/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14375297]

Can we discuss the topic/problem presented in the image? How do i become an autodidact learner, who develops truly substantial knowledge on all kinds of subjects?

Like, perhaps, some others here i have not been capable to follow the conventional path of studying at a university and am mostly left to my own devices, which does not mean that i dont have a great thirst for learning, for studying, for understanding, but which has lead to me not approaching things the right way. I do believe in my talent for insight and analysis, but it is a "flaccid talent", one which i am convinced off due to it shining now and then, but one which is not trained, not utilized systematically, and one that has not been incorporated sufficiently into my perspective of the world, that I could deny the evident superficiality of my observations and thoughts

I read carelessly, often i find myself pseudo-reading parts that i do not understand, i do not write anything but short insignificant sentences in my notebook, and i have so far tackled every single topic in a lazy way. I adopt arguments or opinions in relation to how i feel about them. I struggle to formulate my thoughts in a concise and convincing way. This is shameful as i have dedicated my last 4 years to reading and supposed studying.
Nonetheless it remains my dream to grow more mature and sincere in my approach, as i have a genuine thirst for learning - simply, as it is one of the few joys, as irregular and half-assed as i do it, that gives me a deeper sense of fulfillment in my day-to-day life.

Excuse me for this blog-post, but i felt i needed to establish where i'm at (as one often feels like most of /lit/ consists of fairly succesful university students) What i'm asking for now, is advice, charts, guides, websites, books - that may guide me, that may fill the gap that in an ideal world would have been filled by a teacher. The posted chart is already a great help but leaves some gaps (particularly as i'm austrian and not american)

[Anonymous No.14375347]

>>14375297
image looks good but is utter bullshit, shouldn't be hard to notice that on ur own. if you're seriously considering following that reading program, you're probably retarded

[Anonymous No.14375367]

I'll be honest anon, while I believe you hypothetically can become a good autodidact I want to say that it's 99% impossible and you'll end up a pseud compared to people who actually get educated through professors with curricula to provide you with on a class-by-class, semester-by-semester, basis, potentially for years (say BA, MA, PhD). You're better than a lot of people just for realizing the value of the academia track, it really is optimized for teaching you. The best you can have, if you can't go that route, is socialize with friends who are on that track and can genuinely help guiding you the way their professors help them.

[Anonymous No.14375387]

>>14375367
I understand and mostly agree. Yet i wish to make the best of what is possible on my own. I do have friends in academia, but they lack the right pathos.

>>14375347
I'm particularly thinking of the Autodidact Core sections. I value "How to Read a Book" quite a bit - despite having hated it intuitively on my first reading and the other two books mentioned there seem like a decent help too, but as i speak german and intend to write in german as well, they are sort of useless to me

[Anonymous No.14375394]

>>14375297

1) You have to be systematic, even when it’s boring
2) You have to engage with the industry standards (like university textbooks, and works written by the authoritative figures of the field)
3) You have to understand the practical pictures (tools and methods used by professionals in their daily reality)
4) Have a historical understanding

One can get better education a field in this way than someone in an academic setting. The big difference is this, and mainly this: most, if not all, people do not have the motivation to slug through this eithout outside incentive. That likely includes you.

[Anonymous No.14375409]

>>14375387
just so much of that chart is really dumb. like putting the Bible in the liberal arts section. or recommending people read textbooks for physics, chemistry and biology (textbooks are literally reference books, not shit to read cover to cover like normal books lmao). random meme book on psychology. also
>the basics of thinking and of the structures of ideas which you may think about
whoever wrote that sentence is a fucking idiot

feel like the dude who made this graph is really really dumb and i doubt he's read everything included in the graph. this is probably his reading list that he thinks will make him smart if he can read it all

[Anonymous No.14375413]

>>14375297
>set curriculum for yourself
>follow it through to the end
>continue ad infinitum

This is it. Yet, not a single anon here has ever completed any such curriculum. The motivation and resolve needed requires a will beyond what the average person has in them.

[Anonymous No.14375419]

>>14375394
It seems to me that another factor that hinders people is lack of access and guidance. What does it mean to be systematic? What university textbooks am I to read on what, who are the authoritative figures of the field, and what do you mean with tools and methods.

Another issue i have observed from my pals is simply time dedication. I am often confused in how little they read in depth and how much is dealt in excerpts. I understand the utility and reason for this, but without a professor guiding one through these excerpts it is almost impossible to replicate this.

