6 ms·

A note on reading big, difficult books

146 points by MaysonL 7y ago

__ka 7y ago
Reading big difficult books is offered as a way to teach reasoning from first principles. On how to go about it: "We have our recommended ten-stage process for reading such big books: 1. Figure out beforehand what the author is trying to accomplish in the book. 2. Orient yourself by becoming the kind of reader the book is directed at—the kind of person with whom the arguments would resonate. 3. Read through the book actively, taking notes. 4. “Steelman” the argument, reworking it so that you find it as convincing and clear as you can possibly make it. 5. Find someone else—usually a roommate—and bore them to death by making them listen to you set out your “steelmanned” version of the argument. 6. Go back over the book again, giving it a sympathetic but not credulous reading 7. Then you will be in a good position to figure out what the weak points of this strongest-possible argument version might be. 8. Test the major assertions and interpretations against reality: do they actually make sense of and in the context of the world as it truly is? 9. Decide what you think of the whole. 10. Then comes the task of cementing your interpretation, your reading, into your mind so that it becomes part of your intellectual panoply for the future."
commandlinefan 7y ago
I thought when I was younger I couldn't read big, difficult books and (since it never occurred to me that there might be people smarter than me) I concluded that nobody could read big, difficult books. It was quite an epiphany when I actually really forced myself to get through one - and once I had pushed past that first barrier, it's gotten easier and easier to read really meaningful books.
- hogFeast 7y ago
  Most of these books are very poorly written. Smith's Wealth of Nations, as an example, is mostly very well-written and abysmally bad through the minority (Marx/Keynes probably the opposite). And meaning isn't really constant either, you read something and then come back to parts of it.
  - commandlinefan 7y ago
    That's a good point - when I think of big, difficult books, I think of Knuth, or SICP (or the bible)... the author's examples are more along the lines of philosophy.
  - chasedehan 7y ago
    Keynes is known as being one of the best Economist writers of all time.
    - hogFeast 7y ago
      First, no he isn't. Second, the book we are talking about (again) is a textbook (this view isn't remotely controversial btw - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employment,_Interest_and_Money#Observations_on_its_readability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employme...). Economic Consequences of Peace is very good, a lot of his stuff aimed at the general public (Persuasion/How to Pay for the War) is good...General Theory is not.
msie 7y ago
6-9 hours per book seems impressive to me.
- jkingsbery 7y ago
  That was my reaction too. Maybe this is an argument in favor or reading slower?
- wyre 7y ago
  Me too. At a page/minute for 360-540 pages. Sounds realistic, but not for difficult reading unless your are already good at it, or at least good at speed reading.
tunesmith 7y ago
He certainly makes Wealth Of Nations sound compelling. I haven't read it before and want to see how it's structured as an actual argument with premises leading towards conclusions.
- calpaterson 7y ago
  It's fun but the English is not easy. Smith has some cool insights (which must have seemed much more novel at the time) and great skill at imparting them. I only read book 1(and the theory of moral sentiments).
- arafa 7y ago
  As suggested, it's an excellent but difficult read. But like many such books (say The Beginning of Infinity), they reverberate in my mind for years afterwards, with interesting inferences and callbacks. That said, you might skip the digression on silver (ugh).
daly 7y ago
My research involves reading "big, difficult books" all the time. It usually takes me 5 books on the same subject to get a firm grip on the subject. The first book gives me the important words. The second book gives me the paragraphs that show how the words are used. The third book strings together the ideas. The fourth book shows how the ideas are used. The fifth book makes sense and I get a grip on the subject. Breaking into a new area where you don't even understand the words, such as in biology, is a very time consuming task.
- SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
  Considering it seems like you're just building up your understanding one step at a time, wouldn't you also be able to read the same book 5 times?
  - DelightOne 7y ago
    Perspectives make the picture. None is complete, and all have assumptions.
    - SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
      But that's not how the process was described. The first book is apparently only for vocabulary, the second for diction (not sure about a better term for this), third for basic concepts, fourth for application, and then finally a holistic understanding of the subject. If the case was looking at various ideas, I'd agree with you, but if the first book only "gives me the important words" and the second "gives me the paragraphs that show how the words are used" then it's not really giving you different perspectives as you're still very much in the "understanding what the book is talking about" phase.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - TeMPOraL 7y ago
        I think this list could be written as "after finishing book one, I have the important words; after finishing book two, I have a grasp on how these words are used", etc. I.e. the process is additive, each book lets you tease out another layer of understanding, and it's best if these are different books, because then there are more things for your brain to diff, making the understanding process faster.
