Tl;dr?

Tl;dr?

Attached: 09E99355-F141-439E-A10A-AC9B24EB3E7A.jpg (324x500, 88K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=GlKL_EpnSp8
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

take notes

reading technical books the same way you'd read fiction books is stupid

If you were to actually read the book you'd know he mentions this.

I did read the book, I know he mentions it, which is why I'm passing the information along to the OP as per the topic of the thread. Dummy.

I got this book but as I got further into it I realized this is for fictionfags and people who never had to learn critical reading skills in college. I'll save it for when my kids are teens and need to learn how to learn.

based

>this book
>for fictionfags
This book focuses mostly on reading nonfiction. Seems like you either only read a couple pages or are in dire need of reading this book again.

>Read all material outside of main text
>Skim through main text in random jumps
>Speed read what chapters or sections seem most important (How? Just scan it, only TRY to comprehend it)
>Research any unfamiliar words at this point

>Skim individual chapters right before reading them normally
>Read regularly the chapters or sections of the main text.
>At this point you're only taking notes INSIDE the book. Specifically, underline unknown words, important sentences, paragraphs and circle the page number of important pages.
>Refuse to reread lines during this phase. It's not from the book but somewhere else. NOT FROM HOW TO READ A BOOK
>After each page, close book and recall main ideas. This isn't from book either I got this from somewhere else. Specifically Learning To Learn by Oakley

>After completion of section, return and re-read while noting OUTSIDE the book. Write the page number and, in most cases, write a revision (shortened version or full re-write) of important stuff from the main text

>Once a book is 1/4th read, begin doing the exercises presented within the book. (Not from How To Read A Book)
>At half way point, write the following; What is it about? What are it's parts and what is their relation? What is being proposed, discussed, or questioned? What is the inference?
>At 75 percent completion, begin re-teaching the material. Write up an explanation like a teacher. Speak it out loud. (Not from How To Read A Book)
>After completion of the book write the following; What are its key terms and words? What are it's most important sentences? What are it's most important paragraphs? What was the result?
After all that stuff, including taking notes, then
>Rewrite important text in own words. List questions that authors ask. (In history books it's often "What happened here at this time? In a math book it's "How do we solve this?" or "What do these mathematical symbols mean?" >List answers to the questions that authors give. Examine disagreements between authors. Attempt to negotiate the argument through writing it out
Congrats you've fully read a book.

Attached: adler.jpg (180x279, 10K)

But he specifically says that technical books and fictional books should be read differently. He briefly mentions that Dante's inferno could be read like a philosophy or that Plato's dialogues could be read like a drama but that was only to express that the same book could be read in different ways. You must have misunderstood him.

>But he specifically says that technical books and fictional books should be read differently.
That's what I said though

>this is for fictionfags
You must have not even gotten 1/4th of the way through the book. When he mentions "the classics" he isn't strictly referring to literary fiction. There is a part in the book where he lists off plenty of philosophers, political philosophers, economists, and scientists which he considers to be classics. If I can find the excerpt easily I'll link it here.

>reading technical books the same way you'd read fiction books is stupid
This is what you said. The way you presented your post seemed to be a retort against the author's belief, or maybe against somebody else's belief. I don't know anybody who believes that literature and science textbooks should be read in the same way.

>But suppose that we could resuscitate the primary teachers of all times. Suppose there were a college or university in which the faculty was thus composed. Herdotus and Thucydides taught the history of Greece, and Gibbon lectured on the fall of Rome. Plato and St. Thomas gave a course in metaphysics together; Francis Bacon and John Stuart Mill discussed the logic of science; Aristotle, Spinoza, and Immanuel Kant shared the platform on moral problems; Machivelli, Thomas Hobbes, and John Locke talked about politics. You could take a series of courses in mathematics form Euclid, Descartes, Riemann, and Cantor, with Bertrand Russell and A.N. Whitehead added at the end. You could listen to St. Augustine and William James talk about the nature of man and the human mind, with hperhaps Jacques Maritain to comment on the lectures. Harvey discussed the circulation of the blood, and Galen, Claude Bernard, and Haldane taught general physiology. Lectures on physics enlisted the talent of Galileo and Newton, Faraday and Maxwell, Planck and Einstein. Boyle, dalton, Lavosier, and Pasteur taught chemistry. Darwin and Mendel gave the main lectures on evolution and genetics, with supporting talks by Bateson and T.H. Morgan. Aristotle, sir Philip Sidney, Wordsworth, and Shelley discussed the nature of poetry and the principle of literary criticism, with T.S. Eliot thrown in to boot. In economics, the lecturers were by Adam smith, Ricardo, Karl Marx, and Marshall. Boas discussed the human race and its races, Thorsetin Veblen and John Dewey, the economic and political problems of American democracy, and Lenin lectured on communism. Etienne Gilson analyzed the history of philosophy, and Poincaré and Duhem, the history of science. There might even be lectures on art by Leonardo da Vinci, and a lecture on Leonardo by Freud. Hobbes and Locke might discuss Ogden and Richards, Korzybski and Stuart Chase. A much larger faculty than this is imaginable, but this will suffice. Would anyone want to go to any other university, if he could get into this one?

This was on page 31, btw.

>your post seemed to be a retort against the author's belief, or maybe against somebody else's belief
It wasn't

he literally just replied to OP's question

That wasn't the main point of the book. He failed to answer OP's question if that were the case.

Just admit you have autism and can't infer things from a simple post.

>be illiterate
>be sad because I can't read
>read "How to read a book"
>"don't understand anything because I can't read
>mfw

Attached: 1559625037160.jpg (482x427, 27K)

Read word
Repeat word
Think word
Thank for come to ted talk

Attached: DbgRlTnV0AAP_5P.jpg (582x449, 40K)

Imagine how glorious it would be to go to a university where Da Vinci teaches on art and Freud talks about Da Vinci?

Oh God. This would be a dream.

It would be extremely enlightening

4 u

Very good :)

>be literate
>open a book
>read

>forgets what happened five pages ago
>has a brain aneurysm

>skim
>take notes
>compare
there

Thanks user for being a good boy
We love you

GoT is the best fiction

>Tl;dr
Read a motherfucking book
youtube.com/watch?v=GlKL_EpnSp8

Attached: read a book.png (1280x800, 502K)

Retard

Before you do this, you need to read "How to Read "How to Read a Book""

Yes. It's a real book, but it's not online. My uni library has it.

read book gud

What is it with the phenomenon of books that tell you how to do stuff before you do it? Read some books for kids or young adults if you're too fucking retarded to know how to read a book until you get better and can read the stuff you want.

This is a board for discussing literature.

yep

Baste

This

these niggers read books by other rapper about how blacks were kangz

He doesn't care. OP is simply baiting, and this thread should be pruned.

take love