Can I see
like people can read 100 books and still not have the fire within them
okay this is interesting because pedagogies we have rn are not proper models
as in
you cannot feed someone truth
not their contents
mazelike/rhizomatic/immanent/emergent are not antithetical to a transcendent real but its very manifestation
isaac newton
i struggle with building a personal technical architecture for storing media, both curation and creation. instead i bookmark everything
i know a little bit of lacan which probably influences me in a way i cant articulate
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.
you cannot feed someone language, they have to speak
i don't really want to be associated with that one for some reason
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
god being the centre magnet
we need to be deconstructing our identities
yes
magnetises a pin
feel you
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
13 |
|
|
H |
|
|
. . . . |
. . . . |
. . . . |
. . . . |
|
autonomy of learning
is this you as well
i hope ai fixes this with the cessation of interfaces and walls
this is possible in mazelike research sprints on the internet
it is hopeful
we want to live the knowledge too live the content
currently