Yet incentive is also important. What i really struggle with is to write essays on what i've read or to ask myself questions on certain figures (I have tasked myself with writing an essay contemplating the role of Alkibiades in the peloponesian war, but this task creates anxiety and sort of shame, it feels somewhat pathetic and also useless) - And this is of course a major part of thinking, of understanding, of creating structured arguments. It is actually particularly here where i desire guidance and would love a book that allows me to treat it as an authority (and even if a questionable authority, as long as it gets me writing..)

[Anonymous No.14375427]

>>14375413
Is a curriculum just a book list?

[Anonymous No.14375429]

>>14375409
>textbooks are literally reference books

Yes, but also no. Textbooks are written chronologically and fluidly. You can develop a foundation for any field following a good textbook. People don’t read cover to cover because you usually develop this foundation through your education in other ways instead of just reading. But reading a textbook cover to cover will give someone (especially an autodidact) greater systematic understanding of a field than any other approach. The number of “normal” books necessary to equate the knowledge from a single textbook is inefficient and clumsy.

[Anonymous No.14375439]

>>14375429
nope, they're reference books designed so that teachers can select sections that they want to teach from. nobody reads those things in their entirely and that's not the point. they're basically encyclopedias catered to certain fields

[Anonymous No.14375472]

>>14375419
>It seems to me that another factor that hinders people is lack of access and guidance. What does it mean to be systematic? What university textbooks am I to read on what, who are the authoritative figures of the field, and what do you mean with tools and methods.

If you’re really stuck on this, then you shouldn’t really be looking into being an autodidact. To be an autodidact you need some basic talent to realize these things on your own, or at least to carve out a path for yourself with confidence. Read a basic history on the subject, take advantage of easily accesible information such as wikipedia and simple articles written on the subject to give you a notion of what the current discussion looks like. Pick a particular approach as they emerge from these prelimary investigations and focus on it, with an eye for deficiencies and criticisms. It’s nothing more than using common sense, anon. Who’s an authority? The guy that pops up with his name highlighted in the textbook, or the guy with 100,000 citations on google scholar, or the one in tv shilling his new book. Engage with these things and you’ll find holes, and different routes as they emerge. The #1 thing to become an expert is to remember that it takes time and the only way to learn is by engaging with the material, whatever material, the path will carve itself out as long as you aren’t satisfied with the first answer you find.

[Anonymous No.14375489]

>>14375439
>t. will never make it.
I have never engaged in a good class that didn’t have us finish the textbook by the end of the semester, unless the class was part of a two-semester set up. That people don’t actually read them is another matter. But the majority of people complaining how difficult the test is or how they didnt understand the questions is because they dont read the textbook. Reading the textbook is what seperates the mediocre student from the one crusing, and getting reserch offers from their profs. Read the textbook, anon if you value your education.

[Anonymous No.14375495]

>>14375489
t. retard who reads the textbook and thinks it makes him smart
LMAOOOO shut up dork

[Anonymous No.14375499]

>>14375472
You have made a convincing point. I still would like some methodical books on learning (How to read a book, for example, i consider truly valuable as a meditation on insightful and deep reading) - but mostly it is laziness. My first big target is Ancient Greece, and i have actually written down all mayor artists and also secondary sources on that epoch - yet i hesistate out of "fear" (an excuse) of doing it wrong.

[Anonymous No.14375529]

>>14375495
I have nothing to gain by convincing you, anon. But reading the textbook has time and time again proven to be the decisive factor between simply regurgitating lecture notes and actually internalizing the material and meaningfully engaing with it. Waste your time reading “normal” (whatever those are) books.

[Anonymous No.14375535]

>>14375529
>Waste your time reading “normal” (whatever those are) books.
yeah bud i'm gonna read non-reference books and use reference books when i'm supposed to use them

[Anonymous No.14375574]

>>14375535
Okay, bud. Live in happy mediocrity. Which you clearly resent and need to take out on the notion of somebody trying harder than you. I can’t imagine resisting so much to advice. I doubt you’ve genuinely tried reading a textbook cover to cover. It has been nothing but a rewarding experience. And again, I have never taken a class in the a hard sciences that didn't assign full chapters periodically until finishing the book (unless the material in it is divided over semesters).

[Anonymous No.14375584]

>>14375574
>Live in happy mediocrity.
you post on /lit/ dude, stop being so haughty reference book reading dork lmao ur not smart!

[Anonymous No.14375596]

>>14375584
How about you read instead of continuing to project your insecurities unto others.

[Anonymous No.14375613]

>>14375596
i'm actually reading right now (your post)

[Anonymous No.14375618]

>>14375613
Thanks. Remember to cite in APA.