If dialectical materialism is core to socialist theory (I agree with this) then that only underscores the necessity of properly understanding it.

For a non-physicist, it is enough that they know that quantum mechanics is a thing. Maybe show them the double-slit experiment. What does this amount to? A basic familiarization with the results of quantum mechanics. We have not trained a new expert in quantum mechanics. They did not receive a comprehensive education of all the details, and it is not necessary unless they want to be a physicist.

A physicist has to spend years studying quantum mechanics, learning the mathematical and philosophical concepts. It takes a long time to master it. And of course, it can’t be summed up in 100 pages.

If someone asks me how to start with quantum mechanics, I would want to know what is their goal. Are they interested in an overview or a deep understanding. If they want an overview, I’ll send them a YouTube video. If they want to actually learn it, I’ll send them a textbook that will take a year to study. I would not consider the first person to have learned it.

You might think I’m being too severe but I don’t see how we can extend Marxism, apply it to concrete conditions, without having experts who spend years deeply studying it, beyond the introductory texts.

I would place dialectics solidly in the category of: you don’t need to learn this unless you want to be a scholar.

“I wanna learn dialectics” is the Marxist version of when first-year physics students say “I wanna learn quantum mechanics”. One can hand them an introductory primer; this gives a general idea, but I would not call that understanding. If someone wants to learn dialectics then they have already decided that they want to be a scholar, so they should be reading the primary sources. There should not be this middle ground, as though dialectics is an introductory topic requiring no prerequisite knowledge (i.e., the lineage of the theory against which Marx counterposed his own dialectic). We should be willing to tell people that they aren’t ready to learn something yet, because they need to learn something else first.

It would be good to know what OP strives to achieve from “learning dialectics” or what they mean by that. Are they just trying to get some practical knowledge to situate themselves, or are they trying to deepen their understanding of theory (which one)? Unfortunately they never responded or gave any indication of what they are looking for with this question.

Systems theory is fundamentally different from, and inferior to, dialectics. I’m also skeptical of the notion (that you wrote in a separate comment) that Marx didn’t come up with dialectical materialism just because Daoists thought about unity of opposites — that’s like saying Charles Darwin, with his theory of evolution, anticipated Animorphs. It is not a useful framing, and it neglects the specific differences between these ideas.

Richard Levins wrote an excellent summary comparison between dialectics and systems theory: Dialectics and Systems Theory

Comprehensive is a stretch. It is a good primer for a Marxist, and a good place to start (as the poster requested). Cornfourth leaves a fair amount on the table. That’s to be expected from 100 pages written for a lay audience. To pick up the remaining aspects of the dialectic requires study of Hegel and of Hegel’s relation to Kant and Marx, at minimum.

One glaring thing (imo) that Cornfourth doesn’t really discuss at all, at least that I could find, is he does not talk about form and content, appearance and essence. Dialectic is not only about evolution of history, it is present also in the stable epochs. In Capital Marx does use a Hegelian method of analyzing the form (as in appearance) of value, as opposed to its content or substance, and why necessarily value must express itself through forms, and how the imperfection of expression can lead to problems. This I think needs to be added to what Cornfourth writes in his book.

I’m sure that you will feel better with those out! Do you have liquid/soft food to consume for a while?

Aiming to keep my place cleaner. Trying to build a habit that I “reset” the place before bed. At minimum this means putting things where they belong, but bonus points if I quickly wipe down surfaces and vacuum. My hope is that cumulative small cleanups are more effective than occasional large cleanups. I do notice that if I’m already cleaning something, the activation energy to also pick up an errant sock or dust a lamp is much lower than if I was not already in the motion of cleaning. So a small cleanup can end up larger without feeling like it costs much extra.

After months of tinkering with my first emacs configuration, I finally got to business on developing a note-taking and planning system that works for my brain. At first, I was distracted by some of the shiny Zettelkasten packages, but in the end I was served best by (mostly) sticking to core Org Mode, which has been a revelatory experience. Background: I’m er… not that young at this point, and I’ve been fairly disorganized my whole life. But because I’m good at working under pressure, good at cramming late into the night, good at running to bus stops — I’ve never really been made to figure it out; until the past couple years, that is. I have so much more going on these days than I ever have. So many small and large facts and dates to remember. It wasn’t until my anxiety was through the roof, and waking up each day with my head spinning, that I decided enough is enough: I must write this stuff down so that I stop trying to keep it all in short-term memory.

