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.
so an active mazelike process
so the method has to be autonomous
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
i have read not even 1 book
okay this is interesting because pedagogies we have rn are not proper models
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
barren land
stalgivc is the greatest poster of all time
we want to live the knowledge too live the content
mazelike/rhizomatic/immanent/emergent are not antithetical to a transcendent real but its very manifestation
like people can read 100 books and still not have the fire within them
propensity within someone
and the fake qualifier
i hope ai fixes this with the cessation of interfaces and walls
autonomy of learning
feel you
like first name
was it worth it
what do you think my name is
what do you mean
like magnets
you cannot feed someone truth
god being the centre magnet
i love it here
and the fake qualifier
ahnaf is it worth reading all those books
yeah
its good
ahnaf is it worth reading all those books