Showing posts with label Reading. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reading. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

How NOT to review a book

I love reading, as I've written about before, and I usually review the books I read on Amazon.

Two recent events have raised the issue of how NOT to criticise or review a book. I will use these two examples to illuminate this common error.

The first occurred on facebook. John Dickson wrote an article criticising Andrew Bolt's attempt at Biblical criticism, and then this article was linked on the Public Christianity facebook page. A guy named Dave Singer responded with this gem:


I note that John offers, as usual, NO evidence whatsoever to support the claim that the Gospels are true.

He may as well call Andrew Bolt an idiot for thinking the Phantom Menace contradicts The Empire Strikes Back.

 
I responded by pointing out that it's an error to judge an author by a standard that he never intended to meet. John Dickson's purpose wasn't to "provide evidence to support the claim that the Gospels are true", it was to show that the problems raised by Andrew Bolt aren't all that troubling at all. I also referred to Dickson's latest video where he talks about historical reasons to believe that the Resurrection accounts are historically plausible- 1. They're historically very early, 2. The testimony of women and 3. The conviction of knowledge (as opposed to belief) evidenced by the early followers.



A second example occurred on Amazon.com. A review of Christian Smith's The Bible Made Impossible was heavily critical of the book, on the basis that Smith's argument was "hoisted on it's own petard". The author of the review, S.D Parker, berated Smith because Smith apparently criticises the Bible for not being definitive enough, but Smith's own conclusions won't reach definitive agreement either! As I pointed out in response to Parker, Smith never intended for his own conclusions to reach definitive agreement! He clearly states that his views are merely some suggestions to get the discussion started on how to better approach the Bible, and not the final word. Further, Smith's argument was not against the Bible for not being definitive enough, it was against a particular view of the Bible (Biblicism) which implies the Bible should reach definitive agreement when it clearly doesn't! Big difference.
 
 
Smith devotes the second half of the book to arguing that the theology of the Bible does contain ambiguities (Chapter 6) and even the theological conclusions that we can reach are not entirely based on the Bible but are developed with later reflection and discussion (Chapter 7).
 
 
Parker was welcome to argue that Smith's suggestions don't work, but it was a simple error to criticise them for not being capable of reaching definitive conclusions. Smith never said they would! In fact quite the opposite. Not only did Parker misrepresent Smith's argument, but he judged Smith by a standard he never intended to meet.
 
 
It's interesting to note that Parker deleted that review the day after my response. The moral of the story here is that you can only judge a book by whether it sets out to do what it intended to achieve- NOT whether it achieved what YOU want it to achieve.

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Lifelong Learning

Recently I discussed philosophy of reading, that is, questions like what you should read, and how you should go about reading.

But there's a bigger picture issue at play. It's all good and well to have ideas about how to read, but what about finding time to do it? We're all busy people, that's the practical reality. So if we're serious about reading and learning, then we need to find ways to work that into our lives. We humans are creatures of habit. This leads us the question of what habits can I put in place in order to be a lifelong learner?

This article provides 15 useful tips for cultivating lifelong learning.

They are:

1. Always have a book.
2. Keep a to-learn list
3. Get more thinking friends
4. Guide your thinking- (Be reflective. Contemplate. Don't just consume or swallow a book and move on)
5. Put it into practice
6. Teach others
7. Clean your input
8. Learn in Groups
9. Unlearn assumptions
10. Find jobs that encourage learning
11. Start a project
12. Follow your intuition (Note: Not sure I agree. Being intentional is often a good thing).
13. The morning fifteen
14. Reap the rewards
15. Make it a priority

Sunday, July 10, 2011

Thoughts on Philosophy of Reading

Why read? Are there different types of reading? What should I read? Is there any specific advice I should take heed of when it comes to reading?

For those of us for whom reading is a relatively big part of our lives, the above questions will inevitably be crucial. Here I'll lay out some general thoughts on reading.

Why Read?

- It enhances literary skills- both reading and writing.
- It broadens ones perspective and develops ones understanding of issues with a depth that other forms of learning will inevitably fail to achieve.
- It helps develop the ability to disseminate information and process it.
- It is enjoyable.

Are there different types of reading?

- According to the Classic How to Read a Book by Adler and Van Doren, there are three types of reading or purposes for reading: Reading for entertainment, reading for information, and reading for understanding.
- Fiction and Non Fiction.
- Genre: History, science, philosophy, theology, etc etc.
- Format: Books- scholarly books, popular level books, textbooks, website articles, scholarly journal articles, blog entries, magazines, newspapers.

What Should I Read? is a far more complicated and difficult question. Using Adler's 3 categories, generally I personally read for understanding. Many other issues come into play here- this is now an interpretive issue rather than just a basic question like the first two above.

Some random thoughts follow:

- Read old and new books. CS Lewis suggests at least one old work for every 3 contemporary works. We're all a product of our times to one degree or another, regardless of whether we want to be or not. Opening one's mind to the exchanges at the table of ideas from days gone past can serve many purposes: Helps free our thinking and helps us avoid getting stuck in our own cultural vortex thus avoiding chronological snobbery, teaches us that "there's nothing new under the sun", opens our eyes, allows us to consider different frameworks for understanding or new ways of looking at issues that we may not have considered.

