Knowledge of grammar, logic and rhetoric is suppressed in order to enslave us. Starting with the introduction of the Prussian education system knowledge of these subjects was reserved for 0.5% of the population.

Well, I challenge you to come to Brazil and teach this to the average brazillian folks.

>muh knowledge
reddit is down the hall and to the left

>>512205412 (OP)
1984 was a good book

>>512205412 (OP)
Reminder that OP has aphantasia and no internal monologue.

>>512205907
I don't remember that it talked about that. Are you referring to picrel?

I think Brave New World was closer with:

>'They'll have that repeated forty or fifty times more before they wake; then again on Thursday, and again on Saturday. A hundred and twenty times three times a week for thirty months. After which they go on to a more advanced lesson.'

>Roses and electric shocks, the khaki of Deltas and a whiff of asafoetida--wedded indissolubly before the child can speak. But wordless conditioning is crude and wholesale; cannot bring home the finer distinctions, cannot inculcate the more complex courses of behaviour. For that there must be words, but words without reason. In brief, hypnopædia.

>'The greatest moralizing and socializing force of all time.'

>The students took it down in their little books. Straight from the horse's mouth.

https://gutenberg.ca/ebooks/huxleya-bravenewworld/huxleya-bravenewworld-00-e.html#chapter02

This is now a pattern recognition thread. Most of /pol/ can't into basic pattern recognition.

>>512206537
what's the IQ threshold for failing this one

¤Institutes of Grammar by Priscian of Caesarea

¤Summa Grammatica by Roger Bacon

¤Summa Logicae by William of Ockham

¤Logic or the Right Use of Reason in the Inquiry After Truth by Isaac Watts

¤Port-Royal Logic by Antoine Arnauld and Pierre Nicole

¤The Organon by Aristotle

¤Rhetoric by Aristotle

¤Isagoge by Porphyry

¤Lectures on Logic by Immanuel Kant

¤Lectures of Logic by G.W.F. Hegel

¤Metalogicon by John of Salisbury

¤Rules for the Direction of the Mind by René Descartes

>>512207103
>¤Logic or the Right Use of Reason in the Inquiry After Truth by Isaac Watts

Back when Red Ice was good they had several pieces about homeshooling, the Prussian education system, the Trivium etc. I haven't even read/listened to all of them. Here are a few.

https://youtu.be/PhsYBM38W4g

https://redice.tv/news/you-are-the-solution-you-ve-been-looking-for

https://redice.tv/news/education-programming-101-destroy-logic

https://youtu.be/m2ItZzcHd4M

https://redice.tv/red-ice-radio/abduction-of-domenic-johansson-by-swedish-social-services

https://redice.tv/red-ice-radio/learning-vs-schooling-and-prophecy-vs-the-business-plan

https://redice.tv/red-ice-radio/school-sucks-intelligence-and-education-vs-schooling

https://redice.tv/radio-3fourteen/human-needs-control-and-group-think

https://redice.tv/radio-3fourteen/voluntary-and-non-violent-communication

https://redice.tv/news/the-origins-of-the-american-public-education-system-horace-mann-and-the-prussian-model-of-obedience

https://redice.tv/news/education-in-a-free-society

>>512207103
>¤Summa Logicae by William of Ockham
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sum_of_Logic

>>512206818
I'd say it filters sub-90s.

>>512207665
I can't imagine any human failing this, even niggers with down syndrome
post the hardest one you got

>>512205412 (OP)
>>512206278
LETS FUCKING GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>>512206537
I-is it W?

>>512206537
Its W.
I think, I may have miscounted. I suck at the alphabet.

>>512207767
>post the hardest one you got
I don't actually have any, I just saved that one to see if a chatbot is smarter than American wagies.

>>512207945
>>512207990
I'm not telling!

>>512206537
The missing letter is W

https://human.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Philosophy

https://www.e-booksdirectory.com/listing.php?category=288

https://www.e-booksdirectory.com/listing.php?category=33

https://courses.umass.edu/phil110-gmh/text.htm

The grammar they studied in the Trivium was Latin and Greek grammar. I just started studying Latin myself with this book:

https://archive.org/details/familia-romana

https://youtu.be/YtPd2ALW5b4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivium

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivial_school

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts_education

Notice how we still have the hollow remnants of a different past in words like "Latin school", "grammar school" and "liberal arts".

