Abolished logic in schools to make it easier to manipulate consciousness

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Logic is the science of how to think. However, in our education system, thinking is prohibited. You can only read and memorize what is written in textbooks and approved by the educational program. If someone has forgotten, then he is obliged to look again at the textbook and learn. Therefore, the science of logic does not fit into this educational system.

There is evidence that this subject is being studied in modern schools. And here are the links to logic textbooks from 1947 and 1953.

How important formal logic is. Formal logic is the cement that holds all other knowledge together. Logic actually “teaches to learn.” Then why is logic, despite all its phenomenal usefulness, not taught in schools and universities?

There is a logical answer to this question.

Logic is not taught for the same reasons that slaves are not allowed to own firearms. Dangerously. After all, what is the whole ideology of the modern school based on? On authority. Children are taught not to prove their statements, but to "substantiate" them as in the zone.

It turns out that there are two competing methods of argumentation. The first is through logic. The second is through authority (written in the textbook or so the teacher said). From the point of view of logic, proof through authority is a logical fallacy. This is how it looks in real life. "Who are you to argue with me, a candidate of sciences!" For modern Russian science, this is a variant of the norm.

Even if the teacher wants his students to think logically, he will not do it. For example, in physics there is so much that is illogical, inconsistent, confusing, and erroneous. And all this is approved by the educational program. The student must learn this, answer and get a grade. Thinking in such a process is prohibited. What kind of individuality is there. And the role of the teacher is reduced only to the fact that everything that is approved by the educational program, the students memorize well. And on the exam, it will be checked.

People for the most part stopped proving, simply because they no longer knew how to think consistently. And there was no need for this for a long time. Everything was approved by the educational program. If you forgot what you learned, then you need to take the textbook again and learn.

This situation in education has arisen since at least the beginning of the 20th century. The result is that almost everyone has forgotten how to think. Most think what they think. Some people think that by sending their child to a prestigious private school or university who wants to study physics, they will avoid negativity. Nothing like this. Textbooks with errors remained the same, approved by the educational program. And it will not give anything new when studying them.

Think about what he will think about?

The lack of logic in the number of school subjects shows that education in a modern school is more of an expensive clownery than acquiring knowledge.

First you need to understand which of the logics we are talking about: logic - as part of philosophy - the science of methods of correct thinking, and logic - a branch of mathematics, the so-called. Boolean algebra.

1) Logic, as a science of methods of thinking, is implicitly taught through many school disciplines - mathematics, in which you have to analyze each example, and look for the simplest and most effective solution to it, and, for example, literature, where students are engaged in all unloved analysis of works.

2) Boolean algebra is taught in the required (probably) volume in the computer science course.

There is an opinion:

What for? It is necessary to teach correct thinking in different subjects, involving the student in the process of productive thinking. Moreover, in different areas of knowledge the requirements for logical persuasiveness are different. It seems that after the war, when the course was taken to bring the Soviet school closer to the pre-revolutionary gymnasium, they taught logic. I have not heard that this has a great effect.

The accursed Stalin, instead of training a qualified consumer at school, which undoubtedly testifies to the fact that no growth in consumption was expected, filled the head of Soviet schoolchildren with all sorts of rubbish that was completely unnecessary for the natives: all kinds of physics, mathematics, and for some reason even logic, which certainly not only hinders the promotion of progressive cotton work pants instead of the old-fashioned pure wool suits, but, more importantly, eliminates the very possibility of introducing even such a basic value as liberal democratic and Nazi brainwashing.

Long live Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev, who immediately canceled the teaching of logic at school and thereby brought closer the day of the coming to power of the Great Pizza Merchant (VTP) M. S. Gorbachev and no less Great National Alcohol (VNA) B. N. Yeltsin!

The Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), in the decree "On the Teaching of Logic and Psychology in Secondary School" of December 3, 1946, recognized it as completely abnormal that logic and psychology were not studied in secondary schools, and considered it necessary to introduce within 4 years, starting from 1947/48 academic year, teaching these subjects in all schools of the Soviet Union. In accordance with this decree, in 1947-1949, teaching psychology was introduced in 598 secondary schools … Then, in 1947, the textbook by B. M. Teplova "Psychology", intended for the senior classes of secondary school. In 1956, another textbook for schoolchildren appeared, prepared by G. A. Fortunatov and A. V. Petrovsky.