crazygringo 7y ago
Here's the thing: most books, for most people, don't need to be absorbed or understood in their entirety. If you're a professional in your field and ought to be expected to be able to write a similar book? Then sure, you should understand it 100%. But this is a very rare circumstance for most people. For most books, the reality is that you only need to know the Big Idea and its main justifications. Or that, depending on your needs, there are a few additional details that might come in handy. But that reading the whole book a) really ensures you'll remember the big idea and its main justifications, in a way that a one-page summary you might totally forget later, and b) lets you skim for specific details that might be especially relevant to you personally. You shouldn't generally feel guilty that you don't remember enough from a book. You're not supposed to. (Again, unless you have a very specific and necessary professional reason to.) Fully understanding a book might take 100 hours. In that time, you could read 10 other books in 10 hours each and get the main gist of each. Which one do you think is going to be more productive for your life?
- jp42 7y ago
  This -> 'most books, for most people, don't need to be absorbed or understood in their entirety.'
- m463 7y ago
  I think human nature/marketing is at work here. If someone wrote the core concepts of a big idea on one sheet of paper, nobody would pay $14.95 to read it. But if it is wrapped in a 400 page book, it would be reasonable, or even a bargain to charge $14.95. Same reason meals at US restaurants are getting bigger and bigger. People don't need meals that huge, but...
  - yocheckitdawg 7y ago
    I don't think this is quite fair, explanatory examples can be very helpful at cementing the point or persuading the doubtful. What does shit me is the amount of 300+ page books that have at least 50-100 pages of unnecessary fluff. Giving 1 story or example to illustrate your point is one thing, but stacking 4-5 dull dull DULL stories is just a chore to get through.
hogFeast 7y ago
This isn't really how most people should read books. You aren't reading a book to learn arguments like a parrot. The meaning of all the books he mentions has changed over time, and you won't have the same understanding the second time you read it (i.e. years after, re-reading it straight after is pointless...it is robotic). Also, just generally I think the structure of the course is bad. Reading three books cover-to-cover is basically pointless (Keynes esp. so as it was a textbook, I think he would turn in his grave if he thought people were being subjected to this, both Marx/Smith are very dry in areas too). It would be far better to look at the key ideas across more periods and get students to engage directly with those ideas...which is why similar courses in philosophy, theology, etc. do this.
- jkingsbery 7y ago
  I agree, and I don't think I appreciated this point enough when I was in school. In high school or college, I would do literally what is said here - get assigned a book, and read the book. In my professional reading, or also hobby reading as an adult, I would never approach learning a topic that way. As an adult, I supplement my reading of a text with secondary sources about the text (things people have written about the text, wikipedia articles about the text or things in it, etc.). To take an example of an edition that does this really well: the "Landmark" series for Thucydides [1] and Herodotus [2] both qualify as "big, difficult" books, but the book comes with additional secondary sources that aid in the reading to orient the newbie in how to approach the text. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Thucydides-Comprehensive-Guide-Peloponnesian/dp/0684827905 https://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Thucydides-Comprehensive-Gui... [2] https://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Herodotus-Histories-Robert-Strassler/dp/1400031141 https://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Herodotus-Histories-Robert-S...
  - hogFeast 7y ago
    Yep, tbh it is kind of wasteful to just go into Thucydides...like you read it, and 95% of it will go over your head (that is a particularly good choice of example because it is at the nexus of sp many important subjects...if you just come in without anything...it is just a normal book). And, imo, dipping between books is far more effective. Even at university, you are given a few sources and you move between them but it isn't natural. Going between sources naturally at your own pace and based on your own interest/understanding will build far more actual knowledge than trying to shortcut your way there (and yes, Wiki is great for that). It is a shame that doesn't fit into some kind of formal education system...definitely in a subject like history, the end result would be far better work from academics.
smallcharleston 7y ago
Realizing you don’t understand the point comes from understanding the point more than you did before you read the book.
lcall 7y ago
Skimming is helpful, especially I think if in a structured way: reading the beginning and the end first, then deciding if more is worth it, and if so, reading the first sentence (or so, maybe last) of each paragraph, and then deciding if more is needed. The optimal approach might vary sometimes, but I have found this helpful even for some fiction (to relax, but get thru boring parts faster), and to get through more material generally, because things are of very unequal worth. Also news articles tend to put the most important things at the beginning so there is less reason to read the end, or anything once you get far enough to answer your purpose.

