Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 100 KB, 1242x772, EdubxSaXsAM1hzC.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
11939321 No.11939321 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

What numbers are the people in the chart referring to?

>> No.11939325
File: 47 KB, 644x960, covid-19_panicroom.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
11939325

panic room combination

>> No.11939383

In his unpublished manuscripts, Marx attempted to use calculus to translate the descriptive content of his positive contributions to economic theory into formal mathematical models. This was decades before the popularization of mathematics in economics by the marginalists.

Marx wasn’t opposed to the mathematicalization of economic theory. It was latter day Marx-ists that rejected mathematical formalism because of their inability to comprehend, as State Socialists, the relationship of mediation and therefore self-contradiction between the political and economic spheres, as well as the reifying fetishism of social relations as economic relations.

Without attempting to grasp the crisis of modern politics and its origins, how and why political economy, as the self-understanding of bourgeois society, could become “pure” economics “divorced” from its politics, is incomprehensible. Official Marxism got mired in a dogmatic antinomy of positivism and moralism, and would vacillate between both, becoming degraded and deficient equivalents of their liberal counterparts.

>> No.11939415

>>11939383
ok and where does the 3-3-3 come from?

>> No.11939420

>>11939415
I assume Hegel derived it from theology and hermeticism. I'm sure one of the pseuds from /lit/ could give the actual answer. You don't need to know though, its not real or important to your life.

>> No.11939423

>>11939321
There's another one of these with a grug saying "friend good, enemy bad" and then a midwit and then Carl Schmitt writing a treatise on the central importance of the friend/enemy distinction

>> No.11939496

>>11939415
I’m guessing something to do with thesis-antithesis-synthesis. That’s a set of three, so three sets of threes? Memes don’t tend to explain much.

Hegel opposed deductive logic as a one-sided formalism, and consequently viewed form as requiring to be constituted by its respective content. In apparent retrospect, disregarding and reducing qualitative phenomena into abstract forms of quantities was the opposite of Hegel’s conception of form. This is not really true, but comes out of a later development that more firmly rigidified the form-content relation in the positivism-moralism distinction.

The problem with Hegel is similar to Marx. Hegel is viewed as anti-mathematics and anti-positivist, as some sort of a normative moral theorist, when really this is a result of the failure of the Hegelians. Since Hegel is either read through Marx or Heidegger, Hegel is usually transposed unto Marx (and tangentially Heidegger unto Hegel), this says more about Marxists (and Existentialists) than Hegel. Hegel wasn’t opposed to deductive reasoning and by extension mathematics, but sought to situate rationality in history, situate form in its content, and viewed deductive reasoning as a one-sided though necessary step, a moment, in a much broader development

The problem is that Hegel’s view of history as the triumph of reason is thrown into crisis with capitalism. Instead of the state as the harmonious unity of a civil society, the state exists because society cannot solve its own problems by itself, even though that is the only way those problems can be resolved. State Socialists tried to reconcile and overcome the problem of politics in theory, affirming the role of the state in mediating society, without comprehending its origins in social practice (more specifically the implications of commodity fetishism), conceding social practice only in a one-sided opposition (e.g. the so-called evils of the market) that reproducing the resulting antimony as moralists

>> No.11940927

>>11939321
>IQ posting

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action