Can you spot the pattern?

>1806:
>battle Napoleon vs Prussia
>Prussia lost.
>It was determined it was due to the fact the Prussian soldiers had studied the Trivium. (grammar, logic and rhetoric)
>They were thinking too much when they should just follow orders.
>After this the Trivium was reserved for the elite.

>1950s:
>The Soviet Union put the world's first satellite in orbit, Sputnik.
>America feared lagging behind, and being nuked.
>In response America did a number of reforms aimed at making America more competitive against the Soviet Union.
>This included New Math.
>Euclidean Geometry was removed from public school.
>There's logic in it.
>Can't teach that to the slave class, they need to be taught how to obey, not how to think.

While we're all in here discussing our love of logic, you guys might as well take the autism test.

>>512206278
I don't have one either.

>>512208766
The text is lying, this is impossible.
>If you don't start or end in a room you have to pass it's adjacent doors an even number of times
>There are three rooms with an odd number of adjacent doors
>You can start in one and end in a second leaving one of the doors of the third one impossible to pass

>>512208766
Got it my first try. I am not autistic. Fuck you. YOU'RE autistic.

What's the correct answer, logically speaking?

>>512205412 (OP)
Weird, I was just thinking about the Prussian system two days ago. I'd forgotten about it

>>512208989

>>512205412 (OP)
Saved. It’s getting out of control these days.
>>512206494
I think the comparison could be best summed up by “Has it ever occurred to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?”

As time passes, I find that to convey any kind of information to those around me, it is increasingly necessary to dumb it down, pepper in some cuss words, otherwise the information is lost entirely. I often find myself facing the same dilemma as Joe, Not Sure, from Idiocracy: It says here you talk like a fag, and your shits all retarded

>>512209248

>>512206278
Interdasting. He’s conveyed a far more complex analysis than I would have expected, given this revelation. But perhaps it’s a matter of regurgitation.

>>512209355
>lurn2logic
>ppl r dumm
>greek wuz le smart
Complex analysis, indeed.

>>512206537
dub-ya

>>512209248
Oops, file didn't attach. Anyway, made me notice your sneak-delete lmao.

For Euclidean geometry I don't know which path is the best. I guess you could read translations of Euclid's Elements directly, in my experience reading old books is generally the best option for the Trivium. Here are two I found:

https://archive.org/details/tayloreuclid00euclrich

https://archive.org/details/thirteenbookseu03heibgoog

Possibly an alternative is to study books on "discreet mathematics" which incorporate Euclidean geometry, here's one I found:

https://open.umn.edu/opentextbooks/textbooks/394

There are also online resources for studying Elements such as:

https://elements.ratherthanpaper.com/

https://www.c82.net/euclid/#books

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclid%27s_Elements#External_links

>>512208766

>>512209432
This is the nuance of language. I said he gave a more complex analysis than expected, I did not say he presented a complex analysis.

>>512209601
Nuance is for nu-males.

>>512210003
Nuance is for nonces

>>512209251
That's part of the quote I posted in the picture. That sentence is good. But other than that sentence I don't remember there being anything about suppression of grammar, logic and rhetoric in that book. The rest of the quote in my picture is about decreasing vocabulary, which isn't really the same thing. In fact I want to object to the message, I think it's self-contradictory, because on the one hand it talks about having fewer words, but on the other hand it says:

>Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning
rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.

Having one word for every concept means you have a greater number of words rather than fewer words. Having a word's meaning rigidly defined is not a bad thing. Having many subsidiary meanings of a word means having a lot of ambiguity, which is a bad thing. A greater number of subsidiary meanings for each word is associated with fewer words and more ambiguity, a smaller number of subsidiary meanings for each word is associated with a greater number of words and less ambiguity. I'm not impressed. We have too much ambiguity. But furthermore English has a lot of syntactic ambiguity compared to Latin, due to the more complex and refined grammar of the latter, which means in order to express the same thing in English you need to use a greater number of words.

