One Must Demand the Right for Truth
One must demand the right for truth. The reader must demand the right to transform. If we simply read to be entertained or appeased, then our obtainment becomes nothing more than ignorance and indoctrination. Adler makes a stunning declaration regarding this apathetic crisis in our culture. “Many readers, and most particularly those who view current publications, employ other standards for judging, and praising or condemning, the books they read – their novelty, their sensationalism, their seductiveness, their force, and even their power to bemuse or befuddle the mind, but not their truth…”[1] Are we looking for truth or tantalization? Are we seeking the author’s perspective or our agenda?
I recently wrote an article, titled “Love Won”.[2] Many people lambasted my Facebook wall with offensive comments. My readers did not seek to find truth. They chose to approach the article passively – skimming through and dismantling my statements to formulate their own agenda. My blog post became obsolete, because my audience refused to read past my title and hear my voice. They refused to pursue truth.
Adler summarizes my experience, when he suggests, “He who regards conversation as a battle can win only by being an antagonist, only by disagreeing successfully, whether he is right or wrong. The reader who approaches a book in this spirit reads it only to find something he can disagree with. For the disputatious and the contagious, a bone can always be found to pick a quarrel over. It makes no difference whether the bone is really a chip on your own shoulder.”[3] Active reading requires one to step out of comfort, culture, prejudice and step into the lives of those within the pages. It requires one to read-between-the-lines.
Adler makes an interesting statement in regards to actively understanding literary characters in light of understanding humanity. He suggests, “Do not disapprove of something a character does before you understand why he does it – if then. Try as hard as you can to live in his world, not in yours; there, the things he does may be quite understandable. And do not judge the world as a whole, until you are sure that you have ‘lived’ in it to the extent of your ability.”[4] Have we lived in this world to the extent of our ability? Have we settled for indifference or fought for impact?
Amy Orr-Ewing, shares a quote by Bertram Russell’s daughter, which states, “I would have liked to convince my father that I had found what he had been looking for, the ineffable something he had longed for all his life. I would have liked to persuade him that the search for God does not have to be in vain. But it was hopeless. He had known too many blind Christians, bleak moralists who sucked the joy from life and persecuted their opponents; he would never have been able to see the truth they were hiding.”[5] Bertram Russel was not offended by arrogance; He was astounded by indifference. Adler is challenging his readers to engage with the text, wrestle with the theme and approach reading from the position of the literary characters. He is asking the reader to be transformed through the activity of thought. He is asking us to forgo apathy and agenda to find truth.
This type of consideration challenges conviction, comfort and convenience of its readers. It places them in the thick of turmoil and expects change to occur – it expects empathy and opinion to be wrought in the battlefield of experience. It expects one to actively contemplate the reality within each page. Alder goes on to suggest, “Do not begin criticism until you have completed your outline and your interpretation of the book. Do not say you agree, disagree, or suspend judgment, until you can say I understand.”[6] Do we utter the same statement towards ministry? Do we seek to comprehend or condemn?
Active reading occurs when one seeks to delve into the text and discover the truth – the crux of the author’s heartbeat hidden beneath the shadows of terminology. “The art of reading, in short, includes all of the same skills that are involved in the art of unaided discovery: keenness of observation, readily available memory, range of imagination, and of course, an intellect trained analysis and reflection.”[7] Each sense must collaborate and aid the reader in discovery. Active reading requires one to be fully infected, in order to be fully effectual. It requires one to seek and pursue truth at all costs.
[1] Mortimer Jerome Adler and Charles Lincoln Van Doren, How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972), 163.
[2] Colleen Batchelder, ‘Love Won’, by Colleen Batchelder, COLLEENBATCHELDER, June 26, 2015, accessed September 3, 2015, http://colleenbatchelder.org/love-won/.
[3] Mortimer Jerome Adler and Charles Lincoln Van Doren, How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972), 145.
[4] Mortimer Jerome Adler and Charles Lincoln Van Doren, How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972), 213.
[5]Amy Orr-Ewing, Is believing in God irrational? (United States: Inter-Varsity Press, US, 2008), 84.
[6] Mortimer Jerome Adler and Charles Lincoln Van Doren, How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972), 162.
[7] Mortimer Jerome Adler and Charles Lincoln Van Doren, How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972), 14.
About the Author
Colleen Batchelder
I speak at conferences, churches, companies and colleges on intergenerational communication, marketing, branding your vision and living authentically in a ‘filtered’ world. My talks are customized to venue needs and audience interests. My passion is to speak with organizations and bridge the intergenerational gap. I consult with companies, individuals, churches and nonprofit organizations and help them create teams that function from a place of communication that bridges the generational gap. I’m also the Founder and President of LOUD Summit – a young adult organization that presents workshops, seminars and summits that encourage, empower and equip millennials to live out their destiny and walk in their purpose. When I’m not studying for my DMin in Leadership and Global Perspectives at Portland Seminary, you can find me enjoying a nice Chai Latte, exploring NYC or traveling to a new and exotic destination.9 responses to “One Must Demand the Right for Truth”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Colleen:
“Do not begin criticism until you have completed your outline and your interpretation of the book. Do not say you agree, disagree, or suspend judgment, until you can say I understand.”[6] That quote was quite convicting to me when I read it.
It seem our minds function best when we analyze AS we are reading or going through a situation. Instead of our own judicial system, “Innocent till proven guilty”, it seems the norm is to judge as we go. This leads to a tainted view before we ever have the facts.
Adler encourages “kicking the tires” before you even really enter the vehicle.
What was the outcome of your FaceBook post?
Phil
Exactly, Phil! Too many times we approach the text with our own bias. We glean information, but we leave without transformation. Analysis continues to pose questions throughout the text and even challenges the reader’s first perception. Yes. Adler encourages readers to delve into the facts, theories and false statements made by the author. He suggests, “The activity of the student must somehow be responsive to the activity of the instructor. The relation between books and their readers is the same as that between teachers and their students” (Adler, 74). Active reading requires us to actively pursue the truth at all costs, but also be willing to examine the unknowns, falsehoods and vague statements and seek to make senses out of them.
I actually received GREAT feedback. The majority of readers sought to interact with my post and question themselves as well as the article. Many times, when it comes to “hot” topics, people have a tendency to take sides. They find the most convincing argument and repost it on every form of social media. They’re comfortable with indoctrination, because it excuses them from the responsibilty of conviction. My post challenged people to think from all perspectives. They saw the topic, the opposing sides, the supporting sides and they saw the person. I was blessed to watch so many of my Facebook friends approach the text from the point of view of the character. They might not have agreed with the article, they might have agreed with the character, but they gained an opportunity to see past the stereotype and see people. They gained compassion.
Colleen:
Excellent post. I agree with you regarding your blog post. Titles are suppose to be provocative and draw a reader into the story. Unfortunately, I have had the same experience with newspaper article I wrote once that ended in a two hour conversation with a disgruntled reader. Had she actually read my article, she would of known that I was trying to be provocative. I think our problem with reading today is largely due to living in a “soundbite culture.” People post in 160 characters and that might be conditioning them never to go deep into a topic. Would you agree with this assessment?
Thank you, Jason!
Almost every book I’ve read regarding social media marketing and engaging your audience through blogging all use the word “provocative” to describe a great title. It’s funny, I actually received the highest share stats for that blog post, but it definitely stirred up what I like to call “controversial conversation”. Good point. I would certainly agree with your assessment. We’ve become so focused on gaining “viewers” we lack “readers”. People want to be entertained, because they’re bored, not because they’re interested in the actual topic.
Colleen,
What a provocative post!
In How to Read a Book, one of the most fundamental points that Mortimer Adler and Charles Van Doren make about the art of active reading is truth seeking that is the by-product of reading analytically for increased understanding. Sharing the truths of the Bible can be a great witnessing tool for those who are open to an increased understanding of its texts and are not motivated by contentious arguments. How many countless people are walking around with little or no clue as to what the Bible is about? Even many of those who have read it, approached it with pre-conceived ideas of its contents, and made judgments concerning its meaning without any analytical scrutiny. According to Adler and Van Doren, “the analytical reader must continually ask many questions about what he is reading throughout the reading process and attempt to answer those questions” (Adler and Van Doren 1972, 19). The reader must determine what the book is about, whether any of it is true, whether it has valid arguments, and analyze its personal significance.
Thank you, Claire!
Reading should result in a reaction. The problem occurs when we share the “truths of the Bible” without first exploring the theological facets of the text. We have to approach it with a keen eye and seek to understand it in context, in order to present it with conviction. Otherwise, it becomes regurgitation of verbiage without proper analysis. The Word of God is infallible; however, it is not unapproachable. I have seen many walk away from the church, because they have sought to ask the difficult questions – they sought to understand, not simply be informed. Adler made an excellent point when he stated, “Human inquisitiveness is never killed; but it is soon debased to the sort of questions asked by most college students, who, like the adults they are soon to become, ask only for information” (Adler, 265). Yes, we must approach Scripture with “analytical scrutiny”. We approach God’s word seeking answers, not tiptoeing through questions.
Colleen, it is well said: “Active reading requires one to step out of comfort, culture…” That can be aerobic exercise at times, because it requires effort. I must confess that at times I read books or articles with a certain mind-set going in, because I know something of the author and that predetermines my expectations.
Colleen:
Great post, especially in addressing the criticism factor of reading. I have been guilty in the past (undergrad for sure) of skimming through books and then write a review based on what I thought made sense. I didn’t care about gleaning anything, I just wanted to complete a project. My approach was intentional because I felt like every book was a rebuttal of another and each author wanted to prove their theory. I also felt like they assigned too many books for each class so I was always trying to keep up. Initially, I thought something was wrong with me because I had a hard time reading one book every other week. However, I realized that when the book was on a subject that I loved…I’d read all day.
Call me crazy but I think teachers should assign book reading based on the person’s interest in order to promoting more reading. If a student should read ten books, find out their interest and increase the book reading in that area. If people don’t like the book, they will skim through it or simply not read it. The title will grab the attention of some people but if they don’t like to read, they’ll skim their way through and criticize the author unfairly.
Colleen,
Posting a grabbing headline can generate some interesting feedback. As an avid user of Facebook, I usually can predict what kind of response I am going to get by the simple title.
I find it really hard to do what you have written about in the area of reading through the whole thing before starting to form an opinion. That is sometimes resolved as I reread a book but most of the time my own personal bias lends to my argument early on in the reading. It is something that is hard to do.
Thanks for the post.
Kevin