146 points by MaysonL 7y ago

__ka 7y ago

Reading big difficult books is offered as a way to teach reasoning from first principles. On how to go about it: "We have our recommended ten-stage process for reading such big books: 1. Figure out beforehand what the author is trying to accomplish in the book. 2. Orient yourself by becoming the kind of reader the book is directed at—the kind of person with whom the arguments would resonate. 3. Read through the book actively, taking notes. 4. “Steelman” the argument, reworking it so that you find it as convincing and clear as you can possibly make it. 5. Find someone else—usually a roommate—and bore them to death by making them listen to you set out your “steelmanned” version of the argument. 6. Go back over the book again, giving it a sympathetic but not credulous reading 7. Then you will be in a good position to figure out what the weak points of this strongest-possible argument version might be. 8. Test the major assertions and interpretations against reality: do they actually make sense of and in the context of the world as it truly is? 9. Decide what you think of the whole. 10. Then comes the task of cementing your interpretation, your reading, into your mind so that it becomes part of your intellectual panoply for the future."

commandlinefan 7y ago

I thought when I was younger I couldn't read big, difficult books and (since it never occurred to me that there might be people smarter than me) I concluded that nobody could read big, difficult books. It was quite an epiphany when I actually really forced myself to get through one - and once I had pushed past that first barrier, it's gotten easier and easier to read really meaningful books.

hogFeast 7y ago
Most of these books are very poorly written. Smith's Wealth of Nations, as an example, is mostly very well-written and abysmally bad through the minority (Marx/Keynes probably the opposite). And meaning isn't really constant either, you read something and then come back to parts of it.
- commandlinefan 7y ago
  That's a good point - when I think of big, difficult books, I think of Knuth, or SICP (or the bible)... the author's examples are more along the lines of philosophy.
- chasedehan 7y ago
  Keynes is known as being one of the best Economist writers of all time.
  - hogFeast 7y ago
    First, no he isn't. Second, the book we are talking about (again) is a textbook (this view isn't remotely controversial btw - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employment,_Interest_and_Money#Observations_on_its_readability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employme...). Economic Consequences of Peace is very good, a lot of his stuff aimed at the general public (Persuasion/How to Pay for the War) is good...General Theory is not.

msie 7y ago

6-9 hours per book seems impressive to me.

jkingsbery 7y ago
That was my reaction too. Maybe this is an argument in favor or reading slower?
wyre 7y ago
Me too. At a page/minute for 360-540 pages. Sounds realistic, but not for difficult reading unless your are already good at it, or at least good at speed reading.

tunesmith 7y ago

He certainly makes Wealth Of Nations sound compelling. I haven't read it before and want to see how it's structured as an actual argument with premises leading towards conclusions.

calpaterson 7y ago
It's fun but the English is not easy. Smith has some cool insights (which must have seemed much more novel at the time) and great skill at imparting them. I only read book 1(and the theory of moral sentiments).
arafa 7y ago
As suggested, it's an excellent but difficult read. But like many such books (say The Beginning of Infinity), they reverberate in my mind for years afterwards, with interesting inferences and callbacks. That said, you might skip the digression on silver (ugh).

daly 7y ago

My research involves reading "big, difficult books" all the time. It usually takes me 5 books on the same subject to get a firm grip on the subject. The first book gives me the important words. The second book gives me the paragraphs that show how the words are used. The third book strings together the ideas. The fourth book shows how the ideas are used. The fifth book makes sense and I get a grip on the subject. Breaking into a new area where you don't even understand the words, such as in biology, is a very time consuming task.

SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
Considering it seems like you're just building up your understanding one step at a time, wouldn't you also be able to read the same book 5 times?
- DelightOne 7y ago
  Perspectives make the picture. None is complete, and all have assumptions.
  - SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
    But that's not how the process was described. The first book is apparently only for vocabulary, the second for diction (not sure about a better term for this), third for basic concepts, fourth for application, and then finally a holistic understanding of the subject. If the case was looking at various ideas, I'd agree with you, but if the first book only "gives me the important words" and the second "gives me the paragraphs that show how the words are used" then it's not really giving you different perspectives as you're still very much in the "understanding what the book is talking about" phase.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      I think this list could be written as "after finishing book one, I have the important words; after finishing book two, I have a grasp on how these words are used", etc. I.e. the process is additive, each book lets you tease out another layer of understanding, and it's best if these are different books, because then there are more things for your brain to diff, making the understanding process faster.

