i picked up the rock today and decided to play
the sun rose and so did i, elevate and fly, i do
the first shot a fadeaway, swish
i should have walked away
but i continued to push it
i could not hit a three
my game was always best inside
but i always tried to deny
the further out i got, the less will control i had
the ball would do what i didn't want it to do
this caused an anger reaction inside of me
which only made the shooting worse
then i decided to go inside and stay a while,
giving everything i had to every rebound
expending all with put backs and elevated turnarounds
finally, covered in sweat at this point, i step back outside
this time i had confidence on my side, as i pictured the swish
in my mind's eye.
the ball went up and there was never a doubt, i could then proceed to my leg workout
a girl there, probably 19 years old, 10 years younger than i, wow, i am old, totally eye fvcked me.. it was uncomfortable, she did it twice. this was exceedingly blatant. the problem wasn't that she was not good looking, i just was not there to have sex, that's all. i was thinking about perhaps calling the authorities on her for sexual harassment, but i decided it wasn't worth the effort
i know how to enjoy my life alone too well
it makes people think that i would be fun to be around, and they are right, the only issue is it's not fun for me and i am a selfish prick
i went to school to deliver a paper
here it is if you want to read it
When a baby is born they are born with more synaptic connections than they will ever have in their entire lives. Clusters of connected neurons, clustered in chaos and disjunction, fail to fire and atrophy over a given time. i.e. From the point of birth on, the brain undergoes a series of changes known as neuronal pruning that work to create and maintain a bounded and limited belief structure that will form a personality over time. This system is what is known as education in our world today. Education of the person is basically the byproduct of being born and raised within a given culture. This said personality can be trained using two accepted psychological categories known as formal and informal learning.
In our scenario, as presented, one predicated upon the prospect of a wealthy philanthropist taking the knowledge they value, which is formal in structure and different in relation to the way that it is based on the external knowledge rather than personal life experience, I think it is necessary to notice and accept the fact that there is not one single right way or wrong way, and that both ways must be implemented together in order for the smooth transition from the former to the new to occur.
There are three possible reactions from a situation in which a new system of learning is given to the minds of men so far as I am concerned. One, there will be a small minority of people that are willing to give up what they have just out of spite alone, and accept anything different than what they know, just because of their basic disillusionment. Secondly, there will be a larger cohort of individuals that want to stick to their former way because it is the way that their brains were trained, and to deviate from that pattern of thinking and feeling would cause discomfort Thus we have two polar opposite sides, then we have the middle way, which in Nature always seems to be the correct way, at least for me; so I might subtly suggest to this philanthropist that they incorporate a third way. The third way shall come to be known as the way that combines both to harmonize the polarities, or the neutralizing force; without this force, all endeavoring for future growth will be for not.
Scaffolding is a term that means to build a structure of demonstration as the critical task in leading others into learning new knowledge and models of possible belief systems. In order to create a third way, there needs to be this combination of efforts, the meeting of minds, so to speak, in that the transition moves in harmony with Nature, because that which functions in discord with Nature, creates the appearance of being haunted to our vibratory apparatuses receiving the apparently unascertainable electromagnetic information emanating out from disharmonious structures. And we do not want these presumably poor children, coming from rural backgrounds, being introduced to our westernized technology if it has not been perfected yet, in terms of just building the object in together in harmony with both nature and the man that she brings.
It would be foolish for the philanthropist to neglect the opportunity for the construction of the object of learning itself as being a potential learning instrument that could not only help persuade trust, in that you are willing to compromise and accept that you do not know everything there is to know about how to educate the entire world. Talking to anyone without first taking into account the affinity that they will have for what they know is a waste of everyone’s time. What better way to integrate and create a way in which the explicit curriculum of engineering, math, and construction so prevalent here today in the 21st world is transferred into an informally educated race without offering them something completely foreign and alien feeling? This question begs the idea, at least in my mind of building the school together. Verily, the philanthropist should literally build the school with the native population.
Work with them in designing the structure and constructing the structure in which the learning will take place. Yes, being able to disconnect from the personal is important in realizing the biases and delusions that one can have due to a few faulty beliefs that are not even ours, most of the time, but so too is the personal relationship and the working knowledge that one has with Nature. The relationship with Nature is important. If you take that away from the indigenous people, they will lose their will to care very quickly and descend into degeneration and disgust.