The Trivium (grammar, logic and rhetoric) is the tools of thought, this is what is suppressed, again, I don't see how 1984 directly addressed this.

>>512210760
My guy. If you don’t recall suppression of grammar, language, ideas, and generally the “when I imagine the future, I see a boot crushing down on our neck- forever” mentality of the book, I don’t know that I can bring you back from that

>>512210760
By one word for every concept, it was implied that the language model would shrink significantly as a result. Not an expansion of it. That is my understanding. The meaning of the word, or any word/idea/concept would be re-spun daily(or as needed) to fit party needs. More or less.

>>512210760
>I don't remember there being anything about suppression of grammar, logic and rhetoric in that book.
>doublethink is not a suppression of logic
OP is the dumbest motherfucker on this board, bar none.

>>512211998
I’m tempted to agree but maybe his Swedish upbringing is just so far removed from the surveillance state presented in 1984 that leads to an inability to comprehend, due to ignorance. Ignorance is not stupidity necessarily, it is just the lack of knowledge. As to whether he chooses, or indeed is able to acquire it, will be the deciding factor.

>>512212208
Even if you're the most ignorant Swede in the world, it shouldn't be hard to see how conditioning people to uphold mutually-contradicting beliefs is direct a suppression of logic. Even if you don't know about the Law of Noncontradiction, you should be able to intuit it.

>>512206278
I didn't say that I don't have those things, I said they are bullshit concepts. If I recall correctly that was in a discussion about what an NPC is. What I meant was that whether someone is an NPC or not is not determined by whether they have internal monologue and visualization, but by whether or not they have studied logic (or rather the Trivium). What is even meant by internal monologue? Most people think it's just "thinking to themselves in words". This is what I'm objecting to. As Brave New World says in chapter 2 there is such a thing as thinking in words without using reason (logic), hypnopaedia. We are conditioned with not just emotion but also with propositions. Every time you hear X you think X is Y. Simply thinking in a string of propositions is worthless in terms of breaking out of conditioned responses, which is the difference between being an NPC and not. You need to go from propositions to arguments in your thinking, basically the Socratic method. While we are conditioned with propositions, you cannot condition with actual reason (logic, arguments). Learning logic is how you rise out of being an NPC, suppressing logic is how they turned us into NPCs. As for visualization I don't think it has much relevance to being or not being an NPC. However, even discussing a concept like that is pointless for people who haven't studied the Trivium, which very much deals with these types of things, see this book >>512207213 for example, look at the table of contents I posted there. Page numbers don't fit with the file in this link but anyway this is the book:

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

As for things like >>512206537 which people might reflexively think of when they hear "logic", that actually has next to nothing to do with the logic I'm talking about, the Trivium.

>>512212574
Hey... Hey, OP?

Guess whose wall of text I didn't right?

>>512212721
didn't read*

>>512211750
Again, I don't recall it saying anything about grammar, logic or rhetoric.

>>512211974
Yeah, I know it's talking about deleting definitions, I'm just making a point about ambiguity.

>>512212721
Well you're a known troll.

>>512212543
Good point. Note how I said "I don't remember". I actually wanted to discuss the book, but as that quote implies I haven't read it in many years. Study logic, you need it, both for being able to see and address points better and for purifying your dirty heart, it helps with both.

>>512213619
You are dumb and seething and you hate logic. That's why you call me a troll every time I rub a little bit of logic in your face.

>>512206537
My problem with questions like these is that they're so open ended that I can't figure out what the question even is. When anons said the answer was "W", I immediately understood that I had to skip letters to get to W.

>inb4 "you're fucking retarded dude"
I'm hyper analytic. The only context clue I was given was "pattern recognition", and I immediately started analyzing the rings around the letters and the color coding of the letters. I thought the question mark was part of the symbol sequencing.

Is it low IQ when you miss something due to over analysis?

>>512214785
>My problem with questions like these...
Is that you're retarded. Not even reading the rest. I support forced state sterilization or even euthanasia for anyone who spouts this kind of post.