Read things at an appropriate level for you. . Fairly self explanatory I would have thought, but failing to take stock of this one could have drastic consequences. What can happen is picking up a book and realising it's just way above your head and then losing interest as a result. As per my list before, writing comes in various formats and at various levels. Also, different writings presuppose different levels of existing understanding within their readers. Always look at things like: How many pages long is the book? How technical is the language? Have I read anything else on the specific topic or issues from this book? Always flick through a book, read the table of contents, and read a few paragraphs here and there. Even the blurb and commendations may help because they may indicate who the book is intended for and at what level it is written.


Tips?

Again, a complicated question.

- Understand what you are reading and read thoroughly and deeply: This is a difficult one for me because I constantly see new books I want to read. But I'm still convinced that the whole enterprise of reading is almost pointless unless one gets a thorough understanding of what one is reading, remembers the main points or arguments that the author has made, considers consequences of their reading and how the ideas presented may be true or false, the assumptions and presuppositions, and how they may relate to, complement or conflict with existing ideas, thoughts and frameworks of understanding.

Use tools to help you read more effectively Underline, highlight key points, make notes, whatever works for you really.

Connect the dots. Keep an eye on th author's Big Picture. Attempt to follow the author's argument- if he is a good author this should be relatively clear. Inevitably, a book will have a central theme. It may be structured in various ways; with standalone chapters, or with chapters that build on each other and thus presuppose a reading of the prior chapters, etc. The argument will usually build as the book continues, though. Always try to understand where your current bit fits into the whole. This will help you make sense of the book's main line of thought and critically consider how ideas are interconnected and how the various arguments depend on each other or are interconnected.

Remember the finiteness of human attempts to reason through problems in any form, even including the literary form- the best form I know of for gaining understanding This may seem a bizarre inclusion but allow me to justify. This is more of an epistemological observation but it relates to reading hence I've included it. (Anyone who reads through more than a couple of my blog entries will observe the importance that generally I place on epistemology; thus there is almost nowhere where epistemological thoughts aren't welcome).

I disagree with the argument of Adler (if I remember correctly- I do not have the book in front of me) to the effect that one is compelled to action- or changing one's beliefs if one cannot pin the author on one of the four possible criticisms Adler offers, ie: The author is not aware of/has not considered other information that could render his thesis less plausible, the author has made an error of logic etc etc. It appears to me that Adler is guilty of an overestimation of the powers of human reason here, an overtly rationalistic approach that is untenable in light of the inability of humans to solve all the necesaary puzzles they wish they could with the powers of their grey matter alone.

I would perhaps agree with Adler but reduce some of the force of his suggestion: I'd suggest that readers are obligated to critically consider what they read, but I wouldn't say that necessarily they owe the author and that it is their duty to change views because they personally cannot, at that point, show exactly why the author is wrong. Note: I'm not advocating irrationalism here, I'm merely attempting to work in an understanding of human finiteness as it relates to reading. One should initially contemplate and take time to work through the author's conclusions, and seek to look at the problem from various angles through different frameworks, and examine the author's assumptions. If, through the cold light of day and after considering the issue carefully one comes to a different conclusion or changes their view to align with the author's that is good and should be welcomed, but one should always take the time to digest what a particular view means and balance the importance of that view or it's strength against opposing views.

If one comes across an unanswerable puzzle, there may in fact be a good answer that one has not yet come across. This is related to the general observation that conflicting ideas do exist and often need to be balanced against each other, and that occasionally one can be justified in believing in the existence of unanswerable paradoxes or simply not committing to any given idea; for example if other conflicting ideas exist and there is evidence in both directions. (Also, as I previously noted, one of the marks of an educated mind is holding different ideas in tension).

Take a speed reading course . I haven't done this but would like to do it one day. All reports suggest it's a worthwhile exercise.

Don't become a dogmatic know-it-all. We must also remember the vast pool of human knowledge that exists. Even the most learned and intelligent members of society know only a miniscule amount of the possible pool of current human knowledge, thus it seems that one should always keep in mind that having too much certainty about one's knowledge or views is often a bad thing. In my own experience, the more I learn the more I realise how much I don't know.

Enjoy and grow without being consumed or isolated Reading is enjoyable, as I already noted. And reading helps one grow one's knowledge, as I already noted. But reading is like many other things: there is something known as "too much of a good thing". Always keep in mind the purposes for which you read nd if you find those purpose unwittingly changing then consider this carefully. For example, you may read to increase your understanding of issues A, B and C, but could there be other purposes slipping in- for example to pridefully prove how much you know to other people? (This was a dot point on a sermon I recently heard at my home church on the Discipline of Study), or to escape from life because life itself isn't really working for you? These are just examples.

Be careful, because the mere mechanics of reading open up the possibility of becoming overly engrossed to an unreasonable point. Reading is an isolated activity; being social creatures, this can mean reading too much can mean we are too isolated.

That's about all I have- this has been unlike most of the posts on this blog thus far in the sense that this is probably more random and less well proof-read. But the purpose of this was to simply jot down my thoughts on reading- and I've accomplished that purpose. I hope these thoughts benefit anyone who might read this.