experiment of brain activity appearing milliseconds before a person is conscious of moving his finger, but this wasn't the only thing found. Consciousness can also cancel that movement as it desires. actually in practice the complexity, free will or how you want to call what makes humans unique is a reason why it is impossible with current understanding to predict human behaviour. Game theory only works if you assume people as psychopaths and shallow husk only interested in playing the game the game theorist made up. This makes the idea of unconscious mathematical digital human being the same as a regular human bit wonky, yet because I can't point to from where consciousness emerges, my position is wonky too. Amy thoughts?
We already had a thread about this: >>2780 tl;dr: math was designed to describe the world

What are the prerequisites for understanding this book ? Comrade 09/25/2020 (Fri) 18:27:10 No. 4328 [Reply]
Is college alegbra enough?
Try it and see If you have any questions ask and I'm sure we'll be able to bring you up to speed comrade


no cookies?