To implement a standardized structure where knowledge is passed on through the verbal medium of a professor or a teacher in an area of the world where individuals value their own knowledge and affinity for the self assembled knowledge they have gained through experience, one must determine first that the former is more important than the latter, which is obviously up for question, as is anything or anyone under the sun. However, if both sides can accept that the other has something useful in which to offer, then the mutual agreement to learn can be made, and the neutralizing force activated.
In this particular framework, by utilizing the older Guatemalan generation in designing and building the structure, working side by side with younger Guatemalan’s and wealthy businessmen alike, scaffolding can occur, while many of the critiques of formal education obfuscated. For example, by working with the older population in building the school for the young people you are essentially cutting through the cultural gap while also creating a cultural relevance that can be found in the buildings resonance with the surrounding structures of the developing country.
Formal education is what the established authority thinks you ought to know. And then they go about informing the population about what facts to memorize by installing certain information in their chosen instructors, depending on them, then, on uploading it into the minds of men, so to speak. While on the other hand, informal education is more about learning what you need to know to live in everyday life, where the individual themselves is responsible for obtaining the experiences, knowledge and skills that they will carry with them throughout life. One is based on the causal connections of the external: Formal. One is based on the experiential implications of the internal: Informal. The offspring of the two should guide the individual from the nation that values internal experience by offering a practical curriculum aimed at each individual. External knowledge can be made interesting and relevant to the decedents of an informally educated society if it can be related to the knowledge of the self and the dealings with their world. i.e. the curriculum must be designed with each individual in mind. Treating students as a mass of meat ready to be injected with other peoples’ information is not the way you are going to uplift an informal nation, or any nation for that matter. Which is why I suggest the information that formal learning finds useful be attuned with the demonstration of doing before installing the program, otherwise it will be a waste for everyone involved. I.e. teach the people how to do differently than they do, and you can help them. Teach a person more than they know, and you will confuse them. Teach a person more than they want to know, and they will rebel. Leaving the wealthy philanthropist only one option out of the three, in my opinion, teach them how to do.
the sun rose and so did i, elevate and fly, i do
the first shot a fadeaway, swish
i should have walked away
but i continued to push it
i could not hit a three
my game was always best inside
but i always tried to deny
the further out i got, the less will control i had
the ball would do what i didn't want it to do
this caused an anger reaction inside of me
which only made the shooting worse
then i decided to go inside and stay a while,
giving everything i had to every rebound
expending all with put backs and elevated turnarounds
finally, covered in sweat at this point, i step back outside
this time i had confidence on my side, as i pictured the swish
in my mind's eye.
the ball went up and there was never a doubt, i could then proceed to my leg workout
a girl there, probably 19 years old, 10 years younger than i, wow, i am old, totally eye fvcked me.. it was uncomfortable, she did it twice. this was exceedingly blatant. the problem wasn't that she was not good looking, i just was not there to have sex, that's all. i was thinking about perhaps calling the authorities on her for sexual harassment, but i decided it wasn't worth the effort
i know how to enjoy my life alone too well
it makes people think that i would be fun to be around, and they are right, the only issue is it's not fun for me and i am a selfish prick
i went to school to deliver a paper
here it is if you want to read it
When a baby is born they are born with more synaptic connections than they will ever have in their entire lives. Clusters of connected neurons, clustered in chaos and disjunction, fail to fire and atrophy over a given time. i.e. From the point of birth on, the brain undergoes a series of changes known as neuronal pruning that work to create and maintain a bounded and limited belief structure that will form a personality over time. This system is what is known as education in our world today. Education of the person is basically the byproduct of being born and raised within a given culture. This said personality can be trained using two accepted psychological categories known as formal and informal learning.
In our scenario, as presented, one predicated upon the prospect of a wealthy philanthropist taking the knowledge they value, which is formal in structure and different in relation to the way that it is based on the external knowledge rather than personal life experience, I think it is necessary to notice and accept the fact that there is not one single right way or wrong way, and that both ways must be implemented together in order for the smooth transition from the former to the new to occur.
