How do you tackle extremely challenging books?

[Anonymous No.13226924]

I've been having some difficulties lately with some philosophy books. I am not of a disposition that enjoys a challenge and I usually just put a book down and stop reading it if it makes me have to go slow and reread lines. I read to finish books moreso than I read for knowledge. I like the satisfaction of finishing a novel and saying I was productive more than anything. As such, I've found it rather challenging to read stuff like Aristotle, Heidegger, etc. I'm reading Guenon's Symbolism of the Cross right now which isn't even that hard and I'm contemplating dropping that since the geometrical symbolism has no pictures and is so awkwardly written. It is profound, but I don't know how to get to the crux of the info when I hate rereading and going slow, especially when there are no commentaries on such works. What do you do /lit/ when you have to finish a super hard book that makes you want to give up?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!/qKRybJPyoB No.13226936]

>>13226924
>Aristotle, Heidegger, Guenon
Well there’s your problem

[Anonymous No.13226969]

>>13226936
shut up already

[Anonymous No.13226991]

>>13226936
I'm just giving examples. I sorta knew I shouldn't have even listed anyone since it would devolve into an autistic debate. Just answer the main question

[Anonymous No.13227005]

>>13226969
This, shut the fuck up butterfly you're pretentious as hell. Only one you're right about is Guenon.

>>13226924
Read "through" the text and don't worry too much about understanding every passage. Just force yourself to keep reading even if it feels like you're reading gibberish. This applies to Heidegger especially; students struggling with Hegel and Heidegger are often told to use this strategy.

[Anonymous No.13227021]

>>13226924
Just don't start w them man lol, read secondary works or Plato. Aristotle is ridiculous and makes useless distinctions, scholastics play this cat and mouse game w it, erasing distinctions when they don't do anything then reinstating new ones.

Don't read anything really challenging, you get nothing out of trying to bench press 315 lbs if you can't bench 135

[Anonymous No.13227023]

>>13226924
If u *have* to read it just do sparknotes, u miss nothing and come back to it later. Rome wasn't built in a day, just read main things that pop out, put it away and then reread later when it becomes hype to you again, repeat

[Anonymous No.13227032]

>>13227021
>tfw can't even bench 120

[Anonymous No.13227042]

>>13227021
I've been reading philosophy for a few years. I've already read Plato and some more niche philosophy that I was interested in. I liked Plato more though since it seems it was at least somewhat interpretive and there wasn't a definitive meaning to be obtained, moreso an idea to be pondered.

>>13227023
I said
>especially when there are no commentaries on such works
Sparknotes isn't an option for some of the stuff I'm reading

>>13227005
Regardless of what you believe about Guenon, I'm reading a book of his right now about geometrical symbolism that doesn't really work with that method you present. If i don't get the beginning stuff, I won't get the end because it all builds off the beginning. I've tried doing what you've said to do in the past and it doesn't work unfortunately.

[Anonymous No.13227066]

Supplementary texts and lectures can be helpful, but you're better off reading a few rather than just taking one thinker's interpretation as gospel. I know that adds a lot more work, but it's worth it for certain thinkers like Heidegger or Wittgenstein.

[Anonymous No.13227115]

>>13227042
>Regardless of what you believe about Guenon, I'm reading a book of his right now about geometrical symbolism that doesn't really work with that method you present. If i don't get the beginning stuff, I won't get the end because it all builds off the beginning. I've tried doing what you've said to do in the past and it doesn't work unfortunately.
I can see why that wouldn't work for the type of text you're reading. It also might not work so well with Aristotle. Regardless, I still suggest trying it with Heidegger. You'll find that after a few reading sessions of forcing yourself onward, Heidegger's prose "clicks" and you can understand it clear as day.

[Anonymous No.13227139]

Partake actively in it. Take notes and think about a paragraph before tackling the next page. By forcing yourself to interact with the text you are more alert of the meanings and engage with it as opposed to an old man lecturing and having it wash over you. It sounds dumb and it makes reading take forever, but its far more entertaining to argue with the author as you go when you are dealing with these huge dense texts from 2000 years ago.