Why books don't work (2019)

You learn facts by attempted to recall and by creating relationships to already known facts. So for humanities, you learn by making notes from test, trying to recall them, trying to write own essay based on the texts or answering questions etc.

The same thing as you do with math/science where you learn by actively engaging with topic.

Books work in different ways.

Memory isn't freeform, it's triggered and asssociative. If I ask you what you were reading a year ago, you probably won't be able to tell me. But if I mention an associated experience or concept, your recall may be triggered and you'll be able to remember something relevant - and talk about it, possibly in some detail.

People are much better at remembering narratives and parable than facts, and also better at remembering practical experience than theory.

Textbooks are useless unless you do the exercises and use your new skills to solve real problems.

But it's also why liberal political and economic books rarely have much political influence.

The right always frames its points as memorable narratives with an emotional kick, not as attempts at objective analysis. The left rarely understands why this matters, or how you can use that one weird trick to persuade people to do all kinds of stupid and self-destructive things.

See also the ad industry, talk radio, QAnon, etc.

It's funny, the author has made a decent case for why pop science/non-fiction books are useless (I agree) despite pitching a book on an obvious nonsense subject about imaginary computers unlikely to ever exist (or, if you're an optimist; to exist in our lifetimes). Imagine wanting to master a field less realistic than phlogiston theory or medieval demonology to the extent that it "also means repeating those quick memory tests in expanding intervals over the following days, weeks, and months." I suppose indoctrination is necessary since this form of anti-knowledge is unlikely to ever be actually used -unlike actual knowledge, say, such as linear algebra or obscure tree data structures relating to metric spaces.

Books are mostly not for actually learning a technical subject; they're for reviewing the subject after you already know something, and expanding your knowledge after you have the basics. There are many things I know, and can recall with effort, as they're in long term memory, but can easily recall and apply if I pick up a book and thumb through it for a few minutes. Yeah, I can cook up a nice boeuf bourguignon or pumpernickel bread from memory, but it's gonna go a lot more smoothly if I read the cookbook.

Another thing he misses; if a book makes you feel something, it's going to stick with you a lot more clearly than some recitation of dry facts. Storm of Steel sticks with me better than the official British History of the Great War. Similarly, "Darwinian Fairytales," which is absolutely hilarious in addition to being perfectly correct, sticks with me a lot better than "The Selfish Gene" -which I've paid considerably more attention to.

Books work fine, but reading comprehension is a real skill and very few master it by adulthood, or even by the end of a higher degree. I’ll suggest a simple solution to try. After you read a chapter (or whatever suitable section), spend 10 minutes re-explaining it to yourself. Begin by merely regurgitating: argue what the author argued, but in your own words. If you find gaps or contradictions, go back to the source and correct them. (With time your need to do so will diminish: your brain will learn to pick up more the first time.) After regurgitating, a larger inner discussion is both helpful and fun: what did you agree with? Disagree with? What questions are you left with?

This brief rehearsal and analysis of the contents will greatly aid comprehension and recall, and the value of the time spent.

You could try it on this very post.

This technique works also with video and audio content, conversations, or any other form of information exchange. Early rehearsal and analysis increases comprehension.

And that’s significant because if you think books don’t create lasting comprehension, try measuring the effectiveness of video, audio, lectures, etc. I’m not aware of a medium that outperforms text, properly read.

> Listeners’ attention wanders after a few minutes

So does readers' attention. It's like he never got to the point. I was expecting some revelation about how he reads books, or how books should be read, or what is a better replacement for books... couldn't past a quarter of that post.