There are three possible reactions from a situation in which a new system of learning is given to the minds of men so far as I am concerned. One, there will be a small minority of people that are willing to give up what they have just out of spite alone, and accept anything different than what they know, just because of their basic disillusionment. Secondly, there will be a larger cohort of individuals that want to stick to their former way because it is the way that their brains were trained, and to deviate from that pattern of thinking and feeling would cause discomfort Thus we have two polar opposite sides, then we have the middle way, which in Nature always seems to be the correct way, at least for me; so I might subtly suggest to this philanthropist that they incorporate a third way. The third way shall come to be known as the way that combines both to harmonize the polarities, or the neutralizing force; without this force, all endeavoring for future growth will be for not.
Scaffolding is a term that means to build a structure of demonstration as the critical task in leading others into learning new knowledge and models of possible belief systems. In order to create a third way, there needs to be this combination of efforts, the meeting of minds, so to speak, in that the transition moves in harmony with Nature, because that which functions in discord with Nature, creates the appearance of being haunted to our vibratory apparatuses receiving the apparently unascertainable electromagnetic information emanating out from disharmonious structures. And we do not want these presumably poor children, coming from rural backgrounds, being introduced to our westernized technology if it has not been perfected yet, in terms of just building the object in together in harmony with both nature and the man that she brings.
It would be foolish for the philanthropist to neglect the opportunity for the construction of the object of learning itself as being a potential learning instrument that could not only help persuade trust, in that you are willing to compromise and accept that you do not know everything there is to know about how to educate the entire world. Talking to anyone without first taking into account the affinity that they will have for what they know is a waste of everyone’s time. What better way to integrate and create a way in which the explicit curriculum of engineering, math, and construction so prevalent here today in the 21st world is transferred into an informally educated race without offering them something completely foreign and alien feeling? This question begs the idea, at least in my mind of building the school together. Verily, the philanthropist should literally build the school with the native population.
Work with them in designing the structure and constructing the structure in which the learning will take place. Yes, being able to disconnect from the personal is important in realizing the biases and delusions that one can have due to a few faulty beliefs that are not even ours, most of the time, but so too is the personal relationship and the working knowledge that one has with Nature. The relationship with Nature is important. If you take that away from the indigenous people, they will lose their will to care very quickly and descend into degeneration and disgust.
To implement a standardized structure where knowledge is passed on through the verbal medium of a professor or a teacher in an area of the world where individuals value their own knowledge and affinity for the self assembled knowledge they have gained through experience, one must determine first that the former is more important than the latter, which is obviously up for question, as is anything or anyone under the sun. However, if both sides can accept that the other has something useful in which to offer, then the mutual agreement to learn can be made, and the neutralizing force activated.
In this particular framework, by utilizing the older Guatemalan generation in designing and building the structure, working side by side with younger Guatemalan’s and wealthy businessmen alike, scaffolding can occur, while many of the critiques of formal education obfuscated. For example, by working with the older population in building the school for the young people you are essentially cutting through the cultural gap while also creating a cultural relevance that can be found in the buildings resonance with the surrounding structures of the developing country.
Formal education is what the established authority thinks you ought to know. And then they go about informing the population about what facts to memorize by installing certain information in their chosen instructors, depending on them, then, on uploading it into the minds of men, so to speak. While on the other hand, informal education is more about learning what you need to know to live in everyday life, where the individual themselves is responsible for obtaining the experiences, knowledge and skills that they will carry with them throughout life. One is based on the causal connections of the external: Formal. One is based on the experiential implications of the internal: Informal. The offspring of the two should guide the individual from the nation that values internal experience by offering a practical curriculum aimed at each individual. External knowledge can be made interesting and relevant to the decedents of an informally educated society if it can be related to the knowledge of the self and the dealings with their world. i.e. the curriculum must be designed with each individual in mind. Treating students as a mass of meat ready to be injected with other peoples’ information is not the way you are going to uplift an informal nation, or any nation for that matter. Which is why I suggest the information that formal learning finds useful be attuned with the demonstration of doing before installing the program, otherwise it will be a waste for everyone involved. I.e. teach the people how to do differently than they do, and you can help them. Teach a person more than they know, and you will confuse them. Teach a person more than they want to know, and they will rebel. Leaving the wealthy philanthropist only one option out of the three, in my opinion, teach them how to do.