crazygringo 7y ago

Here's the thing: most books, for most people, don't need to be absorbed or understood in their entirety. If you're a professional in your field and ought to be expected to be able to write a similar book? Then sure, you should understand it 100%. But this is a very rare circumstance for most people. For most books, the reality is that you only need to know the Big Idea and its main justifications. Or that, depending on your needs, there are a few additional details that might come in handy. But that reading the whole book a) really ensures you'll remember the big idea and its main justifications, in a way that a one-page summary you might totally forget later, and b) lets you skim for specific details that might be especially relevant to you personally. You shouldn't generally feel guilty that you don't remember enough from a book. You're not supposed to. (Again, unless you have a very specific and necessary professional reason to.) Fully understanding a book might take 100 hours. In that time, you could read 10 other books in 10 hours each and get the main gist of each. Which one do you think is going to be more productive for your life?

jp42 7y ago
This -> 'most books, for most people, don't need to be absorbed or understood in their entirety.'
m463 7y ago
I think human nature/marketing is at work here. If someone wrote the core concepts of a big idea on one sheet of paper, nobody would pay $14.95 to read it. But if it is wrapped in a 400 page book, it would be reasonable, or even a bargain to charge $14.95. Same reason meals at US restaurants are getting bigger and bigger. People don't need meals that huge, but...
- yocheckitdawg 7y ago
  I don't think this is quite fair, explanatory examples can be very helpful at cementing the point or persuading the doubtful. What does shit me is the amount of 300+ page books that have at least 50-100 pages of unnecessary fluff. Giving 1 story or example to illustrate your point is one thing, but stacking 4-5 dull dull DULL stories is just a chore to get through.

hogFeast 7y ago

This isn't really how most people should read books. You aren't reading a book to learn arguments like a parrot. The meaning of all the books he mentions has changed over time, and you won't have the same understanding the second time you read it (i.e. years after, re-reading it straight after is pointless...it is robotic). Also, just generally I think the structure of the course is bad. Reading three books cover-to-cover is basically pointless (Keynes esp. so as it was a textbook, I think he would turn in his grave if he thought people were being subjected to this, both Marx/Smith are very dry in areas too). It would be far better to look at the key ideas across more periods and get students to engage directly with those ideas...which is why similar courses in philosophy, theology, etc. do this.

jkingsbery 7y ago
I agree, and I don't think I appreciated this point enough when I was in school. In high school or college, I would do literally what is said here - get assigned a book, and read the book. In my professional reading, or also hobby reading as an adult, I would never approach learning a topic that way. As an adult, I supplement my reading of a text with secondary sources about the text (things people have written about the text, wikipedia articles about the text or things in it, etc.). To take an example of an edition that does this really well: the "Landmark" series for Thucydides [1] and Herodotus [2] both qualify as "big, difficult" books, but the book comes with additional secondary sources that aid in the reading to orient the newbie in how to approach the text. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Thucydides-Comprehensive-Guide-Peloponnesian/dp/0684827905 https://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Thucydides-Comprehensive-Gui... [2] https://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Herodotus-Histories-Robert-Strassler/dp/1400031141 https://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Herodotus-Histories-Robert-S...
- hogFeast 7y ago
  Yep, tbh it is kind of wasteful to just go into Thucydides...like you read it, and 95% of it will go over your head (that is a particularly good choice of example because it is at the nexus of sp many important subjects...if you just come in without anything...it is just a normal book). And, imo, dipping between books is far more effective. Even at university, you are given a few sources and you move between them but it isn't natural. Going between sources naturally at your own pace and based on your own interest/understanding will build far more actual knowledge than trying to shortcut your way there (and yes, Wiki is great for that). It is a shame that doesn't fit into some kind of formal education system...definitely in a subject like history, the end result would be far better work from academics.

smallcharleston 7y ago

Realizing you don’t understand the point comes from understanding the point more than you did before you read the book.

lcall 7y ago

Skimming is helpful, especially I think if in a structured way: reading the beginning and the end first, then deciding if more is worth it, and if so, reading the first sentence (or so, maybe last) of each paragraph, and then deciding if more is needed. The optimal approach might vary sometimes, but I have found this helpful even for some fiction (to relax, but get thru boring parts faster), and to get through more material generally, because things are of very unequal worth. Also news articles tend to put the most important things at the beginning so there is less reason to read the end, or anything once you get far enough to answer your purpose.