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

so the method has to be autonomous

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

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

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

its good

division of reality is straying away from it

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.