Reminder not to actually go to a diploma mill for a Veeky Forums related degree...

>unless you're rich or have a scholarship
/thread

well, leftists haven't ruined it yet

but probably soon, archeology will be about finding african settlements in Europe, unveiling the real europeans.

You don't disagree that "science was developed thru colonization"?

Apart from the comment about "science" which I suspect probably has some sort of context, the rest of that slide doesn't seem entirely unreasonable.

But race and science are social constructs OP

"Words have meanings"?

Sure, but where they created "thru colonization"? Well race /maybe/, but science?

You don't think words have meaning?

Race was created before colonization

Words are arbitrary noises, the meaning lies in the relationship between words, ideas, images and concepts. The words themselves mean nothing.

>science was developed thru colonization
What kind of argument could've been made in support of this assertion? Maybe that science was largely developed by prosperous elite whose existence and prosperity relied upon oppression (including colonial) or what?

>the meaning lies in the relationship between words, ideas, images and concepts.

So meaning then.

Does the word "Gabaegogagi" have any meaning to you?

just avoid liberal arts colleges and get an international studies/relations degree from a good uni

>Learn a trade
ok Jamal

But that's exactly the point I was going to make to you, we aren't just making random noises at each other or creating random squiggles. We are communicating with each other because we are using words with meanings.

I was going to ask YOU whether yo understood "weeble bibble bobble" in the same way you understand "it's hot today".

I'm not that familiar with this post-modernism stuff but I'm certain if you think the claim "words have meaning" is some claim that a random noises that aren't part of a language have meaning then you arguing against a strawman of your own imagination.

Not the same person, but the only example I can sort of think about is arbitrary classification of creature where the European one always is preferable for the one from outside of Europe.

The colonizing powers held Carolus Linnæus in high regards because he classified species based on looks (today we know that phenotype and genetic categories isn't as closely related as we used to think) compared to, say, classifying species based on usefulness or something like that as they did outside of Europe (China comes to mind iirc).

Even if you buy it, you have to do some pretty big mental gymnastics to go from that to "science develops trough colonization".

Words have no inherit meaning. They have the meaning you give to them. That was the whole point.

>international relations
>not just even more smug more exclusive group think

And then enjoy what? Quasi politicking?

The meaning given to them by societies, yes, rather than you as an individual. But I seriously doubt there is any claim being made here that say the word "titties" would be automatically understood by aliens from another galaxy because the noise / symbols have inherent meaning.

Words have meaning by definition, it it has no meaning it isn't a word.

>words have meaning
what the fuck is this? What is she even trying to say with that?

>It's easy as fuck to get a job as an archaeologist if you live in Europe
You gotta be american. Archeology in Europe doesn't land you jobs, it lands you research assignments where you're paid like minimum wage for a year.

Race has existed for as long as (well, maybe a few hundred years less than) life has existed.

You know tertiary education isn't the same everywhere. There's no reason not to take a degree in history if you're in a country where it costs 1k/year and you don't have mandatory lesson attendance.
I got mine while working a fulltime job, and let me tell you it makes a very big difference in how you see history. It's all about method rather than content.

>words have meaning
>what the fuck is this? What is she even trying to say with that?

If the words you used to ask that question have no meaning why didn't you just write "bdsbvfkjfvshfhbv" and hope someone would magically understand?

>mandatory lesson attendance.

why the fuck would you go to a university if you have to attend shit

learn the meaning of facultative classes

Today I got my bachelor in Art History & Archaeology, just another useless scrap of paper. I don't in now what I can do with it, probably nothing. I'm working my ass off in a restaurant for the time being, I want to do something else with my life. Any idea fellow Veeky Forumstorians?

In Italy most unis are like this

>In Italy
I have the feeling that italians are wildly overrepresented on this board compared to the rest of Veeky Forums.

Tell me how the fuck science was developed through colonialism without spouting SJW anywhere nonsense.

What school?

Yeah, work in a trade, make big money, read history for fun. I wouldn't say my degree was useless, it helped me grow intellectually and as a person. Learning to work on supermarket refrigeration however, grew my wallet and paid for my home.

...

>understand it on the level of someone who has properly studied it

Like someone who studied in their spare time?

>who has properly studied
>properly studied

U've been fucked

PRO TIP TO UNDERGRADS

DO NOT GET A BA IN HISTORY

MAJOR IN SOMETHING WORTHWHILE

MINOR IN HISTORY, OR DOUBLE MAJOR IF YOU CAN

t. Me

There are exceptions, and those who are planning on going to to things like law school are likewise exempt, but don't for the love of god get a humanities degree and expect to just figure things out

I look back on young me and wonder what I was thinking. My parents were too supportive and should've smacked me

There are actually people who major in something that can't give them a job?