But … Logic and psychology ceased to be necessary in 1959. In particular, thanks to the INSTRUCTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOLS AND EDUCATION AND THE STUDENT … OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLOMBIA AND THE FATHER OF PERESTROIKA ALEXANDER NIKOLAEVICH YAKOVLEV.

A little background

After the Bolshevik party came to power at the end of 1917, few people imagined how far they were ready to go in implementing their Marxist precepts. In their Internationale, the Bolsheviks sang: “We will destroy the entire world of violence to the core. And then we are ours, we will build a new world. With this formulation of the question, everything fell under the skating rink of the Red Revolution - the laws of formal logic as well.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels worked at the intersection of philosophy, sociology and economics. The founders of the doctrine of communism were inclined to believe that they were able to create a comprehensive teaching explaining the laws of historical development. Many of their followers gradually turned even understatements and allegories in the works of the founders of Marxism into dogmas akin to religious ones. The Bolsheviks, who conquered the whole state, went farthest in this undertaking. Marxist philosophy received a strong argument in its favor - the state apparatus of violence created by the Bolsheviks during the revolution and civil war.

The basis of Marxism is dialectics. This philosophical method is based on the search for contradictions in reality. Within the framework of Marxism, dialectical materialism was developed, which asserted the primacy of matter over consciousness. Bolshevik philosophy taught that the development of the world is a product of the formation or resolution of contradictions.

In such a situation, logic, the science of the rules of thinking, as part of philosophy, turned out to be out of place in the state of victorious Marxism-Leninism

After all, the laws and methods of logic make it possible to reveal contradictions in any "only correct doctrine." Already from the end of the 1910s, logic began to be called nothing other than a citadel of metaphysical thinking, incompatible with dialectics. Logic was accused of its bourgeois nature, which came into conflict with proletarian science. The modern philosopher Alexander Karpenko aptly noted that the logic of terror left no room for logic.

In the early 1920s, the Bolsheviks finally solved the "philosophical question". All objectionable humanitarian scientists were proposed to be expelled from the country. In 1922, a "philosophical steamer" took place - a series of actions organized by the Bolsheviks to expel philosophers, theologians, sociologists and writers from the country.

Any philosophical doctrine and trend that did not fit into the framework of dialectical materialism was banished. “From the news that overwhelms the mind, I can report that Nadezhda Krupskaya and some M. Speransky are prohibited from reading Plato, Kant, Schopenhauer, Vladimir Soloviev, Nietzsche, Lev Tolstoy,” wrote Maxim Gorky in 1923. For several decades, philosophy in Russia practically ceased to exist.

From the mid-1920s to the late 1950s, Marxism-Leninism firmly held its position in Soviet philosophy. Outside of it, it was simply impossible to make a career - in the USSR, no other philosophy existed.

But the one who buried philosophy in the USSR “resurrected” it before - “the luminary of all sciences” Joseph Stalin. And what is significant, the revival of philosophy began with formal logic. It cannot be said that it completely disappeared from university departments in the 1920s – 1930s. But those who, back in the 1920s, were openly engaged in logic, had to write on the table in the next decade. In the early 1940s, Stalin suddenly remembered the existence of logic. Over the previous years, collectivization, industrialization, the "Great Terror" swept through the country, millions of people moved to cities.

The country needed effective Stalinist understanding and governance.

In early 1941, Moscow State University professor Valentin Asmus was summoned to the Kremlin. During the years of the revolution, he was impressed by the historical changes that the revolution brought, so for a while he focused on attempts to combine Marxist dialectics and formal logic. The result was the book Dialectical Materialism and Logic.

But by the end of the 1930s, he completely focused on the study of ancient Greek aesthetics - a relatively safe area of knowledge in the USSR. In the Kremlin, Stalin complained to Asmus that his commissars “do not know how to think,” so it is necessary to organize courses in logic to teach managers of different levels. But the beginning of the Great Patriotic War did not allow these courses to take place.

However, Stalin did not let go of the thought of logic. But after the war he decided to go even further - "the leader of all peoples" was going to teach all Soviet citizens to think correctly. At the end of 1946, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution "On the teaching of logic and psychology in secondary schools." By this time, there were no curricula, logic and psychology were destroyed by the primacy of dialectical materialism. But Stalin was not embarrassed by these problems.

