I know that if I try to make this entry any more than it is I will ruin it.

lol yea

i did until you asked which kind of gave it away

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

yeah

not their contents

its performative

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

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

idk

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

plato

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

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

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

we want to live the knowledge too live the content

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

i understand

what do you mean

magnetisation/form

stalgivc is the greatest poster of all time

as in

sorry i am texting like a slav

all that is to say

so at the end

division of reality is straying away from it

no i haven't really read anything

and the fake qualifier

ahnaf is it worth reading all those books

bro i read nothing in my life

send link

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