> Questions, not takes. Borrowing a lens from @humsys, we prioritise being curious about what the book is saying, and about what our bodies and minds are saying

> Questions, not takes. Borrowing a lens from @humsys, we prioritise being curious about what the book is saying, and about what our bodies and minds are saying in response, over judging the book or using the book to judge ourselves. Evaluation is not the answer. This is so key. When I transitioned from great-books-liberal-arts to big-university-science-journal-clubs, the difference in approach was staggering. In the former, we read for understanding, to try to grok what the author was trying to say. In the latter, the culture was to crap on the authors and show how smart you are by criticizing experiments and methods and citing contradictory research. I understand that critique is important for progress, but as a new student just trying to figure out which way was up, I was just trying to understand, and the culture at my university certainly didn’t promote that. And honestly, there is more humility in the first approach, and I like that.