Memorizing facts has always been easy for me. In the thread below, "Throwing in the Towel" you'll read about me missing key information that was outside the scope of my purpose and questions because I didn't know about the thing in the first place so I couldn't ask questions about it. It's been my experience that the questions I ask and purposes I have limit my reading to those things when what's in the book may be much more broad. I'm not asking for photographic recall of anything, I'm just asking for recognition of things. If I PR a whole book and only 2 things interest me enough to go back and study read them, great, but I at least want to see that it was there in the first place. Photoreading has burned me on many reading assignments over the past 2 (almost 2.5) years and what I hear over and over is "make clearer purposes and mind probes, make a new branch on your mind map during each activation pass, etc etc" which is great and certainly better than the support that other accelerated reading programs provide (none at all) but if I continue to not ask the right questions to get the information, and I'm not a moron (that's still open to debate though), is it possible that other people are also not asking the right questions and are putting down these books thinking that they've read them but instead what they've done is just (through the law of attraction, previous knowledge attracting more of itself, especially in books about topics you "like") gotten more of what they already know and are now feeling good about "reading a book" really fast? The reason I say that is because that's what I've noticed in myself. I'm not just making this up to be a troublemaker but on the other side of the coin, do other people have "my" problem but are not saying anything about it because they've already said "it works" and they don't want to be a "turncoat" or a non yes man?
I would be happy with recognition that something is in the text, I would like to have the memory of having noticed it and I would like to not miss important information. If a new concept is in the text and I miss it, I am not happy. If I have to resort eventually to moving my eyes over all of the text in order to complete this then in reality, what am I doing? When I read about arthritis and all my questions were geared toward dietary and lifestyle choices effecting it, I only stopped and dipped on things related to those ideas. I think I limited myself to that information and I think that's my problem. My limitation toward what I was thinking spilled over into a limitation in the purposes and questions I was asking and lead to gaining limited knowledge.
I seems as if I'm reading to "learn what's in the book" that's not right. What's right is spelling out a few things you want and reading to get those things and then put the book down. If my mind is supposed to guide me to these things and fill in the wholes to complete the picture of understanding, fine, but I always miss the one thing I always need to know. That thing is always new and I don't know how to make my purposes and mind probes so I'll actually stop and dip on exactly what I need to know, because I don't know about it in order to ask a question about it.
While I superread and dip I actually think up more questions I want answered but if I stop myself and back up a page or two, there is the answer. Sometimes if I just pick up a book and start reading and asking "where is this train of thought going?" "What is important to me here?" and keep asking those 2 things as I just read, I can blow by tons of junk and be done pretty quick.
Maybe I need a crash course in Purposes and Mind Probes. If one question can get me everything I need, then what is the question? If my questions are too vague, I dip on everything, so there's 2 sides here. Maybe questions need a book all to themselves.
