|
May. 23, 2006
How to Read a Book, Chapter 1
|
Notes on
HOW TO READ A BOOK:
THE CLASSIC GUIDE TO
INTELLIGENT READING
By Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren
Notes taken from the
completely revised and updated version of 1972,
based on the original 1940 version.
Chapter 1
(pp. 3-15)
p.4, P 1: “We do not have
to know everything about something in order understand it; too
many facts are often as much of an obstacle to understanding as too few. There
is a sense in which we moderns are inundated with facts to the detriment of
understanding.”
This quote brought to mind
a recent conversation. Our pastor’s wife and I discovered we both enjoy doing
research. In passing, she suggested I look into a particular word in the
context of a given verse. One week and 13 typed pages later I decided I’d best
be finished! Although that particular research was done from books at hand,
except for Bible verses copied from an online source, we both acknowledged that
use of the Internet can make it almost impossible to come to the end of any
research project. There is always another rabbit trail to follow. Without a
clear understanding of your purpose you could go on finding new information
endlessly.
In addition to the
explosion of available information, the input we receive from many sources,
like the media, is couched in such authoritative terms that we accept it as a
package, spouting it as though our own, rather than going to the effort of
evaluating and truly understanding. Adler uses the analogy of a tape player:
the information is inserted like a cassette, ready to be played back at will
with no thinking required.
Active Reading (pp.
4-6)
Adler discusses the ideas
of passive and active reading. Absolutely passive reading is impossible. Reading, by definition, requires that at least the eyes
and some degree of the mind be engaged. He points out the fallacy that the
writer or speaker is active while the reader or listener is passive. He then
likens reading to the relationship between pitcher and catcher: the writer or
speaker pitches the ideas to the reader/listener who must catch them. Adler
then asserts that the analogy breaks down because, while the ball is either
caught or not, the ideas being read may be partially caught.
I beg to differ with
Adler. His analogy does not break down at that point. He simply did not take it
far enough. Reading is not the passing of one ball, but many. Each
idea tossed by the writer represents a different ball thrown. Each session with
an author is an inning of the game, and the entire read is the game as a whole.
How adept the writer is at presenting ideas and how actively the reader reads
determine the final count of caught and missed balls. Seldom is the effort a
total loss; generally something is gained.
Both writer and reader
have a responsibility to prepare for the game. Both start in the Little Leagues
and move progressively toward the Pro’s. Building vocabulary and a base of
experience is necessary for both. The writer must develop expertise of subject
matter and skill of expression. The reader must develop the ability to make
judgments about the reliability of the text and decisions about what to keep
and process, and what to discard.
The Goals of Reading: Reading for Information and Reading for Understanding (pp.7-11)
When you read something
that does not challenge your ability as a reader, you are merely reading for
information. If you do not understand everything presented you are then in a
position to use your mind to dig in and “…gradually lift yourself from a
state of understanding less to one of understanding more. Such elevation,
accomplished by the mind working on a book, is highly skilled reading, the kind
of reading that a book which challenges your understanding deserves.” (p.8)
Adler’s rough definition
of the art of reading: “the process whereby a mind, with nothing to operate on
but the symbols of the readable matter, and with no help from outside, elevates
itself by the power of its own operations” (p.8). Concerning the idea of “with
no help from outside”, Adler’s footnote indicates an exception given in chapter
18, which covers philosophy.
“…[T]he shock of
puzzlement and perplexity that come from getting in over our depth…” (p. 9). I
love this phrase! This is what we should encounter when we approach something
that we must read for understanding. Sometimes we miss it, though, because we
are not “…both alert and honest” (p.9).
In addition to more than
one meaning for reading—for information or for understanding--there is also
more than one meaning for learning. We often associate learning with simply
acquiring more facts, increasing the information we already have, but within a
realm we readily understand. Adler presents another meaning of learning, that
of understanding more. He gives the example of someone with some knowledge of
American history reading a new text on the subject. If that text merely gives
more facts the reader only learns in the first sense, information. However, if
the author presents a different way of looking at the new facts as well as the
ones the reader already knows, then the reader has the opportunity to increase
his or her overall understanding of American history. Gaining understanding
takes work. I observe that the reader must absorb the new view point, make a
judgment about its validity, and determine to what extent it should or should
not be assimilated. However, once it is understood, it will forever affect the
way the reader approaches the subject of American history.
