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

autonomy of learning

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.

okay im going very rogue and very inarticulate

you cannot feed someone truth

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

its performative

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

propensity within someone

this is possible in mazelike research sprints on the internet

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

to work in time to get to the timeless, perfection thru chaos

so an active mazelike process

i hadn't considered this pedagogically or as a kind of personal knowledge management system (puke) at all but i suppose it is both of those things

that looks like my instagram account

we want to live the knowledge too live the content

i have read not even 1 book

i haven't read 100 book s so i'm probably not getting the depth of all of what you're saying

as in

so at the end

I am below everything.

i dont understand magnetisation

not their contents

idk

        13       |
                |
                |
            H   |
                |
                |
. . . .         |
. . . .         |
. . . .         |
. . . .         |
                |

abrar?