[extropy-chat] Self-Enhncmnt: data acquisition at high speed

[Brent Neal]

 (1/21/04 19:57) David Lubkin <extropy at unreasonable.com> wrote:

>At 03:07 PM 1/21/2004 -0800, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
>
>>Normal reading speed is perhaps 240 wpm (though this was from the net, not 
>>the GBoR so ByrBwr).
>>         :
>>Now, speed reading is great (though I would question the 2000 wpm number
>>as another source said only 1000 wpm -- which is closer to high speed
>>listening capabilities).
>
>We had a thread on reading speed a few years ago. A lot of people chimed in 
>with their data points. Few on the list were as slow as that 240 wpm mark. 
>I'd expect that peak reading speed is correlated with IQ given that 
>response times for elementary tasks seem to give the best measure of IQ. On 
>this list, I'd guess the least impressive participant would have no problem 
>passing Mensa's 1:50 threshold (2 SD); the list median is at least 1:1000 
>(3 SD).


I, too, have a fairly high reading rate, though its been years since I've clocked myself. (I consider that measurement to be fairly pointless, since I really think the ability to read that quickly is essentially a savant talent, and not any measure of intelligence.)

However, I have noticed one thing about my acquaintances who read quickly that I thought I'd toss out for general comment. -None- of the people that I know who read almost or more quickly than I do subvocalize words while reading.  Almost everyone else I know does.  Apparently, having to associate the sounds with the words really slows the comprehension down. (Which has interesting implications for teaching reading by phonics!)

Interestingly, this does not strongly correlate with being a visual learner either. In my (admittedly small) sample population of 10 people who are naturally fast readers, 3 of them are kinesthetic learners and another was an auditory learner.  9 out of the 10 reported being very early readers (i.e. younger than 3 when first able to read new material).  Also interestingly, 10 out of 10 reported despising poetry in grade school. I suspect that's because rhythm and rhyme are pretty much lost concepts if you don't either vocalize or subvocalize the words you read.

>>Now with software of this nature one begins to ask if this could be
>>used to "compress" education times (either in children who still
>>have extremely plastic brains or adults in college)?

I'd guess not. As I stated in another thread about education,  there is a vast difference between having access to a corpus of knowledge and being able to apply it. It will still take time to process this informations and integrate it into your natural stream of thought.  All the SFish Matrixesque crap about uploading the ability to pilot helicopters and to kick Laurence Fishburne around virtual dojos is a pretty fiction, and not likely to become reality any sooner than uploading your consciousness. (Actually, I'd wager that uploading consciousness would happen first, considering the complexity of forcing the development of reflexes vs. adding memories.)


B

Just a comment,

B

-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein