What do you do when you are reading philosophy, antropology,

>>8029221
Hi, I use a lot of sticky bookmarks, written with topics that interested me during the read depending of what I'm working on.

I don't take notes, I just try to absorb the experience and retain the important parts.

>>8029248
>sticky bookmarks

I started to use some months ago. They are good to mark quotes I like when I read literature, but when I'm reading philosohpy is like if I don't write down I will forget it soon.

>>8029260
this.

>"Why?" said Zarathustra. "Thou askest why? I do not belong to those who may be asked after their Why. Is my experience but of yesterday? It is long ago that I experienced the reasons for mine opinions. Should I not have to be a cask of memory, if I also wanted to have my reasons with me? It is already too much for me even to retain mine opinions; and many a bird flieth away.

>>8029260
This desu.
If something is good enough it'll stick.

It's not the "words," anon. It's the meaning, the concept behind them that the author is trying to convey. If you can't grasp that then I have nothing else to offer you.

>>8029274
You can try to take notes apart from the text, on reading notes?
Usually, when I've got troubles to remember something in philosophy, it's because I've got to read it more.

It all depends of what you need. In a "pure" philosophical approach, it's important to give the text all the chances to deploy itself. Then, if you read it more with the perspective of a "tool", by example for an usage in an anthropological work, you may permit yourself to read it less... respectfully?
It's up to you, what you need in the matter. You can see texts as "toolboxes" like Foucault said (that doesn't mean to ransack the texts), or read more "alongside" the author. It isn't the very same degree of attention or the same kind of work.

>>8029221
I have my own journal that I write papers for. It is very prestigious, in fact nobody else can understand it due to the advanced nature of the material so it doesn't circulate.

>>8029380
Read: schizophrenia

File: 1424851070176.png (40KB, 547x652px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 547x652px

Underline phrases, write notes on the margin, write a short summary of each chapter. Then I skim through the chapter again a couple of times and try to refine my understanding of it. Reread it the next day.

I've only just started marking my books and I'm making my way through Waterfield's The First Philosophers, which has short chapters on each Presocratic. It lends itself well to this method. Haven't tried it out for any other books yet though.

>>8029221
I read the book
If my mind drifts as I read, sometimes I will go over a page without absorbing
I just re read, or if I have trouble with understanding, I re read

I write summaries when reading philosophy.

Helps when you have to postpone reading for a while.

>>8029600
So you're reading each chapter 4-5 times? I don't have the patience for that. Usually once with notes is enough.

>>8029221
I have a tendency, so I'd noticed, to canonize pages. Not sure how it's done or learned, just something I noticed after a few years. By some ways into the page, I'd have begun to reread from the top (or maybe verify in my mind?). In any case, I noticed when I'd have gotten to the bottom of a page and am still reading - if that makes sense

>>8029221
I usually read a book to get the concepts clear in my head, then I write a test and an answer key as though I were going to give it to someone else, then I wait awhile and answer the test questions, then I check my answers with my fresh answer key, then I read notes on the book to make sure I'm correct, then if I'm wrong I reread the book and try again.

>>8029852
>>8029221
It also doesn't hurt to write an essay as though you were turning it into someone you respect. Mental Gymnastics. Imagine someone you respect and admire, then imagine you're writing this essay to them and they will read it personally. It usually motivates me.

>>8029221
For philosophy, these help me:

(1) Evaluate things as you read them. This can be through margin notes or a .txt or whatever. Or you can just think it or talk about it with someone. What's important is that you not just go along with whatever the author is saying, letting it wash over you without resistance. Ask why you should believe it, why they're saying it, and think about how to object to it or how it fits or doesn't with whatever else they've been saying.

(2) Read with some particular purpose in mind. It's much easier to remember things if you have some specific questions/issues in mind, rather than if you're just reading something because you think it would be good to have read or whatever. Read Descartes or Hume, e.g., because you are interested in what we can know and how we can know it. Or Aristotle or Peter Singer because you want to know how you should live. Etc. It also helps if you think for yourself some about the relevant questions before you get too far into the reading. Then reading will be an aid to furthering and challenging your own thought. Of course, you don't have to think only about the issues you've considered beforehand--one of the things great philosophers do is raise new questions or help us see why some question is more interesting we'd thought--but starting out with some questions that you're interested in and reading for helps. Mainly I think this just makes doing (1) and (3) more natural.

(3) Write about what you've found most interesting. And by that I don't mean 'write a summary'. Rather, write something either developing one of the author's arguments or views against some objections or developing your own (or at any rate, some plausible alternative) views in response to objections from the author. Or find some things that the author says that seem to conflict and show how they can be reconciled, or how two things they say that seem compatible actually aren't. Basically, expand some of the more interesting thoughts you had while doing (1). Doesn't have to be any specific length, though early on it's probably best to keep it pretty short to avoid sprawl. Pick one claim, clarify it and argue for it--depth over breadth. This can end up being anything from a few pages to dozens of pages.
Usually writing is easiest and works best if you've read at least a few related things, rather than doing it one book/article at a time.
Write as clearly as you can, preferably for an 'audience' that's not already steeped in the relevant terminology and background. This keeps you honest. Doing something like this will force you to summarize, as well as reformulate things in clearer terms, but for a particular purpose. Not only should this help you remember it later, but it should also help you see why you or anybody else should care.
Try to get feedback on the content of your writing, preferably from someone who is also interested in the questions you're writing about.

>>8029221
I accumulate the information gatherd (I think everything that i read, if i think it is important, sticks with me)
Also im not the fan of learning the precise statements. (yes i know this is contrary to what philosophy stands for) I just notice that a lot of people take what they hear from one philospher and can't deviate from his stance.
An more open minded relation, which let's people accept more than one view would be profitable.

>>8029863
good post

I take notes, mostly because I'm used to rather than forced to in order to remember what's going on. Anyway, I also keep reading on the same subject so I eventually remember a lot of informations. I also teach, which is the best way to consolidate what has been learned.