Tips For Doing Large Quantities Of Reading?

No, actually. Prejudice is not also known as common sense.

Prejudice
"An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the fact"

Common Sense
"Sound judgment not based on specialized knowledge; native good judgment."

Actually, it was Einstein who pointed out common sense as being a collection of Prejudices. So I have to give credit.

Now, to answer your point:

You quoted one meaning of prejudice; specifically the derogatory connotation associated with the word. However, it is not the only 'definition'. In fact, you should be able to see the original meaning from the way the word is made up:
pre-judge

The definition I was using of the word is: preconceived judgment or opinion

Anyways, let me be very specific, since you seem to be a little slow today (or argumentative):

When your common sense tells you not to touch something that looks like a red hot stove, where is that knowledge coming from? Did you know the stove is hot or did you use a preconceived opinion of what temperature metal is at when glowing red?

If all of a sudden at the corner of your house you see a group of young men dressed in a way that could be considered 'hoodlums' and they are listening to loud gangster rap and pushing and shoving and drinking and and smoking and walking in a certain way and looking around and shouting, you would think they are up to no good?

That would be common sense? But how would you know that they are up to no good? Do you know for a fact they are up to no good, or do you use preconceived notions of reality based on past/3rd party experiences?

Based on your personal evaluation of the "fitness product transposition", it seems as though you are a cynic and have a negative opinion of others. You have my sympathy.

Fuck your fake sympathy. And honestly, if you are not cynical about people, you are blind, stupid or both.

You are so caught up with the fact that your ego is hurt to see the extremely obvious.

You keep on speaking in the collective "we", yet you and one other poster were the only ones who had a problem. Maybe you refer to yourself as "we", or maybe you are the spokesperson for WF...I don't know

Well, do you know most people in this thread immediately thought I was a "lazy fuck"? I know you had that thought, but how can you read other peoples minds? Or are you the type of person who thinks, "Well, I think this way, so most other people should/do too..."

There were four or five people poking fun at you. You just don't get it. But even if it is only two, the word we is used for plural. Plural is used for more than one. Two is more than one. Hard concepts to grasp, I know.

And buying books to be "trendy"? Quite common? What planet are you living on?

I forgot where I read it, but over 50% of people who purchase a new book, don't read it to completion (used books tend to be purchased by people who are more into reading than into owning books)

As anecdotal back up, I know many people who like to look intellectual who buy books and never read them. Since I read a lot, I have been in social events where someone talk about a book that I read, when I comment on the end, they stare blank, sometimes they will say "well, I haven't finished it yet" or "I only read a synopsis". I've even heard the words "I rarely finish the books I read"

Thinking everyone is crazy/nasty/stupid? There were 2 or 3 negative responses in this thread. If everyone were saying "Jimmy Clayton is fucking lazy" then yea, but they aren't. There were quite a few people here who understood what I said based on their responses.

Some people simply like to help and look past the part where you made yourself out to be lazy. In any case, if 3 people understand the same thing from what you said and that you didn't mean to convey, what is more likely? That all 3 people are negative and nasty and have reading comprehension issues yet magically ended up understanding the same thing? Or that you might not have expressed yourself properly?

You seem to be one of the few who can't seem to get past my "poor" communication and understand what I am trying to get at. I insulted you because you implied I was lazy and looking for a shortcut, which is sooo far off base.

I don't care what you say about me. And I still have the concept that you are lazy or have real ADD.

I like to learn from others. If there is someone who had the same problem as me and found a solution that worked for them, guess what? I may give it a shot because it may work for me too.

If you actually provide background, you might be right. Say for instance, you posted:

Hey guys, I read quite a bit, but I have too many books in my collection and I'm being overwhelmed. The thing for me is, I read slow/have ADD/I'm lazy/I'm not a native English speaker/I'm trying to read subjects that I don't find too interesting/I prefer visual stimulation/I tend to play video games during the time I set aside for reading/I pick up one book and move on to the next without finishing the first and so on...

See, then you know yourself, you are expressing your limitations and you will find answers from people with similar limitations.

Just saying 'how do you read?' is fucking retarded. Rationalize it all you like.

I'm not looking to get into a back and forth thing here with you. If I stepped over the line with my insult, then I am man enough to apologize for it. But I do not take lightly to people implying I am looking for shortcuts and am lazy, because that couldn't be further from the truth.

If you can't take a little online banter lightly, then you are a delicate little flower that is not fit to live in the harsh reality of planet earth.

I don't care about any insult you hurl at me and you shouldn't either. I'm giving you the gift of letting you know you should work on your communication skills.

You can get caught up in rationalizing, insulting, in making yourself the victim, in feeling insulted, or whatever faggoty crap you like. It doesn't matter. You will either come out of this thread knowing you aren't communicating very effectively and improve, or you will continue to communicate badly and blame others. Either way, no sweat off my brow.
 


recommendations as to courses or texts?

I never took any courses. But someone (forgot who) once showed me to read chunks of text (several words at a time) and the habit of sub-vocalizing will go away partly. Also, push yourself to read fast and you will grow used to it.

I have noticed a decreased retention and understanding when reading fast for MOST books.

If you are reading 'How to make friends and influence people' sure, it will work pretty well since the concepts are clear, repetitive, and easy to absorb.

Try doing that with 'The Art of War' and you will have missed 99.999% of the book.

Also remember, sub-vocalizing never goes away completely, you always have voices in your head. It is just a matter of minimizing them/trying to absorb concepts rather than words.

