This past summer I had the opportunity to rediscover the insightful classic How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading by Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren (1972).  As a doctoral student with an interest in learning to read more effectively the deluge of books and articles that routinely come my way in the doctoral program and through my own research interests, this book has come at just the right time.  I have already started applying the principles from this highly practical book and find the results pleasing, not only concerning my increased comprehension of complex reading material, but also in the realization that not all readings deserve or should be given equal weight.

I have posted here what the authors call analytical reading, a type of reading that is meant to produce understanding of complex topics and distinguished from elementary and inspectional reading used primarily when learning to read for the first time or when engaged in reading for entertainment and/or skimming and scanning of texts.

Stage 1: Find out what the book (article, story, etc.) is about.

  1. Classify the book by kind and subject matter.
  2. Briefly state what the book is about.
  3. Make an outline of the major parts in order and indicate their relationships, and then outline these major parts as well.
  4. Define the problem (or problems) presented in the book that the author is trying to solve.

Stage 2: Interpret the book’s contents.

  1. “Come to terms with the author” by interpreting key words presented in the book.
  2. Understand the author’s leading propositions by dealing with the most important sentences.
  3. Know the author’s key arguments within and across sentences.
  4. Decide which of the problems have been solved and which have not.  For the problems that remain unsolved, determine which ones the author knows he/she has failed to solve.

Stage 3: Enter a dialogue with the author and criticize the book as a Communication of Knowledge. 

A. General Maxims of Intellectual Etiquette

  1. Do not criticize the book until after you have completed an outline and interpretation of the work. (Do not say “I agree”, “I disagree”, or “I suspend judgement” until after you can say “I understand”.)
  2. Do not disagree simply to debate or argue with the author’s points.
  3. Show your recognition of the difference between actual knowledge and mere personal opinion by presenting clear logical reasoning for any critical evaluation you make of the book.

B. Special Criteria for Points of Criticism 

  1. Show where the author is uninformed.
  2. Show where the author is misinformed.
  3. Show where the author is illogical.
  4. Show where the author’s analysis or argumentation is incomplete.

In addition, Adler and van Doren note that the first three of the special criteria are crucial criteria for disagreement with an author.  If you fail to present where the author is uniformed, misinformed, or illogical, you must agree, at least in part with the author’s points and/or conclusion.  Suspension of judgement on the whole is permitted, however, in the case of demonstrated incomplete analysis or argumentation.