4 ms·
I don't buy speedreading. I tried different schools but if I really want to grasp a subject I need to read it carefully, often more than once. Unless, of course
by oscardelben 17y ago
I don't buy speedreading. I tried different schools but if I really want to grasp a subject I need to read it carefully, often more than once. Unless, of course, I'm reading just for the sake of reading.
I believe that with speed reading you are naturally ported to skip parts and words that you don't understand, but that way you are learning nothing new.
I'm still able to read 50 books per year (1 book per week), with an average of 5 hours of reading per week (sometimes less), but definitely not by speed reading.
- f_sav 17y agoTo me it really depends on the type of material. Obviously if I'm reading a math paper, I may re-read the same sentence half a dozen times, so it doesn't apply. But there are clearly cases where I want to read as fast as possible, without necessarily skipping. E.g. scanning the news, or reading a novel in a shallow fashion. (But yeah the blog post talks about learning techniques, so I don't know how relevant it is)
- timwiseman 17y agoAs a math grad student and professional DBA most of the reading I do is technical, and there I have to read it slowly, often stop and think, and often reread after stopping to think. When I do read fiction or the news, I read much faster and I can skim for key words easily. I have never tried formal speed reading techniques, but I suspect I could apply them in a context like that. So I agree, type of material makes all the difference in the world.
- riffraff 17y agoI never tried speedreading, but since a friend of mine surprised me by telling me she read 62 books last year my new year decision was to read more. I am keeping up with one a week until now and I am no genius yet I have a job, friends and girlfriend, so if studying how to read faster brings this little improvement, I'm baffled.