was it worth it

and the fake qualifier

like people can read 100 books and still not have the fire within them

my watchlater reached its limit years ago and now i have to create a playlist for each new topic im interested in but it is incredibly hard to create the taxonomy of knowledge because everything seems to be everything else because at the end it is what you get from it that matters not what is given

so the method has to be autonomous

the only things i have read are just excerpts and 1 dialogue by plato fully and mcluhan's medium is the massage but it cannot be considered a book

what do you mean

magnetises a pin

you cannot feed someone language, they have to speak

is this you as well

god "possessing" artists "possessing" people

ahnaf is it worth reading all those books

all that is to say

Imprint, memory, impact, representation, impression

there is a distinction between western-modern pedagogical systems that's like text-based as in a legal method but there is an idea of "pathshala" or "guru shissho"/ "porompora" i mean how masters relayed knowledge to the student by (oral) transmission often by memorising books. so what was taught was always interactive. knowledge was interactive, you spoke with people rather than read texts.

It's

dusk

bro i read nothing in my life

sorry i am texting like a slav

in a post. I want to be remembered

okay im going very rogue and very inarticulate

lol yea

autonomy of learning

so i or you can author smaller fragments that get arranged

but i respect your search

1

like first name

isaac