mazelike/rhizomatic/immanent/emergent are not antithetical to a transcendent real but its very manifestation

we can only engage in such a way

you cannot feed someone language, they have to speak

okay im going very rogue and very inarticulate

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.

i know a little bit of lacan which probably influences me in a way i cant articulate

send your tumblr

much more tactility

whats your name?

propensity within someone

think this is much more rhizomatic or immanent or mazelike than mainstream education now

its performative

in a way what we are really interested in with pedagogy is the magnetisation

okay this is interesting because pedagogies we have rn are not proper models

magnetisation basically means the induction of divine form unto you

you cannot feed someone truth

no i haven't really read anything

yeah people dont get it they assume its ahnaf

Rain, starting

i dont understand magnetisation

Imprint, memory, impact, representation, impression

so at the end

i want to do that too

abrar?

plato

hiding from the rain

and the fake qualifier

magnetisation/form

no longer writing in the third person