This is a fine list (and a bit humbling) that I’ll need to bookmark and reread periodically. I typically find myself following the Dorothy Parker guideline, “This is a book not to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.”
What a helpful post, Joel. Thank you... Be a critical thinker without being a critical person. Your rules—especially with regard to recognizing our limitations—remind me of biblical book of Proverbs with its scores of verses about the person who refuses correction (Prov. 12:15; 15:5; 17:10; 26:12). Only a biblical fool takes no input because he thinks he has already arrived—and in a sad way, he has. He’ll go no further because his ego allows no progress.
Of course those verses aren't there to confirm our biases about the "others" who don't get it. They are there to make us ask questions of ourselves-- in our motives for reading and for every other source of information.
I like the way you phrased that distinction: “Be a critical thinker without being a critical person.” And I like your using the Proverbs in a self-critiquing way.
This sounds very similar to the advice I was given for writing papers in my history classes- objectivity always comes before personal opinion unless the opinion is relevant to the point being made. And it can easily be applied to other media as well.
Thank you for writing this. I think it’s important to engage with ideas that we disagree with, for all the reasons you stated. How do you decide which writings to engage with, and which writings are not worth your time? I’ve been thinking about this question in the context of fiction, where there are stories with gruesome or distasteful details that I would rather not consider but I know are probably worth grappling with in some contexts. The line between “not worth it” and “challenging in a good way” can be difficult to discern.
I am curious about whether this article has anything to do with Alice in Wonderland. Your five guidelines are sound as a general approach to reading, of course. I have struggled to find a context for Alice. Is it a critique of religious doctrine? Is it autobiographical (especially the white knight)? Is it trying to draw a line between nonsense and folly? Is it an opium dream? I never read it as a child and tend to overanalyze it now.
LOL, no. But I can see how you’d think so given the mixed messages I’ve sent on “Alice.” At this point I tend to read it as a dream. But that’s a great point: How we interpret a book has a large influence on our experience of it, whether positive or negative.
Both books ramble like dreams. Cards and chess give very little unifying velcro. It's easy to see why people take pieces out of context when there is no visible context. I look forward to your insights.
"Books are not valuable because they’re true, though that’s nice. Books are valuable because they help you think thoughts you wouldn’t otherwise think on your own."
"Books are not valuable because they’re true, though that’s nice. Books are valuable because they help you think thoughts you wouldn’t otherwise think on your own." I love this.
I wish someone had told me this back in high school, and then again in college. I believe I suffered from Dunning-Kruger syndrome for all that time until my teenage son told me that I didn't know much, and I might want to start by dropping the tightly held ideological, dogmatic arguments and read a book or two. Ooomphf. That was nearly five years ago. I embarked on a massive course correction. I've never read so much in my life - much if it very disagreeable upon first introduction.
I think each of these attitudes is very useful, especially for reading any book that is more than a couple of decades old. Maybe I’m unusual but I have little interest in books written by someone like me. I read for difference, and if I’m offended, I’m usually more interested - how could they think that? Why do I think something totally different? I’m not big on the comfort read.
I’m with you and quit plenty of books when they’re falling short of my interests or expectations. But some books are worth reading even if they run you the wrong way.
Joel,
This is a fine list (and a bit humbling) that I’ll need to bookmark and reread periodically. I typically find myself following the Dorothy Parker guideline, “This is a book not to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.”
Thanks as always for a thoughtful perspective,
Brian
Haha. I’ve certainly thought of throwing a book or two!
What a helpful post, Joel. Thank you... Be a critical thinker without being a critical person. Your rules—especially with regard to recognizing our limitations—remind me of biblical book of Proverbs with its scores of verses about the person who refuses correction (Prov. 12:15; 15:5; 17:10; 26:12). Only a biblical fool takes no input because he thinks he has already arrived—and in a sad way, he has. He’ll go no further because his ego allows no progress.
Of course those verses aren't there to confirm our biases about the "others" who don't get it. They are there to make us ask questions of ourselves-- in our motives for reading and for every other source of information.
I like the way you phrased that distinction: “Be a critical thinker without being a critical person.” And I like your using the Proverbs in a self-critiquing way.
This sounds very similar to the advice I was given for writing papers in my history classes- objectivity always comes before personal opinion unless the opinion is relevant to the point being made. And it can easily be applied to other media as well.
So true, David but now we're no longer in academia the 'life is too short' rule increasingly applies!
That’s fair. I quit plenty of books I don’t think are going to serve me.
Absolutely. Great advice.
Thank you for writing this. I think it’s important to engage with ideas that we disagree with, for all the reasons you stated. How do you decide which writings to engage with, and which writings are not worth your time? I’ve been thinking about this question in the context of fiction, where there are stories with gruesome or distasteful details that I would rather not consider but I know are probably worth grappling with in some contexts. The line between “not worth it” and “challenging in a good way” can be difficult to discern.
Yeah, that is tough. I know for myself usually, and there are books I just won’t pick up. But it’s totally subjective.
I am curious about whether this article has anything to do with Alice in Wonderland. Your five guidelines are sound as a general approach to reading, of course. I have struggled to find a context for Alice. Is it a critique of religious doctrine? Is it autobiographical (especially the white knight)? Is it trying to draw a line between nonsense and folly? Is it an opium dream? I never read it as a child and tend to overanalyze it now.
LOL, no. But I can see how you’d think so given the mixed messages I’ve sent on “Alice.” At this point I tend to read it as a dream. But that’s a great point: How we interpret a book has a large influence on our experience of it, whether positive or negative.
Both books ramble like dreams. Cards and chess give very little unifying velcro. It's easy to see why people take pieces out of context when there is no visible context. I look forward to your insights.
"Books are not valuable because they’re true, though that’s nice. Books are valuable because they help you think thoughts you wouldn’t otherwise think on your own."
YES!
:) One of the most important lessons for me as a reader.
No matter what book. It deserves a skim.
I think that’s fair. I won’t bother with some, but I’ll bother with a lot.
Ancient skepticism involved “epoché” - the suspension of judgement and the withholding of assent. Good advice.
Great term. Thanks for sharing it.
I just bought St. Maximus' "Four Centuries on Charity", thanks to your post.
It’s rich!
"Books are not valuable because they’re true, though that’s nice. Books are valuable because they help you think thoughts you wouldn’t otherwise think on your own." I love this.
Important lesson for me.
Thoughtful and well articulated, Joel. I found myself nodding along and bookmarking for later reference. Thank you!
My pleasure! Glad it was helpful!
This really struck home for me. Not every intellectual experience is a contest with winners and losers.
Much is lost by always playing the critic.
I wish someone had told me this back in high school, and then again in college. I believe I suffered from Dunning-Kruger syndrome for all that time until my teenage son told me that I didn't know much, and I might want to start by dropping the tightly held ideological, dogmatic arguments and read a book or two. Ooomphf. That was nearly five years ago. I embarked on a massive course correction. I've never read so much in my life - much if it very disagreeable upon first introduction.
I think each of these attitudes is very useful, especially for reading any book that is more than a couple of decades old. Maybe I’m unusual but I have little interest in books written by someone like me. I read for difference, and if I’m offended, I’m usually more interested - how could they think that? Why do I think something totally different? I’m not big on the comfort read.
I’ve only read that in bits and pieces. But I can see how she’d be challenging. She’s a hard drink, as one song lyric has it.
I’m with you and quit plenty of books when they’re falling short of my interests or expectations. But some books are worth reading even if they run you the wrong way.
That would be Nietzsche and Marx for me. Hard to digest but felt like it was imperative that I finish them.