4 ms·

An active reading habit (of books) is one of the most reliable ways to achieve wisdom. Why? - Books require a "Goldilocks" amount of sustained, slow effort giv

An active reading habit (of books) is one of the most reliable ways to achieve wisdom. Why? - Books require a "Goldilocks" amount of sustained, slow effort given to one topic. Not too costly to pursue that it is a bodily harm risk, but not trivial either in terms of time and attention investment. This slows down the frenetic nature of a mind that latches onto heuristics. - By being exposed to different well-formed ideas (especially if you disagree) widens perspective in ways lived experience can't. A reader is uniquely exposed to ideas from other times in human history, from people who are long gone. - A reader develops a practical trust in themselves, particularly in that they know they take auto didacticism seriously, and won't shy away from intellectual challenges, which the world presents constantly. As such, they make better judgements. People often think that being booksmart is having your head filled with useless facts, but this is almost opposite from reality.

taylorlapeyre 2y ago
Yes! I often put it like this: education/reading is about formation, not just information.
adamc 2y ago
I think this makes sense, because, in general, wisdom requires gathering experience and reflecting on it (well in advance of any questions). Reading is an activity that promotes that.
microflash 2y ago
> People often think that being booksmart is having your head filled with useless facts, but this is almost opposite from reality. Indeed. Reading a lot of books does not mean things are retained by mind for a faithful recall. In fact, a lot of detail is lost during the course of reading and afterward. The things that stick are what relate to our experiences, beliefs or aspirations.
freefaler 2y ago
My personal hunch is that the more you read, the better your model of reality is. If you have an interest to a particular time/topic and you've read almost all you can find about it you have a better understanding of "something" from a different point of views. Like read all about a particular event in WW2 from all the sides and on different levels (military, economy, social, political). A term coined by Mortimer Adler is "Syntopical Reading", but by deeply exploring a simple concept you can build your knowledge on how the world works. Several benefits from deeply knowing a limited subject: - when you listen people who are "well known" talking stupid shit about a topic you understand that the info you're getting is not always that high and you need to check multiple sources (if you need to make a decision) - you understand complexity better and "survival" bias - you can even bet for fun on a prediction market when you see a stupid narrative getting puffed up (I've made around 1k after the CrowdStrike bet that it wasn't a "hack") But the biggest win is to put more knowledge on your "tree" you've grown from a simple subject to related areas. This mental skill is applicable in almost all complex situations and this might be related to "the wisdom" you're talking about. The downside is the more you know, the more cynical you get with your sources :)
- wenc 2y ago
  I think reading is necessary but insufficient for wisdom. Reading lets you acquire the experiences that you personally cannot live out in your own life. It does provide leverage in that way. However syntopical reading isn’t sufficient to produce good work. Mortimer Adler himself tried doing it (I believe the Syntopicon was a product of syntopical reading) but those works never did well and were soon forgotten. Books encode canonical knowledge and this works in established domains but in a domains without much existing knowledge, taking action in perturbing the world actually produces more useful knowledge. This is why in these spaces it’s important to test ideas in reality and learn from them, rather than only constructing mental models. (We should strive to do both instead of the just latter) Action often produces more information than reading alone. Having ideas is often the easy part — executing on them is the hard part. If Mortimer Adler actually had some gauge on the market before pursuing the very ambitious multi year effort of producing the Synopticon, he might have produced something noteworthy (which he did with the much smaller experiment “How to read a book.” To me, wisdom isn’t about thinking rightly (which is what rationalists hold) but about being able to make good decisions with good judgment.
glimshe 2y ago
Reading is very important, but hardly sufficient. One problem with over reliance on books is that your world view will be molded by your reading list. You correctly pointed out the importance of reading material you disagree with, but there are often many contradictory ways to disagree with any specific world view. Books must be mixed with a close relationship to people and the world. The world itself can be seen as the "ultimate book", thus the importance of the so-called "school of life". I would never follow someone whose wisdom was built solely or mostly by reading books. No education is complete, or even half complete, without a thorough and direct exposure to different cultures, countries and their people.

taylorlapeyre 2y ago

Yes! I often put it like this: education/reading is about formation, not just information.

adamc 2y ago

I think this makes sense, because, in general, wisdom requires gathering experience and reflecting on it (well in advance of any questions). Reading is an activity that promotes that.

microflash 2y ago

> People often think that being booksmart is having your head filled with useless facts, but this is almost opposite from reality. Indeed. Reading a lot of books does not mean things are retained by mind for a faithful recall. In fact, a lot of detail is lost during the course of reading and afterward. The things that stick are what relate to our experiences, beliefs or aspirations.

freefaler 2y ago

My personal hunch is that the more you read, the better your model of reality is. If you have an interest to a particular time/topic and you've read almost all you can find about it you have a better understanding of "something" from a different point of views. Like read all about a particular event in WW2 from all the sides and on different levels (military, economy, social, political). A term coined by Mortimer Adler is "Syntopical Reading", but by deeply exploring a simple concept you can build your knowledge on how the world works. Several benefits from deeply knowing a limited subject: - when you listen people who are "well known" talking stupid shit about a topic you understand that the info you're getting is not always that high and you need to check multiple sources (if you need to make a decision) - you understand complexity better and "survival" bias - you can even bet for fun on a prediction market when you see a stupid narrative getting puffed up (I've made around 1k after the CrowdStrike bet that it wasn't a "hack") But the biggest win is to put more knowledge on your "tree" you've grown from a simple subject to related areas. This mental skill is applicable in almost all complex situations and this might be related to "the wisdom" you're talking about. The downside is the more you know, the more cynical you get with your sources :)

wenc 2y ago
I think reading is necessary but insufficient for wisdom. Reading lets you acquire the experiences that you personally cannot live out in your own life. It does provide leverage in that way. However syntopical reading isn’t sufficient to produce good work. Mortimer Adler himself tried doing it (I believe the Syntopicon was a product of syntopical reading) but those works never did well and were soon forgotten. Books encode canonical knowledge and this works in established domains but in a domains without much existing knowledge, taking action in perturbing the world actually produces more useful knowledge. This is why in these spaces it’s important to test ideas in reality and learn from them, rather than only constructing mental models. (We should strive to do both instead of the just latter) Action often produces more information than reading alone. Having ideas is often the easy part — executing on them is the hard part. If Mortimer Adler actually had some gauge on the market before pursuing the very ambitious multi year effort of producing the Synopticon, he might have produced something noteworthy (which he did with the much smaller experiment “How to read a book.” To me, wisdom isn’t about thinking rightly (which is what rationalists hold) but about being able to make good decisions with good judgment.

glimshe 2y ago

Reading is very important, but hardly sufficient. One problem with over reliance on books is that your world view will be molded by your reading list. You correctly pointed out the importance of reading material you disagree with, but there are often many contradictory ways to disagree with any specific world view. Books must be mixed with a close relationship to people and the world. The world itself can be seen as the "ultimate book", thus the importance of the so-called "school of life". I would never follow someone whose wisdom was built solely or mostly by reading books. No education is complete, or even half complete, without a thorough and direct exposure to different cultures, countries and their people.