My favorite thing about the Org Agenda is that there is no distinction between calendar and notes. Your notes are your calendar. Your calendar is extracted from your notes. So you don’t have to context swap to another application just to set up a calendar event or a reminder. Type the event description, optional scheduled and deadline dates, and it’s remembered. And from the calendar, when you visit the source file that an event came from, you get the full context of the note, not the terse description that often happens in Gmail or Outlook.

As a consequence, I have significantly improved both my peace of mind and my diligence in completing things I’m supposed to be doing. Things that, in the past, I tried to keep on a mental backburner for whenever it’s “convenient” to do them (hint: it’s never convenient). I can easily pull up an agenda view of all the stuff I’m supposed to be remembering right now. It’s great.

Next steps:

1. Configure more todo-states in addition to the default “TODO” and “DONE”. I’m thinking at minimum “PROG” (in progress) and maybe “HOLD” and “IDEA”.
2. Set up some capture templates once I figure out what are my common workflows and friction points.

It’s a great time to get into programming as a personal hobby rather than career. I don’t generate code for myself, but it is useful to ask AI to essentially scan Internet forums for obscure error codes and usually it extracts the actual solution. But that is just using it as a search engine.

I can relate to the burnout. Are you willing to share what sorts of things are stressing you out? Is it the quantity of stuff, or specific bad events that you just have to cope with?

Wouldn’t it be trivial to generate accounts as needed?

This is one of the rarely spoken boons of capitalist centralization, it doesn’t just centralize the means of production, it also centralizes and socializes far more workers

Yeah this was one of Marx’s brilliant insights. Industrialization took a scattered labor force, mostly working in the home and spread-out geographically, and put them under one roof in a factory. The revolutionary potential of this new association is clear. It makes me wonder why capitalists fight remote work so hard, when in my experience it is very alienating although in the short term I hate going in to work.

Neither, the wiggly line denotes a photon

deleted by creator

Interesting that they bring up clocks. That’s something I have thought about too. I try to use analog clocks over digital in an attempt to follow time less precisely, and I have even pondered removing the minute-hand from a clock, like suggested in that excerpt. Interesting stuff.

Yes, I mean strictly no caffeine. I very much like coffee and tea; it’s practically a hobby of mine. I pretty well understand the effect that caffeine has on my body… and I think most people underestimate the negative side effects.

I believe caffeine makes me more anxious and stressed out as a baseline. I thought it was a natural reaction to the anxiety and stress in my life, but I am surprised just how much better I cope with life when I haven’t had caffeine.

My sleep is deeper, more restorative, and regular. My eyes look less tired and my skin looks healthier. I don’t have brain fog. My energy and focus is more consistent throughout the day. I don’t feel as tired after work.

I wasn’t drinking an abnormally large amount; 2 cups per day, probably 300-400 mg, inside the “safe” daily allowance.

The weirdest observation is that my emotions came back. I think for a long time I’ve had a more flat affect and found it harder to laugh. I thought I was just depressed, but that didn’t seem right. I’m fine on the inside, but it’s like I couldn’t connect that to an emotive state.

It will be hard to cut the psychological attachment to coffee and tea, but I’m already finding alternatives like juice and herbal teas.

Since this is the bear site I will add one edgy comment, that caffeine is a perfect drug for turning us into soulless worker drones. Going off caffeine feels like a tiny rebellion.

Trying to finally eliminate caffeine from my diet. I feel so much better already and it’s only been a few days.

Finland still has very very beautiful nature. I really like it and it’s worth preserving.

My first impression upon moving there was that Finland is far more ecologically conscious than the US. But at this point I fully agree with what you said about old-growth preserves being carefully managed around cities. It’s propaganda to keep the liberals ignorant of how bad it is once you venture out… that’s my feeling at the moment. Appreciate the historical context you added, as always.