Adler shares two
conditions for reading for understanding: 1) “…there is initial inequality
in understanding”, and 2) “…the reader must be able to overcome this
inequality in some degree…” (p. 10). He states that, “In short, we can
learn only from our ‘betters.’” It concerns me that, to this point, Adler has
made no reference to ensuring that what you are reading for understanding is
worthy of that effort, or that the effort requires any judgment on the reader’s
part. I am certain that he is not implying blanket acceptance of all one might
come to understand from an author. Perhaps he will address this later. The author
must initially have a deeper understanding of a given subject, concept, or ideal,
than the reader. The reader must gain understanding of the author’s perspective
and then make and apply judgments about that understanding.
Although only two types of
reading are mentioned earlier, a third is mentioned at the end of this section:
reading for entertainment. Anyone who can read at all can read for
entertainment. There are no rules to be applied. Material that can be read for
information or understanding can also be read for mere entertainment. However,
not all material that can be read for entertainment will yield anything in the
way of information or understanding.
Reading as Learning: The Difference Between Learning by
Instruction and Learning by Discovery
(pp.11-14)
I have heard it said that
the best way to learn is to teach, and I have seen this in my own experience. Years
ago, I substitute taught in advanced high school math classes that were barely
below the last level I had studied in college. In explaining the material to
the students, I gained a much clearer understanding of it myself. Perhaps as a
student I had merely absorbed the facts; as a teacher I had to examine them
more closely and develop a deeper understanding of why they worked the way they
did.
This is what Adler shares
about the levels of reading:
To be informed is to know simply that something is
the case. To be enlightened is to know, in addition, what it is all about: why
it is the case, what its connections are with other facts, in what respects it
is the same, in what respects it is different, and so forth.
This distinction is…between being able
to remember something and being able to explain it…. If…you have gained nothing
but information…you have exercised only your memory. Enlightenment is achieved
only when, in addition to knowing what an author says, you know what he means
and why he says it.
…Being informed is a prerequisite to being
enlightened. The point, however, is not to stop at being informed. (p. 11)
That is the key, “not to
stop at being informed.” Adler notes that the Greeks had a name for those who
were widely read, but not well read: sophomores. I was a sophomore in high
school when a teacher or upper classman gleefully taught the true meaning of
the word: soph=wise, more=foolish. Thus, a wise fool, or one who thinks himself
wise but is in actuality a fool. My peer group rankled; we were no different
this year than we had been in previous or would be in the future. We were not
fools thinking ourselves wiser than we ought. Perhaps in some ways I am more of
a sophomore now than I was then. I like to think myself to some reasonable
degree learned, broadly read, intelligent. But is that the case? I appreciate
Adler’s challenge to dig deeper, to wrestle with the text, to understand.
Although I do this with my Bible, I rarely do with other books. Most of the
thousands of pages I read every year are merely entertainment.
History distinguishes two
types of learning: by instruction, and by discovery. Learning by instruction,
also called “aided discovery,” includes reading and listening. Here, the
learner is being taught by someone, either a writer or a speaker. Learning by
discovery, or “unaided discovery,” includes research, investigation, and
reflection. Rather than the learner operating on written or spoken discourse,
the learner operates on the world around him. We readily recognize the role of
thought in unaided discovery; however we often underestimate it in reading or
listening. If the learner is seeking understanding, reading and listening will
take as high a degree of thought as unaided discovery.
The
art of reading…includes all of the same skills that are involved in the art of
unaided discovery: keenness of observation, readily available memory, range of
imagination, and …the intellect trained in analysis and reflection. The reason
for this is that reading in this sense is discovery, too—although with help
instead of without it. (p. 14)
Present and Absent
Teachers (pp. 14-15)
Although reading and
listening were grouped together in the last section, there is a significant
difference. When listening, the teacher is generally present and available to
answer questions. When reading, the writer usually is not present. From that
standpoint, reading is more like unaided discovery. You may ask a book a
question, but you must be the one to figure out the answer. For those of
us who are not in school with the luxury of a teacher to ask for guidance, “…if
we are disposed to go on learning and discovering, we must know how to make
books teach us well” (p.15).
*******
Thank you, Lord, for the challenge to use the mind you have given me to
dig deeply into the world around me. Thank you that the gift of reading
is such a pleasure. Thank you that it often is a great source of
entertainment and relaxation. Thank you that all the facts I need to
know are at my fingertips through printed and Internet sources. But
help me not to be content to leave it there. Help me to dig, to
process, to think, to understand, so that, as I'm instructed in 1 Peter
3:15, I can always be prepared to give an answer to anyone who ask me
for the reason for the hope that I have in You.
Amen
|
| •
Post A Comment! •
Send to a Friend!
|
Comments
|
|
|
|
