we want to live the knowledge too live the content

so the method has to be autonomous

like first name

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

what do you think my name is

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

autonomy of learning

mazelike/rhizomatic/immanent/emergent are not antithetical to a transcendent real but its very manifestation

i don't really want to be associated with that one for some reason

much more tactility

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

your feed looks like my tumblr

plato

division of reality is straying away from it

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

send your tumblr

feel you

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.

its good

have you read

barren land

in a way what we are really interested in with pedagogy is the magnetisation

I am below everything.

abrar?

"No, it'll get cold!"
"Put a tut ahh put a-"

thank you

yeah people dont get it they assume its ahnaf

1

with this post net clarity and the hours of nothing that followed I realise this is going to be awful.