Reading tehnics might differ depending on the type of book or paper. We didn’t read non-fiction the same way we’re reading novels or guides.
The relation between a book and its reader is the same as the one between a teacher and his/her student. Just like there’s severaal ways of teaching different subjects, books should be analysed differently depending on the subject.
Before start reading a book, we need to know what kind of book it is to adjust the angle with which we will tackle it. Is it a novel? A study? A manual? What’s the subject? Carefuly reading the title can help a lot on this, like it suggested in Inspectional reading.
We should also discerne whether a book is practical or theorical. Practical books are the one from which we can take actions and that could provide takeaways. Theorical books are for the pure sake of knowledge. They’re mostly useful to reinforce our thoughts and ideas on specific thoeries.
For non-fiction, we might read fast by abstracting all the lyricism around specific concepts to then read slower and take pauses to understand unfamiliar concepts and ideas as well as taking some notes. The reading profile through time would be very winding. It also not be very rare to come back to the book later to just search for a specific byte of information.
Reading different type of books
- Reading philosophy
- Reading science and mathematics
- Reading digests
- Reading news
- Reading biographies
- Reading history
- Reading imaginary
Depending on the type, the Note-taking process will also be different: the attention to detail might not be the same for non-fiction or novels, as well as the things selected or the ratio Litterature note / Fleeting note
Contrary to what Speed reading gourous could say, no technics can rule all the different mental models we need to read a book.