If writing is thinking on paper (and there can be no doubt that good writing is), then the ability to read intelligently is a crucial ingredient when it comes to the art of critical thinking. What with non-readers and bad readers everywhere one looks, is it0 any wonder critical thinking skill is in such short supply?
Reading nonfiction has at least two distinct merits. One: it causes the reader to grow in knowledge, insight and (sometimes) wisdom. Two: it provides pleasure and entertainment to those who are not amused by the clandestine amorous activities of celebrities, cockfighting, and the like. Now the good reader, while he is certainly not averse to deriving pleasure out of his reading, ensures that it is never at the cost of compromising on the cognitive element, which remains his primary motivation. Consequently, even his lighter reading has a distinct intellectually stimulating flavour to it.
The Quran offers an enticing challenge to its readers: it encourages them to try and find inconsistencies in its text. This is useful because it makes readers who accept this challenge read the text critically, not casually or superficially. This habit is of utility for reading in general, for all texts must be read critically.
[Unfortunately, when it comes to the Quran, instead of being critical, most outsiders approach the task in a quite antagonistic manner, with a strong prior agenda. So, the first thing that remotely looks like an inconsistency (a judgment which only a little consideration would reverse) is deemed justification enough to put the book down.]
Critical reading calls for high degrees of sincerity and academic integrity. Not only does it require the reader to be ruthlessly critical, but at the same time to be fair (even sympathetic when the author of the text is thought to belong to the ‘other’ camp). But the reward of successfully negotiating this tightrope is worth every bit of the hard work involved. For if no effort is shirked in comprehending the work as it is (as opposed to its straw man version), then whether eventually it is rejected or accepted in any degree, the judgment is based purely on the work’s merit, The whole exercise, therefore, ends up benefiting and enriching the reader in either case.
The distinction between good and bad readers may seem out of place in an age where Genus Reader itself is teetering on the brink of extinction. But this scribe is convinced that as long as we still have some readers left (who knows for how much longer), it is worth encouraging them to become good ones.
It works the other way around too: reading texts favourably with a view to defend them also sees to it that the critical switches in the brain are all switched on. So it is that a sound piece of advice given to young scientists is to get hold of a hypothesis (any hypothesis) and try and see how far they can defend it. If they succeed in doing so, they have obviously made progress. But even if they end up failing, their effort will still have been worthwhile because they will have proved that there is no use pursuing that particular avenue.
The trap to watch out for here is that one can very easily be a little too fond of a text for one’s own good. So it is that many individuals read texts just to reinforce and confirm their biases and inclinations. They carefully choose works with theses that they wholeheartedly agree with (even before reading them) – on hearsay or based on the author’s reputation, for example. Having done that, they decide to strongly approve of and delight in every word that they read. Needless to say, they benefit little from their reading apart from having become more hardened in their already set ways (whatever those happen to be).
Reading that smacks of blindly and lazily approving every word of a text is also characteristic of readers who read in order to parrot parts of it with a view to sound informed and scholarly. Reading habits motivated by such self-serving considerations can hardly be expected to make anybody a good reader.
The ability to judge a work on its own merit (not in light of preconceived notions and biases) is a skill education programs around the globe have failed to inculcate in their students. There are exceptions, of course, and notable ones at that. But they merely serve to prove the rule. In defence of the authorities concerned with imparting education, the ability demands more discipline and force of will than most pupils are willing to exercise and exert. Consequently, most readers fail to keep their passions and prejudices at bay while reading texts. So it is that when such an individual ‘reads’ a text, what he actually reads are his own thoughts, interpretations, fantasies, or what he imagines the ‘dangerous’ or ‘silly’ views of his adversary must be. All these often have little to do with the intent of the author of the text. This type of reading-into is so cleverly and subtly masqueraded as ‘reading’ that the reader even keeps himself blissfully unaware of the method behind his own madness– after he has practised the art for a while, at any rate.
The distinction between good and bad readers may seem out of place in an age where Genus Reader itself is teetering on the brink of extinction. But this scribe is convinced that as long as we still have some readers left (who knows for how much longer), it is worth encouraging them to become good ones.
