How to read a book!

The fundamental problem that lies beneath almost every issue plaguing the human society in these days and times is somehow related with the ideas of knowledge and education. The massive information explosion and the fast media through which it can flow have made knowledge very easy to acquire, or so it may seem. It becomes imperative to discuss how to and how not to acquire knowledge. By knowing so we may be able to differentiate between propaganda and education. The opinion formed thus is not just a well-informed one, but a well understood well as well. In this short essay we wish to throw some light on this highly important topic, a topic which is deciding our present and for sure will decide our future. What I present to you is essentially a summary of the famous book by Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren, “How to Read a Book”.

The first and by far the most neglected aspect of acquiring knowledge is that of “thinking”. Without this faculty being applied all that remains is “propaganda”. For the same information acquired through application of critical thinking “education” emerges. What is unfortunate is that the media most of us use for “educating” ourselves is the same which makes thinking almost unnecessary. This applies to all the Youtube videos (even the “educational” ones) or the Newshour “debates” or panel “discussions” to which we are glued. Social Media has turned the situation into disaster where information flows sometimes in a hundred and fifty characters.

All this has led to a situation where we may know a lot, but we understand so little. Adler and Doler write, “The packaging of intellectual positions and views is one of the most active enterprises of some of the best minds of our day. The viewer of television, the listener to radio, the reader of magazines, is presented with a whole complex of elements – all the way from ingenious rhetoric to carefully selected data and statistics – to make it easy for him to “make up his own mind” with the minimum of difficulty and effort. But the packaging is often done so effectively that the viewer, listener, or reader does not make up his own mind at all. Instead he inserts a packaged opinion into his mind, somewhat like inserting a cassette into a cassette player. He then pushes a button and “plays back” the opinion whenever it seems appropriate to do so.”

Also the fact that fast paced life has made people’s minds prejudicial towards philosophy, which people see as “all theory” with little or no significance in real life. This line of thinking is also an outcome of the flawed ways of acquiring knowledge. The propaganda that flows in through various media tries to show knowledge in such a simplistic way that theory behind an idea seems irrelevant and unnecessary. The idea that emerges in the mind, and you the reader are a victim of it as well, is that “theoretical” means “visionary” or even “mystical” which is again understood as “inapplicable to practical life” or “utopian”. I have personally come across hundreds of occasion where people who are otherwise considered well “read” have commented that most of what I say is “theoretical” meaning “impractical”. “Practical” in such a setting is understood as “something that works”.

What is forgotten in such a line of thinking is that all action is preceded by some sort of thought – that a will emerges first and then the action. The will depends essentially and without any exception on some sort of prior knowledge. It is the theory that directs every action. Any book, any ideal spoken of, any rule, any maxim, any situation, any set of instructions, though in themselves of practical significance are underlined by principles which are items of theoretical knowledge. This essay has been written (the practical aspect) once the thought emerged in the author’s mind that these ideas need to be shared (the theoretical aspect). That you are reading it (the practical aspect) is preceded by the idea that you need/want to read it (the theoretical aspect). If you understand this, then you have understood that the knowledge you acquire is not just for controlling nature or inventing machines or instruments (the things considered practical), but also for directing human conduct and regulating human operations in various fields of skill. It is here that you understand that it is theory that is of greater significance than what you would have thought was “practical”.

It is to be understood that it is Philosophy that is more relevant to us as persons than any scientific knowledge. Philosophy doesn’t appeal to any facts or observations that lie outside the experience of an ordinary man. A philosopher talks about his experiences which would be same or similar to the others’ experience. He appeals to “common experience” and “common knowledge” for the verification or support of anything he has to say. In contrast, a scientific work emphasizes on the things that lie outside the scope of our normal, routine, daily experience. Hence in judging the theories that are put forward, in a book or otherwise the reader must identify the identity of, or the discrepancy between, his own basic principles or assumptions and those of the person who puts forward the theory. For example, if you don’t share Karl Marx’s fervor about Economic Justice, his economic doctrine and the reforms it suggests are likely to seem to you practically false or irrelevant. Hence we as knowledge seekers or the dumping sites of all information have to ask – One, what the author’s objectives are and – Two, what means he is employing to achieving the objective.

If these ideas are kept in mind, most of the Newshour debates, propaganda videos, Twitter propaganda, Political Rants fall on their face in front of a critically engaging mind which knows what it is searching for and how to reach there. Such a receiver of information is better able to filter the information he is receiving. He is further able to appreciate or criticize it after not just having known it, but haven understood it.

