3 ms·
It may be sour grapes, but why should any one read at such high speeds. What is the virtue of reading at 500 wpm. I don't think that the time saved is such a bi
by zhaphod 13y ago
It may be sour grapes, but why should any one read at such high speeds. What is the virtue of reading at 500 wpm. I don't think that the time saved is such a big deal unless one is reading 40 - 50 books a year or reading 300+ technical papers a year. And comprehension suffers at high speed. I do just fine reading at 250 wpm. Some times I feel just being good enough has lost its value.
- CatMtKing 13y agoI have never had much luck speed-reading technical papers. It's too difficult for me to interpret and think critically together -- words flashing by will go unevaluated I think.
- Kiro 13y agoWhat is the virtue of reading at 250 wpm? I do just fine reading at 1 wpm. Some times I feel just being good enough has lost its value.
- zhaphod 13y agoIf you had said you do just fine at 150 wpm may be i can accept it. But you are saying 1 wpm which means you are not trying to give constructive criticism. Most of the gen-pop is around 200-250 wpm which is why I said it is good enough. Don't be a troll.
- Kiro 13y ago> I do just fine reading at 250 wpm. Some times I feel just being good enough has lost its value. What is fine? What is good enough? I think it's an absurd statement that in no way is an argument against reading at 500 wpm.
- zhaphod 13y agoLooks like your comprehension is suffering. No wonder you said 1wpm. Read what I wrote again will you: >Most of the gen-pop is around 200-250 wpm which is why I >said it is good enough. Don't be a troll. At around 200-250 wpm you are in the middle of the normal distribution hence good enough.
- Kiro 13y agoJust because it's normal to die of a cardiovascular disease it's good enough and shouldn't be prevented?