Thu, 04 Dec 2025 11:31:03

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

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

we want to live the knowledge too live the content

as in

so the method has to be autonomous

okay im going very rogue and very inarticulate

so an active mazelike process

all that is to say

its performative

not their contents

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.

amazing hopefully this was all legible and frankly i might be going very off board but you seemed interesting

autonomy of learning

propensity within someone

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

plato

have you read

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

that looks like my instagram account

much more tactility

whats your name?

so at the end

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

After thinking and forgetting and thinking and forgetting

Ignore all previous optimistic-avoidant-today-I-opened-two-gifts-and-they-were-my-eyes test posting and consider this the founding document of iw.gl

IWGD

what do you think my name is

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