If you're a passive reader, you are literally wasting your time by reading books, because you're just going to forget everything other than broad generalities in a couple of months, and you're not really gaining anything by reading in the first place anyway.
Active readers think about what they read, they take notes, they write on margins, they develop their opinions on writing, they deconstruct the author's style, they perform active recall and memory techniques, they think about how this passage or that chapter could have been better and develop their own creative intuition. When you do that, every single book you read changes you forever!
 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
|
Both passive and active readers can read the subtext here. I am sorry about the state of your life, you have my sympathies.
You are literally wasting your time reading books. Schopenhauer and Tolstoy won't actually help you do anything other than appear smug on Vietnamese rice cultivation forums. If you gained any value in your life from your hobby you wouldn't feel the need to police how other people read in order to cast yourself as some sort of elite reader.
>If you gained any value in your life from your hobby you wouldn't feel the need to police how other people read
This is exactly the opposite of how literally anything works
I'd swipe left
True, but I think a combination of both is best, active passivity. Reading a book with the sole intention of making notes is a pretty surefire way to kill your enjoyment. I also think "active recall" and "memory techniques" are a waste of time, they might be useful for exams where you are told what you are being tested on but most of the time you don't know what exactly is going to be important to remember from a book, so cramming boring things like plot summaries are pretty pointless. You are more likely to remember something in the long-term if it's something you genuinely want to remember, or something that proved useful heuristically as you read and responded to other books, rather than if it's part of a larger store of useless info you forced yourself to remember.
You're half right, there's things that you need to memorize in a book, for example to learn how to program, obviously the practice is necesary, but when you're reading a programmer book, you need to memorize a lot things, and if you you just read you'll be frustrated, you need to be verry active. And just in philosophy and novels you don't really need to memorize.
There's a difference between read for fun and for to learn. Stupid people just read for fun.
>gaining anything by reading
Based capitalist mindrape
>Active readers think about what they read, they take notes, they write on margins, they develop their opinions on writing, they deconstruct the author's style, they perform active recall and memory techniques, they think about how this passage or that chapter could have been better and develop their own creative intuition.
Still a waste of time
>you're just going to forget everything other than broad generalities in a couple of months
oh no then I'll have to reread that classic work that people recommend be reread
How do I become an "active" reader
Care more, for whatever reason that works
stick your dick in the book
"How to read a book" by mortimer addler, the op get that idea from that book
MUH BOOOOOKS
Writing in the margins is demonic
Have a spare notebook. Don't soil the book itself.
We live in an era where mass printing is cheap. Obviously keeping a separate notebook has advantages but assuming you own the copy, you're not depriving anyone of a pristine edition, and in fact you're adding marks to it that are unique to that copy. I collect used books that are full of highlighted portions, underlining, margin notes, etc. The original owner is long dead but I have bits of pieces of their legacy, however small, that I wouldn't have if I had a new copy or an unmarked antique.
>Writing in the margins is demonic
consumerist fetishization
I read for fun
Yeah, I fricked her
Passive when reading, active in bed. For you it's the other way round. homosexual.
not him but that doesn't make any sense
He doesn't sleep because he tries to remember what he read.
I agree with you op, but you need to be specific, because there are a lot of stupid people out there. You're talking active reading for to learn. And stupid people read novels and learning books in the same way, they just know novels and they think that they're better than people who watch movies. I prefer to watch a movie tho read the fricking harry potter book
This is a true statement. I also tend to forget the details of whatever nonfiction I was reading with time
I annotate very single book i read, including individual short stories and even individual poems. I kind of wish i could read without doing all of that, but whenever i try to i feel like i am missing out and that i should write down that quote or this theme.eventually i'll reach a balance of comprehension and speed.
You don't need to do that much, if i took a bit less time on taking notes (it almost takes half of my reading time) i would have read a lot more by now
Don't care. I read for fun.
Wow looks at this busy idiot taking notes. Guess what? Your opinion is worthless. Literature is an objective mean to access knowledge. If you're not boarding with a proper literally theory your studies are pointless but hey at least you're achieving to look like a huge moron which is your most sincere endgoal. Congrats for playing academia. gay.
Is that guy a pseud or no?
>watches Benjamin McEvoy once
It's funny how many dumb statements there are here. I find it's like this anywhere that people gather for "smart" hobbies. Way more dumb statements. I don't get it. People's reach exceeding their grasp? Attempting to show off? Overinflated egos?