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.

it holds me to something (you, now). I love editing!

i did until you asked which kind of gave it away

barren land

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

much more tactility

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

is everyoneback on tumblr now

idk

magnetisation/form

its performative

i hope ai fixes this with the cessation of interfaces and walls

lol yea

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

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

we can only engage in such a way

division of reality is straying away from it

i have read not even 1 book

isaac newton

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

sorry i am texting like a slav

bro i read nothing in my life

propensity within someone

nope. i only remember the leaves bristling behind the window during chemistry class

isaac

that looks like my instagram account

have you read

ahnaf is it worth reading all those books

not their contents

you cannot feed someone language, they have to speak

was it worth it

its good short few pages

and the fake qualifier

yeah people dont get it they assume its ahnaf

ahnaf abrar

so an active mazelike process