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
we can only engage in such a way
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 dont understand magnetisation
yeah
autonomy of learning
as in
sorry i am texting like a slav
this is possible in mazelike research sprints on the internet
stalgivc is the greatest poster of all time
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
what do you think my name is
what do you mean
its good short few pages
so at the end
"No, it'll get cold!"
"Put a tut ahh put a-"
isaac
you cannot feed someone language, they have to speak
amazing hopefully this was all legible and frankly i might be going very off board but you seemed interesting
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.