A history education can get you a decent administrative job, the skills are all transferable.

Most people who read history for a hobby don't even glance at historiography or historical theory, which is required in any non-shit history education.

Anything you recommend for the layman?

This is probably just some dumb cunts after hours talk.

I don't know if this is really good advice. I did choose to eschew history for medicine (med school starts straight out of high school in my country) and I ended up dropping out. I do believe that unless you're actively interested in what you're studying you should avoid tertiary education altogether, studying something you don't like doesn't really pay off.

THIS
If we have one life, why not do something you enjoy?
>b-but muh money
You can always find a way to earn money.

Does Foucault count?

I got a BA in history, and I regret it now. I fell for the "study what you find interesting user!" meme, but I can only blame myself. You can't do shit with the degree. I wish I had been more foresighted back then.

Ironic that someone actively trying to destroy culture is complaining about someone else doing it.

I had some right-wing professors

Learn how to market yourself, or widen your scope. Most employers don't care what your degree was in unless you're in a field specifically tied to a certain profession (medicine, engineering, etc.), and most people don't end up in a job that's remotely related to their field of study. Most jobs just require a degree, and you have that, so go out and get the normie office job your degree qualifies you for.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Origin_of_Species

stonybrook.edu/commcms/philosophy/Egger_FS Baum_Erster Umbruch.pdf

This is literally pointless to discuss without context, for all we know that slide could be referring to reading material

Sorry, I am too good for manual labour and don't want to become a working class scum.

>I don't understand science, the protest
Why do liberals insist on embarressing themselves like this?

Wtf do the mean by "science is a social construct"?
Are they refering to the understanding of what qualifes as science or the actual 'facts' of science? They can't really argue that science is only 'true' within a certain culture can they?

Wouldn't that not just be "classifcations are based on arbitrary connections" rather than "science is based on colonisation"?
The foundational science wouldn't really change if you choosed to define speces by hight or by which ones taste better on the grill.

What idiot can't get a job as history teacher?

Science is a human endeavor, to that extent it is a social construct just like language or math are. What the dopey PoMo cunt in OP means by it I don't know (and don't care).

You.

stop huffing memes lad

You say these are just memes but... google.com/amp/s/decolonizeallthethings.com/2016/11/10/we-need-decolonial-scientists/amp/
>I think that W.E.B. Du Bois puts it best, “One could not be a calm, cool, and detached scientist while Negroes were lynched, murdered, & starved.” Not then, not now, not ever. What many see as apolitical ‘objective’ science is out of context, ahistorical, dangerous, and incorrect. Science as an institution developed alongside the logic and interests of the nation state. The vision of designing better products is never outside of the political program of designing better citizens. You cannot do your work and remain quiet while people are silenced and suffering
>It is not taboo to be a bigot in the United States, its an accepted and expected behavioral practice and demanded in many cases. These contemporary colonial relations dominate our minds and how we teach our children to treat other human beings. White supremacy is central to how we socialize our youth and regulate adults into model citizens, designed to defend the logics of settlement and profit even at their own expense.
> I reviewed the history of race as a eugenic math that functions off of eugenic logics that sorts bodies into political order and students listened on. I told them that the ways in which people are taught how to be a model ‘person’ in this society is problematic. I told them that we can change and don’t need to rely on internalized white supremacy to value ourselves & others
>Yes your work has a political program: white supremacy. And in order to work towards one that respects & works with the everyone’s humanity in mind you must work to become a historically competent scientist. Its time for us to examine the values and political relations in our lives and around us and envision better ones that aren’t based on colonial ideas about gender, race, sexuality, age, ability, etc..

Do they let any retard teach at college now?

>now

Aight, so if I understand you correctly it just means that it's a process/construct of human tought and not something in and off itself. The 'truths' garnered from it is still viewed as true allbeit perhaps distorted by the fundamental human elements within the system? If that's the case then I can't really see anything wrong with that notion. It's seems accurate to me.

What do they mean by "science"? Who takes science away from them? Who stops them from making innovative researches and win Noble's prize? No one.

>The 'truths' garnered from it is still viewed as true
Nope. Pomos are retarded.

What does Pomos mean?

>he says as the head of the executive literally says that climate change is a chinese hoax.

See

That's a philosophy class

>PhD student with scholarship
>working in archive all day reading cool stuff in secret police files
>from time to time present your findings and get drunk with other historians afterwards
>get invited to conferences all over the world
>get a jobs lined up for you
>hurr no become a wage cuck

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemological_anarchism

wow good job librarian

what could possibly go wrong in the future

also

>cool stuff in secret police files

are you really pretending that it's fascinating? didn't you know courier new burns through retina in a matter of weeks?

