Forums IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ PhotoReading, Memory Optimizer SQ3R and PR

In High School, the English teacher taught us the SQ3R: Suevey, Question, Read, Recite, Review technique of reading.

Could PhotoReading be considered a "form" of this method developed in the 1940s?

yes

PRing isn't new at all.

Go back few thousands of years you'll see ancient chinese scribes using it.

Many elements are similar; that's because they all appropriate some fundamental principles about speed reading. The only difference is the PR step, which, as I wrote and exhorted people exhaustively to realize, may or may not do anything beyond the so-called placebo effect, as yet, no available studies have analyzed the efficacy of the PR step in and of itself. This needs to be done, contrary to the obscurantist and looped-logically arguments of Believers such as AlexK. The PR step, as I understand it, is something unique to this system-- I don't believe Chang's assertion that "ancient chinese scribes" used this same technique; where's the historical evidence?
KO

In my final semester of college I hardly studied. I mostly just photoread my textbooks and used my own activation techniques when taking tests. I did NOT preview, postview, rapid read, ect. Of course I did not know exactly what I read but I was ablt to pull up the info for multiple choice tests and even essays. I also made the Dean's List that semester. I'm not a "true believer" in Photoreading I'm just a bit more aware of what I can do.

As far as having scientific studies, IMO that is not important at the personal level. If I can do it, I don't really care why it works just as long as it does.

In my Social Psychology class (1996) I learned that in 1993 social psychologists discovered that when people are in rapport with one another their physiology matches and when they are not in rapport their physiology does not match. I could have sworn I learned that in 1990 when listening to the tape set "Unlimited Power" by Tony Robbins. Of course the book was written well before that and NLP used these skills before Robbins was even trained in it. Matching physiology to read someone's thoughts was even mentioned in Edgar Allen Poe's short story, "The Purloined Letter." However, this ability did not exist until 1993 according to social psychologists.

[This message has been edited by Dosetsu (edited April 24, 2003).]

What qualifies as being in Rapport, with specific reference to the ways in which two peoples "physiology" matches? What part of their physiology? How accurately can we actually derive thoughts from a gross Physiological state? What "sociological" studies reveal this? The quote marks their reveal my contempt for sociology, not your assertion. I understand the personal-level position on studies the problem is that we need to clarify what actually "is going on". The placebo effect, and subconscious suggestion may be what's happening. In other words, it might not matter the specific action of PRing. This doesn't make it less valuable necessarily. I like to think of it as the desire to understand how something works, rather than the workingness of something, because knowing how can become very useful.

Originally posted by Kristoff Olafsson:
"What qualifies as being in Rapport, with specific reference to the ways in which two peoples "physiology" matches?"

It is a mental state, usually involving trust, familiarity, and liking the other person.

"What part of their physiology?"

It depends. Most often it is their posture. I think that is all the study covered. The textbook did not mention using the other person's words, matching their voice tone, or rate of speech, things I do more often. The next time you are on the phone, try matching the tone and rate of speech of the person you are talking to and see what happens.

"How accurately can we actually derive thoughts from a gross Physiological state?"

That depends on the skill of the person doing it. Actual thoughts are a stretch IMO, I just pointed out that the method of gaining rapport was very old, far older than 1993.

"What "sociological" studies reveal this?"

I no longer have my textbook. That was 7 years ago.

"The quote marks their reveal my contempt for sociology, not your assertion."

I debated my teachers all the time, using patterns similar to what you are using now. Are you trained in NLP or do you just do this naturally?

"I understand the personal-level position on studies the problem is that we need to clarify what actually "is going on". The placebo effect, and subconscious suggestion may be what's happening. In other words, it might not matter the specific action of PRing. This doesn't make it less valuable necessarily. I like to think of it as the desire to understand how something works, rather than the workingness of something, because knowing how can become very useful."

This depends on your intention. If it is to use it for a psychological experiment what you are saying is a good idea. Some people in the study can skip certain steps while one group follows the whole system, for example. If it is simple to help you learn faster and more effectively, then a scientific study is not needed.

I do agree with you on sociology. I majored in Social Sciences but will be the first one to say it is not scientific. IMO it is pretty much a bunch of people using statistics and wierd logic to "prove" their political idiologies. They have an outcome and they then search for facts and psuedofacts to prove it.

A form of PR is taught in the Vedas, so it has been around.
As for the scientific information, it exists.
I just want to know of the relation between SQ3R and PR.

[This message has been edited by jonah (edited April 24, 2003).]

Off dude, you PRed right? What's the doubt?

Jonah,

If you apply just the steps of SQ3R most people can significantly reduce the amount of time spent with their reading material.

One of the fundamentals not often taught is establishing your purpose for your reading. Then having questions to keep you focused on the reading material. It is also a false assumption that the sound fundamentals of reading have been taught in all schools. A look at the high illiteracy levels being addressed by remedial reading programs seems to point to a only handful of people being taught those sound fundamentals. In fact there are corporations spending money training their employees to preview, prioritise, question and read, their reading material.

While photoreading alone can be all that is necessary, spontaneous activation is elusive for many. The addition of manual activation adopted from methods like SQ3R help with the mind probing which so many have not been taught in relation to reading.

Anyone who has learnt the photoreading system can try for themselves if skipping the PhotoReading stage makes a difference.

Alex

Thanks, everyone