Some books this is awesome, other books, for me, I can't understand everything well at the normal speed of talking, so no need to go faster.
 
Nobody can motivate you to read more. If you aren't motivated to read the books you have, find books you're actually interested in reading. You're not going to trick yourself into enjoying a topic you don't give a shit about.
 
Blah, Blah, Blah

WOW!!

Dude you really need to stop taking yourself so seriously. Nobody is even attacking you.

Try to stop getting hung up on labels and look at the actual issue. Maybe the word "lazy" was incorrect (maybe not). Perhaps try inserting a few other words (unmotivated, bored, ect) to describe your situation. A huge % of the time when people say their "work" or in your case "reading" has crawled to a halt is caused by either lack of motivation and or laziness.

At the end of the day, only you know the true reason for your starting a thread on how to prioritize your reading. Figure out what that reason is and all your "reading" problems will be solved.
 
I never took any courses. But someone (forgot who) once showed me to read chunks of text (several words at a time) and the habit of sub-vocalizing will go away partly. Also, push yourself to read fast and you will grow used to it.

I have noticed a decreased retention and understanding when reading fast for MOST books.

If you are reading 'How to make friends and influence people' sure, it will work pretty well since the concepts are clear, repetitive, and easy to absorb.

Try doing that with 'The Art of War' and you will have missed 99.999% of the book.

Also remember, sub-vocalizing never goes away completely, you always have voices in your head. It is just a matter of minimizing them/trying to absorb concepts rather than words.

Some books this is awesome, other books, for me, I can't understand everything well at the normal speed of talking, so no need to go faster.

maybe it is a habit... i just scolled up, found a paragraph, tried it, and i failed. maybe its that i failed on the level of comprehension i'm used to, but my comprehension by jumping from word group to word group fell ridiculously. maybe its also that i'm constantly considering the implication of what i'm reading & i can't do that as well at any additional speed.

what percentage faster to you think you read, and what percent comprehension do you think you lose?
 
maybe its also that i'm constantly considering the implication of what i'm reading & i can't do that as well at any additional speed.

I'd say it is this. Although you can always make up for it a little by considering what you read after you finish absorbing more material than you are used to (extract meaning of paragraph/page/any chunk of text then consider it)

I'd have to guess the increase to be 50-100%, depending on the text. I try to avoid losing any % of comprehension, so I really only use it on repetitive/intuitive/easy to absorbe concepts.

As I said, try speed reading a book like 'Think and Grow Rich' and it is very useful. Try it on 100 Years of Solitude or something of the sort and it is silly.

My suggestion, try it when you are reading something you know about first. Grab chunks of words, see them, then see how much you understood. I think you will be surprised at how much you can understand in such circumstances. If it is a new concept/complex topic, I'd avoid it.

You can also try sub-vocalizing concepts.
 
I'd say it is this. Although you can always make up for it a little by considering what you read after you finish absorbing more material than you are used to (extract meaning of paragraph/page/any chunk of text then consider it)

I'd have to guess the increase to be 50-100%, depending on the text. I try to avoid losing any % of comprehension, so I really only use it on repetitive/intuitive/easy to absorbe concepts.

As I said, try speed reading a book like 'Think and Grow Rich' and it is very useful. Try it on 100 Years of Solitude or something of the sort and it is silly.

My suggestion, try it when you are reading something you know about first. Grab chunks of words, see them, then see how much you understood. I think you will be surprised at how much you can understand in such circumstances. If it is a new concept/complex topic, I'd avoid it.

thx for the advice, i'll give it a go.
 
thx for the advice, i'll give it a go.

Also, I'll say I don't practice it as much as I could simply because it takes away from the enjoyment I get from reading. I mostly read for pleasure (although I do read quite a bit of business/marketing/self help)

Generally, when I finish a book I REALLY enjoyed, I'm sad I finished it so fast. Examples: A burnt out case, 100 years of solitude, crime and punishment, lord of the rings, 1984, for whom the bell tolls, etc - If I could read them slower and still enjoy as much, I would.
 
Since we’re stopping fewer times on each line, we will read faster if we do not start reading a line at the far left. This is a simple technique that improves the efficiency of our reading, and it becomes more natural after consciously practicing for about ten minutes.

Some people might not think that this small change makes much of a difference. However, if you time your reading with and without this technique, you’ll typically see speed increases in the 15 percent range without changing anything else about your reading.

exactly what i was looking for, thanks.
 
Since we’re stopping fewer times on each line, we will read faster if we do not start reading a line at the far left. This is a simple technique that improves the efficiency of our reading, and it becomes more natural after consciously practicing for about ten minutes.

Some people might not think that this small change makes much of a difference. However, if you time your reading with and without this technique, you’ll typically see speed increases in the 15 percent range without changing anything else about your reading.

exactly what i was looking for...

thanks.
 
There is plenty of well prepared speed reading softwares (like somebody wrote before) and generally 30 minutes of training a day will double your WPM (words per minute) in a fortnight or so. I have started doing speed-reading drills and tests 2 months ago and I do 1500 - 2000 WPM. It is definitely worth giving a try and I would never be worried about knowledge retention. It is only 30 minutes a day and the effects come very quickly.
 
Colleges and universities do 1-day courses all the time. I didn't buy any fancy program, I paid ~$50 for a 1-day, 6-hour class.

I have also been on such a 'one day course' and it just unveils the mystery of speed reading techniques. What is focal here, is regular practice which certain software provides.