The problem of holistic learning is not yet solved. By now we have only stopped the influence of information on us – the information which we understand to be very selectively chosen, packaged to serve a purpose, served sugar coated, not for developing an understanding but to make an adherent. What comes to rescue is reading and reading well, particularly books and more so the classical works. In the field of reading, we as a society are a complete failure. The failure to develop the habit of reading or to read effectively at all has reached epidemic proportions. This hasn’t just swept our part of the world but the world which we otherwise consider “developed”. Put any student to reading a thoroughly engaging argument and he fails to comprehend anything. What makes such a failure even more dangerous is when it is coming from those who the society by and large considers educated. I am afraid I must say that I am talking about professors, lecturers, lawyers, journalists, researchers, editors, writers and all the flag bearers of modern intellectualism, with due and respectable exceptions. The majority of these highly “educated” individuals would be able to skim through fiction, say Chetan Bhagat, and make them have a reading of Shakespeare or Shelley, they fail. Put them against a closely written exposition, a carefully and economically stated argument, or a passage requiring critical consideration, and they are at loss. These individuals are dangerous for they don’t understand their ignorance – the doctoral ignorance. And unfortunate is the fact that these people with great knowledge and no understanding make the policies of tomorrow, leave colleges and universities to lead the nation. They present their ideas to a population which is not able to differentiate between propaganda and information. They don’t know what is good for them and we take their advice to know what is good for us.

Is everyone out there a fool then? If foolish is a person with little or no understanding, then yes. This is a sweeping statement I have made and may irk many a reader. I would still want to hold my ground and leave no inch. If you ask me about literacy, yes most of us are literate. Well read? Well many! Somewhat educated? A Lot many! Highly educated? Just a paltry few! That is the sad state of affairs. The common knowledge and the common experience of this generation is entirely based upon propaganda from previous decades. These “well educated” ones of today, thoroughly and entirely believe with all their conviction whatever they believe in. There is an opinion which they think is original to them, having emerged out of free thinking, while the truth remains that almost all the common knowledge is based on mere propaganda. It is because of this reason I say that most of us are well read, literate, somewhat educated, but ignorant with little or no understanding. Why we don’t think that is the case is because of the common knowledge and common experience which we share. Within all ignorant people, a person with little knowledge is, confirming to common knowledge is considered highly educated.

It is education that comes to rescue and reading with critical thinking forms the cornerstone of education. However reading well is an art that most of us haven’t learnt, little wonder most of us emerge out to be ignorant even after having read volumes of books. We have to admit that our schools have failed to teach the young “how to read”, forget about imbibing in them the passion for reading. Most of our children carry a dislike for reading and most of them will carry this dislike into their higher studies. They would read, if only they would, from the books the portion that appears in their syllabus. In my personal experience, I have found that most of them would not even do that, but “Xerox” notes or ask their tutors for “slides” and read from them. This rote learning is expected to yield the “educated” ones of tomorrow. When within this system emerge students with good CGPA, we think that the system is working, while the truth remains that we are making nothing but a breed of sophomores. Still wonder why I didn’t hesitate in calling everyone around an ignorant?

What I do from here is present to you the art of reading – how to become a demanding reader and how to enhance ones understanding and not just knowledge. We will get deeper into the book I already mentioned and try to find what it says about “How to read a book”. The book is an encyclopedia of more than 400 pages, probably why many would not read it, probably why I am forced to write a summary. If you are really interested in learning, in depth, about the topic, purchase the book and read it, you owe it to yourself. This summary is in no way going to do any justice to the book which is filled with great discussions, explanations and examples which I have to skip for the want of space. However, this summary would still be relevant and greatly helpful if you plan to read the book.

We read, most of us, for information and not for understanding. Reading has to take you from a state of lesser understanding to a state of higher understanding. This doesn’t usually happen because we tend to read what we easily and readily understand. You would understand this by the example of reading newspapers, magazines etc which you are able to understand by the skill set you already possess. Such readings don’t increase your understanding, but just supply you with more information, for your understanding was equal to them before you started. Then there is the kind of reading in which one tries to read something which at first he doesn’t completely understand – this is the type which we often ignore and shun. What is meant by this discussion is that there has to be some initial inequality in understanding for some kind of understanding to develop. Your understanding increases only when you are able to overcome this inequality in understanding, or when you approach the understanding of the writer.

Understanding and learning is much more important than simply increasing your information set. Adler and Doren say, “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 different, and so forth.” This understanding is knowing things as they actually are, without the notions propaganda associates with it. This is knowing the “truth”, which is essentially the purpose of all knowledge. Thomas Aquinas described “truth” as “the correlation of thought and object”, that is, our idea of something is true if it corresponds to the actuality of things. This can only be done when “reality” is properly understood.

Click here for Part II