“The Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) recognized it necessary to introduce, within four years, starting from 1947/48, the teaching of psychology and logic in the graduating classes of secondary school. Logic and psychology should be taught by qualified teachers who have received special training in the field of psychology and logic,”read the decree published on December 4, 1946 in the“Uchitelskaya Gazeta”. The experiment was supposed to be carried out in the largest cities of the RSFSR: Moscow, Leningrad, Gorky, Saratov, Sverdlovsk, Kuibyshev, Novosibirsk and others.

The Union republics were asked to consider the introduction of logic in schools in all cities where there are qualified teachers.

It was proposed to act, as it should have been in the Stalinist USSR, at an accelerated pace. By March 1, 1947, they ordered to publish a textbook of logic for universities, by July 1 - a textbook for schools. It was proposed to create departments of logic and psychology at universities. And in 1951, the first graduation of teachers of logic and psychology was expected.

This was an unexpected decision. Already in the next issue of the Uchitelskaya Gazeta, he had to be explained: “Logic is of tremendous importance for the discipline of our thinking. As a science about the laws of correct thinking, logic establishes those principles, following which we can avoid mistakes in our judgments and conclusions and come to correct, logically justified evidence … The study of the logic of thinking is a necessary step for the study of dialectical logic. School teachers immediately began to write letters stating that students lack the ability to reason logically.

In general, the entire Soviet school began to implement the decision. And the formal logic was completely rehabilitated.

The end of the 1940s-1950s is called in historiography the time of “high Stalinism”. At this time, Stalin's dictatorship reached its climax. In science, attempts to borrow anything from Western scientists were suppressed. Genetics and cybernetics were defeated. The sword also hung over quantum physics, but only the need to use it in the creation of the atomic bomb saved this area of knowledge from defeat.

*

_

*

At this point, the author stupidly reproduces the well-worn anti-Stalinist myth. In fact, there was nothing of the kind, it is enough to recall the words of Stalin himself: “You need to understand, comrades, that the conditions of the struggle are now different from those during the civil war. Now, in conditions of peaceful economic development, a cavalry charge can only spoil the business.

Neuralink will focus its brain implants on patients with disabilities in an effort to restore them to use their limbs.

“We hope that next year, after FDA approval, we will be able to use implants in our first humans - people with severe spinal cord injuries such as tetraplegic and quadriplegic,” said Elon Musk.

Musk's company isn't the first to go this far. In July 2021, neurotech startup Synchron received FDA clearance to begin testing its neural implants in paralyzed people.

It is impossible to deny the benefits that can be derived from the fact that a person will have access to limbs that are paralyzed. This is truly a remarkable achievement for human innovation. However, many are concerned about the ethical aspects of technology-human fusion if it goes beyond this area of application.

Many years ago, people believed that Ray Kurzweil did not have time to dine with his predictions that computers and humans - a singularity event - would eventually become reality. And yet we are here. As a result, this topic, often referred to as "transhumanism", has become the subject of heated debate.

Transhumanism is often described as:

"a philosophical and intellectual movement that advocates the improvement of the human condition through the development and widespread dissemination of sophisticated technologies that can significantly increase life expectancy, mood and cognitive abilities, and predicts the emergence of such technologies in the future."

Many are concerned that we lose sight of what it means to be human. But it is also true that many treat this concept on an all-or-nothing basis - either everything is bad or everything is good. But instead of just defending our positions, perhaps we can spark curiosity and listen to all sides.

Yuval Harari, author of Sapiens: A Brief History of Humanity, discusses this issue in simple terms. He stated that technology is advancing at such a breakneck pace that very soon we will be developing people who will surpass the species we know today so much that they will become a completely new species.

“Soon we will be able to rewire our bodies and brains, whether through genetic engineering or by directly connecting the brain to a computer. Or by creating completely inorganic entities or artificial intelligence - which is not based on an organic body and an organic brain at all. going beyond just another kind."

Where this can lead, since the billionaires from Silicon Valley have the power to change the entire human race. Should they ask the rest of humanity if this is a good idea? Or should we just accept the fact that this is already happening?