5 ms·

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.
  - SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
    Totally fair, but given that you only pulled out the basics the first time through the book, why not go through it again to see what the book has to say about those basics? You clearly didn't get everything out of the first book on the first run through.
    - jacobolus 7y ago
      Sure, after you have skimmed 2 or 3 other books, go back and read the first one more carefully again. * * * I strongly endorse this method. Doesn‘t have to be books either. Want to learn about some cutting edge research topic in a highly technical field, but don’t want to first go through 3 years of grad-student-level coursework? Jump right in, but don’t start with a textbook or a survey paper. Start by skimming 10 or 20 (or more) arbitrary papers about related topics. Don’t worry that many terms seem like nonsense. Try to get the gist (to the extent possible) of each paper quickly. Let the methods and terminology wash over you. After that go back and read the survey paper, which should hopefully start to make sense after prior exposure to some of its ideas. Then if there are parts of that which still don’t make sense, go find the relevant textbook(s). It’s not worth reading research papers in an unfamiliar community too carefully right off the bat; most of the papers are garbage and without some exposure/context it’s sometimes hard to tell which ones. Sweating all of the details before you have the right high level impression is going to confuse you and waste your time.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      As I said - picking a different book lets your brain make a diff. You get to see words/ideas used in different contexts, by different authors. It's like trying to approximate a relationship between a set of points. It's better to look at many points than to try and sample the same point multiple times.

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.
- SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
  Totally fair, but given that you only pulled out the basics the first time through the book, why not go through it again to see what the book has to say about those basics? You clearly didn't get everything out of the first book on the first run through.
  - jacobolus 7y ago
    Sure, after you have skimmed 2 or 3 other books, go back and read the first one more carefully again. * * * I strongly endorse this method. Doesn‘t have to be books either. Want to learn about some cutting edge research topic in a highly technical field, but don’t want to first go through 3 years of grad-student-level coursework? Jump right in, but don’t start with a textbook or a survey paper. Start by skimming 10 or 20 (or more) arbitrary papers about related topics. Don’t worry that many terms seem like nonsense. Try to get the gist (to the extent possible) of each paper quickly. Let the methods and terminology wash over you. After that go back and read the survey paper, which should hopefully start to make sense after prior exposure to some of its ideas. Then if there are parts of that which still don’t make sense, go find the relevant textbook(s). It’s not worth reading research papers in an unfamiliar community too carefully right off the bat; most of the papers are garbage and without some exposure/context it’s sometimes hard to tell which ones. Sweating all of the details before you have the right high level impression is going to confuse you and waste your time.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    As I said - picking a different book lets your brain make a diff. You get to see words/ideas used in different contexts, by different authors. It's like trying to approximate a relationship between a set of points. It's better to look at many points than to try and sample the same point multiple times.