Should I go for my master's in biological anthropology? I can afford to do it without putting myself in debt, but can I make a career in it not reliant on academia? Or should I just dive into trades or teaching high school history?

>words have meaning

What did she mean by this?

I accidentally entered library sciences, I have no proper training but I keep getting odd jobs. I just volunteered at a random college for a summer and later found out it was famous or something. I feel like that one comic where the fat guy keeps getting promoted for no discernable reason.

>didn't you know courier new burns through retina in a matter of weeks
What did he mean by this?

You're too late user, I already have one semester left to get my BS in economics and an IT minor. I seriously wish I knew about trade schools or even community college before I had to apply.

Cheers!

Giving plebians rights was a mistake
Neo-serfdom when?

My Veeky Forums professor from last semester sent me a letter asking me to take on a history minor because he enjoyed my paper on the American Revolution so much. Current major is a CS/fine arts hybrid. Should I minor in Veeky Forums?

If you guys are interested in understanding what people mean when they say "decolonizing science" instead of memeing read on.

During the very beginning of colonization when the church still had a lot of say in political affairs it was illegal to publish a scientific work that had non-Christian sources. The church continuing the Roman tradition of LARPing as Greeks had allowed Roman and Greek sources to be considered "Christian".

This was also the age where the communication between the west and the east was gathering speed. So a lot of what was learned from other cultures (mainly Islamic and Indian as well as Egyptian) was retconned as Greek. There is little non-textual evidence that trigonometry, astronomy or algebra was in any way developed during the ancient Greek periods. For example the radius of the earth calculated to great accuracy by Indians didn't reach that accuracy in Europe till almost a millennium later. Tables of sines etc. were magically made much more accurate just as soon as certain Arabic and Indian texts were translated.

So basically all the scientific and mathematical progress made by other civilizations was dubbed as either Greek or "independently" discovered by Christian scientists. This worked hand in hand with the actual colonization a few centuries later. These civilizations were taught that all science and math comes from Europe.

So when we talk about decolonizing science and math what's being talked about is giving the correct credit to other civilizations for human progress in science. It does not mean the Europe's contribution to science be erased (it's still the greatest contributor even if you strip the dubious contributions). All it asks for is when speaking about discoveries unless we have non-textual evidence that it happened in Europe, the first piece of textual evidence originating from Europe not be considered the de facto origin. Since it continues the CHurches tradition of disregarding non-Christian sources.

Europe dominated modern science, that's a realistic, empirical fact since the 1400s

it's not "Eurocentrism" it's just the reality of the situation

decolonize science is not what you think it means, it means take down all western forms of knowledge

>"You can never understand history on the same level if you just "read in you spare time""

>"You'll never understand X unless you learn it from someone who couldn't do X in the real world so had to settle for teaching it instead"

Never understood this logic.

I wouldn't disagree. Scientific progress outside Europe ground to a halt for the most part after the advent of colonialism and was slowing down before it. But when people talk of decolonizing science they do not mean to strip the west of its contributions. The idea is to set the record straight for a lot of ideas and discoveries credited to the west that have little evidence of being western in origin. Especially in the areas of trigonometry, metallurgy, astronomy, calculus, algebra and medicine.

I'll try to make a thread going in to more details about this debate (and I don't think it's settled one way or the other) but I don't know if many people are interested in it and it's a lot of effort to compile.

I actually had a class on post-colonialism to-fucking-day

>Europe dominated modern science, that's a realistic, empirical fact since the 1400s
No, Europe CREATED modern science in the 1500s

>>"You'll never understand X unless you learn it from someone who couldn't do X in the real world so had to settle for teaching it instead"

You can definitely learn history (or anything else) well by working in a field related to it instead of under a professor. But it's very hard to actually work under someone doing work in any field without the proper education. The alternative is self-study which can never be as effective as either education or real-world experience.

the mathematics that we know of today are essentially Greek. The Babylonians and Egyptians made great contributions to mathematics, but it was the Greeks that provided the first Axiomatic Deduction system i.e Euclid's Elements

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclid's_Elements

it's not "Eurocentrism" but the reality of the situation

See Unless you can give some concrete examples instead of theories and urban legends you're not fooling anyone.

I would argue Colonization was possible trough the Socially Construced Method that is Science, but that you can't have it the other way: Science isn't a construct made by colonization.

Then again, OP posted a picture where with a person that is really really confused on how expansion and trade works. So the second paragraph is just a parrot statement without meaning.
And the last one looks like a skim note, left there to avoid choking if she forgot the pacing of the summary. Which is bad practice.