>>512214785
IQ-test type questions are specifically designed to NOT be measuring education, and to give a result NOT affected by level of education. I have in this thread talked about KNOWLEDGE, STUDYING, and SUPPRESSION of knowledge. This is directly antithetical to the former. You're replying to a troll. Logic is not innate, it's a learned skill. I posted many links to books. There is absolutely no reason to read any of that if it's all innate. And there is no reason for the elite to suppress grammar, logic and rhetoric from the masses and study it themselves if it's innate.

Logic (the Trivium/critical thinking) is studied in Freemasonry, yeshivas, and in elite private schools.

https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/503426619

https://archive.ph/ZR5g0

>>512210760
>The Trivium (grammar, logic and rhetoric) is the tools of thought, this is what is suppressed, again, I don't see how 1984 directly addressed this.
>claims to study logic
>doesnt understand how double-think/linguistic games (a=a, a=b) can be weaponized for narrative control
>ctrl+f "Frege", zero results
Here you go anon, its a pretty quick read.
https://archive.org/details/OnSenseAndReference/mode/2up
https://inters.org/files/frege1892-1948.pdf
>>512208766

>>512215751
One line through all the doors not one line through each door, ESL-kun.

>>512215603
>IQ-test type questions are specifically designed to NOT be measuring education, and to give a result NOT affected by level of education
Yes, they're designed to gauge your capacity for reason. Something you're well-known to lack.

>>512215922
Innate capacity to reason and logic are two different things. Most books on logic explain this in the first chapter, but you haven't read any such book.

>>512216474
>Innate capacity to reason and logic are two different things.
The application of logic depends on the capacity for reason. You fail at logic because you lack reason. Simpuru as.

>>512215898
Not defining it as one continuous line leaves enough verbal ambiguity to justify my solution. I also like >>512209516, very creative.

But you are technically correct that it's unsolvable, when the problem is interpreted as intended.

More stuff here:

https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/508076799

>>512205412 (OP)
>Knowledge of grammar, logic and rhetoric is suppressed in order to enslave us
Just look at emojis. The virtual depiction of a gun cannot even be a virtual real gun, it has to be a virtual fake gun.

>>512216574
>The application of logic depends on the capacity for reason.
I have told you a hundred times, it affects it but it's not the only factor. The whole point of this thread is that they have SUPPRESSED KNOWLEDGE OF LOGIC. Again, there is no reason to suppress it if it's innate. But I know by now that you are not genuine, you are only in my threads to derail, to spread disinformation, to dilute with spam etc. Fuck off shill/troll/bot.

>>512217074
They have SUPPRESSED YOUR PREFRONTAL CORTEX OF REASON.

>>512212574
>OP proceeds to reeee
Have fun with that, retard.

>>512205412 (OP)
I hurt real bad wrong, in my pants

>>512205412 (OP)
BUT

WHJAT

ABOUT

THE
*
FILES

IOF

THE

ERP

STEEEN

CASE

YOU JUST

TIRED
TO

SLIED

WITH

YUR
THREAD


YOU

FUICKING

SHEILL

DIE

IN

A *
FUCKING

HELL

YOU ANTI

HUMAN

FUCKTARD

GO

WASTE

YOURSELF

IN

A

BIN

RETARDED

NIGGER

>>512216474
from https://courses.umass.edu/phil110-gmh/MAIN/IHome-5.htm chapter 1

>>512217732
negger

>>512217732
from https://commons.libretexts.org/book/human-24312 chapter 1

>>512217732
>logic can be defined as the science of reasoning
Into the trash it goes.

>>512217870
>logic takes up reasoning as a prescriptive mode
Into the trash it goes.

>>512217870
>>512217904
megas bblacked neggerians... pussies....

>>512217870
from https://commons.libretexts.org/book/human-26799 chapter 1

>>512218060
I literally don't care about Epstein. It's not logical to care about Epstein. It is also unreasonable.

