/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19668287]

What's the best way to increase your comprehension ?

[Anonymous No.19668307]

>>19668287
I mean you can try to come up w your own memory metaphysics but a lot of how lying and memorizing work is it being a real part of your belief system. The more you can tie points into your belief system then the easier recall will be. You should have a belief system which is encompassing, don't try to work backwards (try to mash a particular info onto your belief system) but have some interests and be able to derive conclusions.

[Anonymous No.19668335]

>>19668287
Be smart. It's not really hard. A good memory mixed with a trained mind that automatically logically structures things helps a lot.

I've never had much problem with text comprehension unless the author is being very intentionally confusing as a style. I think all the studying tricks for comprehending texts are just that, tricks. Literally just read, imagine, structure, and remember and you will comprehend.

[Anonymous No.19668339]

>>19668287
>>19668195

[Anonymous No.19668341]

>>19668287
Fuck all of that, just make a scene out of the words in your mind's eye and watch a movie in your head.

[Anonymous No.19668343]

>>19668287
This is a bit impractical. I don't want to reread every book that I wish to comprehend. And if I don't stop to think about the things I don't understand in a book, I'll just get bored. What if it's a 700-page massive book? I have to read it three times if I want to understand it?
When I read, I just make notes with post-its on the passages I find interesting. If a book is really enjoyable to me I'll reread it. But I'm not going to read every book I read three times.

[Anonymous No.19668367]

>>19668287
sleeping desu

[Anonymous No.19668374]

>>19668287
This reeks of severe autism.

[Anonymous No.19668388]

>>19668287

CRISPR

[Anonymous No.19668440]

>>19668287
For fiction books I generally highlight a passage in my Kindle but otherwise i don't bother too much.

For non-fiction books (technical etc. for my work related skills) I like to highlight some sentences with different colors and put stickers to bookmark the location if content/image/graph is especially important. I also write in the margins sometimes. So far this has really helped me with capturing information from those 500pg+ technical books.

I tried note-taking but when you are not studying for an exam and you don't have to the luxury of taking time off to take notes, I think the above mentioned method works fine for knowledge consolidation. It's like active reading and cements the stuff better in your head.

[Anonymous No.19668777]

>>19668287
phenomenology and hermeneutics

[Anonymous No.19668855]

>>19668287
no idea I read for fun, if I'm studying I take notes that seems to work

[Anonymous No.19668873]

imagine applying this process to Being and Time

[Anonymous No.19668885]

>>19668307
This makes a lot of sense anon, could you elaborate? How does one make ones belief system more encompassing?

[Anonymous No.19668887]

>>19668777
trips of truth

[Anonymous No.19668902]

>>19668885
I think he means connecting it to something of value or with personal emotive content in addition to relating it to your already held beliefs. You remember things you have an emotional connection with and things you tested and synthesized against your existing understanding.

[Anonymous No.19669024]

>>19668287
sleeping and application, especially for technical stuff. If you learn something new then try to make use of that knowledge asap. For me who's learning CS stuff, it means making a small little project or demo to test the idea out.
After you've done all that go to sleep, reflect on what you've learned, and when you get up look at what you did to get a second whiff of what you did.

[Anonymous No.19669296]

>>19668885
If you want to memorize x then in your system you should have a way to go from system to x. You should not try to go from x to system.
Practically that would mean, if you want to memorize a fact about the civil war, you should have a historicism which can show that that is what would happen and because of that so on and so on is true. Trying to forcefully append x to your historicism is instead too much effort and fruitless as you could never derive it.
A bit more of a practical example, if you're trying to find out why the generals in the civil war acted as they did, you could remember that all domestic disputes in usa are fundamentally derived from the lockean/rouseauian liberalisms split which may, preferably, be a part of a larger historical narrative (talking out my ass, the "platonist/aristotelian" historicism of humans or, maybe, biology in rk theory etc (still talking out ass)).