>>512218121
>>512218173
SUPER

ULTRA

MEGA

BALCK

PEOPLE

OF THE NIGGER

CULTURE

YOU

JUST

AVOIDED

EPSTEIN

TOOPIUC

JUST TO

FEEL
GOOD

YOU

ARE

SIMPÖLE

EVIL

ASSHOÖES

>>512218121
But the best description/summary of logic/the Trivium is picrel from this book:

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

Note how logic in the past included what we call grammar and rhetoric today, operations 1 and 2 are grammar, 3 is logic, 4 is rhetoric. These three subjects used to be taught as a unified system, as interconnected subjects, which they are. They have been divorced from each other and hollowed out for the goyslop "education" fed to the masses.

>>512218474
does it feel good to derail from a criminal líst who rapes your daugther, your fucking asshole.

>>512219192
Epstein is irrelevant and leftists are the real child rapists.

>>512219363
>Epstein is irrelevant
what went through your mind

when you typed this down

you unhuman asshole

die

just die

you fucking asshole

>>512219428
Explain how Epstein is relevant. You won't.

>>512219653
what are you

the fuck is wrong with you

criminals rule the fucking economy

and you ask me irilecant shit

are you fucking out of your fucking mind

YOU SHOULD FACE SATAN

YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE

AND DIE

DIE IN A FUCKING

FIRE

BASTARD

>>512220320
>criminals rule the fucking economy
That has been true for centuries before Epstein and will be true for centuries after.

>>512220386
BECAUSE

OF

FUCKING

PEOPLE

LIKE

YOU

you are the fucking problem

>>512220456
In what way do I contribute to capitalism, statism and civilization existing?

>>512220528
by helping to derail from pushing the main topic, you fucking asshole, ready to die, you fucking slave of satan, face the fact, you are nothing

>>512220696
I don't understand. How exactly does playing into the political circus organized by the state, help end statism?

>>512221169
because you are retarded, and mostly black.
You iphone worhshipping idiot.

epstein list is everything, and as soon you push for it yuo will see it. idiot.

Bumping for improvement of the mind, purification and liberation.

>pajeet in need of bumping
>the brown alert is sounded
>timmy the tank engine to the rescue

learn to recognize pajeet threads. learn to stop giving (You)s, which end up as rupees, to OPs like this. jews pay pajeets to spam this board en masse with the same globohomo agenda that you're still associating with only jews. since 2023 you are much more likely to see jew noise posted by a pajeet. there are a hundred times as many pajeets as there are jews. if you want any part of the internet to survive, you must detect, reject and redeem pajeets everywhere you find them

the majority of pajeets on /pol/ try to hide the fact that they're pajeets. in addition to "leaving that part out" they will proactively, persistently misrepresent their true form. pajeets are all about assuming other people's roles, from today's outsourcing and replacement migration all the way back to thuggee bandits lying to travelers about who they were. pajeets are devoid of their own identity, making them the ideal globalized goyim. they don't want a home where they belong. all that means to them is "compete in squalor." much better to go somewhere nicer, built by other people, and do their jobs for less pay and live slum-barracks life in their suburbs. pajeets don't want to be home. they also don't want to be pajeets. jews know exactly how to play their insecurities and dopey ambitions like the innocent rube fresh off the bus from the cornfield. this is their new golem to replace the ones that don't love them anymore

when in doubt, try this
CLINICAL TEST QUESTION
>are you descended from south asian subcontinental ancestry?
any answer longer than "no" means yes
not answering means yes
lying means yes

>>512205412 (OP)
My bf went to Gordonstoun and is still a complete asshole despite being intelligent, tough, logical to the bone, and knowing social elites from around the world. He’s still just as dismayed about the state of the world as everyone else and feels just as lonely. Only advantage he has is the class to navigate social situations and pretty much manipulate people into getting whatever he wants.

I don't think so. If you watched a farmer in the 1910s, They were all the same.

>>512205412 (OP)
>>512214785
doesn't indicate a low g-factor but I think it indicates that there is room for improvement in your thinking techniques or communication skills
i.e. applying occam's razor, thinking about what one can expect from the tester, thinking about what contemporaries would be able to figure out, metagaming
sort of related but see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_principle#Grice's_maxims

>>512225512
>doesn't indicate a low g-factor
With a question this trivial, it does.