Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
I'mConvinced

Hypothetically speaking

614 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

XenoFish
7 hours ago, Sherapy said:

His argument is kids are inept and can't read or comprehend because they don't know the JFK method of speed reading, this is not even offered in education. 

Well. From Walkers perspectives I suppose we're all idiots. :blink:

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Mr Walker
12 hours ago, danydandan said:

It's a slippery slope asking people to do such tests. In my opinion, however if your willing to do it. A simple test could be conceived, for example:

1. You log it at a predetermined time of your choosing.

2. Someone who agrees, will also be online at that time.

3. At that predetermined time you start a thread in the off topics section. Relating to the test.

4. That agreed person posts a link to an article that has approximately 3500 words. You have five minutes to read it.  However.

5. At two and a half minutes after that link is posted a series of simple yes or no questions will be posted in that thread. This means you have read the link two and a half times by your own speed reading claims and it also gives you more than enough time to review the approximate 3500 again when answering.

6. You can say how many questions you are willing to answer but it has to be at least 10 in my opinion yes or no questions are easy. Considering there is a fifty fifty chance of you answering a question correctly we can use maybe an 80 percent of the questions being correct as a successful test and anything below that to be unsuccessful.

7. After the questions are posted you have 2 minutes to answer them. As they require yes or no answers I feel that's more than enough time to type at least ten words. Or at least ten letters.

For example y,n,y,y,n,y,y,n,y,y.

8. If you do not respond within the allowed time you fail. If you do not answer correctly 80 percent of the time you fail.

Considering you claim to read three times faster than 1 percent of reader's and between 8 to 17 times better than the average reader I think this test is suitable and fair. That one percent have approximately 85 percent retention or comprehension and the average reader has approximately 60 percent I believe 80 percent of successfully answers is also fair.

I am tempted, but no thanks. if it has occurred to me that i could cut and paste the article and have it there while answering the questions, then it will have occurred to others and so this would prove nothing and still leave me open to being called a liar  

I am not sure just how much i can read and comprehend now.

i can no longer just see a whole page as one word and flip a page as fast as i can while seeing everything on it and committing it to memory, but i know from real experiences that i COULD do this and used it in exams etc.  But I did the online tests several times and read around 3500 words a minute That s enough for me to know  i can still read and comprehend that fast, and this is about me, not others.

if i did this test i would not report my results  even if i did very well, because its really only important to me that I know and not important what others believe. 

You might accept the results as valid, but from experience those who dont believe me would still not believe i had done it fairly. 

  i dont have to prove anything to anyone, as long as i can know that the claims i am making are as true as i can ascertain them to be 

What gets me is  that this is totally normal for me and something i've been doing all my life, yet so many peolpe seem to think it is so exceptional that i must be lieing.

And it surprises and disappoints me, that more humans (who all have the same potential)   never utilise these skills Maybe reading is just not a very important  part of their lives, but for anyone who is studying, or an academic, or a teacher, it makes life so much easier.  

My brother can do the same thing , but he can take in and comprehend  3 separate sources of information simultaneously, and respond  accurately to all .  He uses a technique which splits the processing of his mind into 3 different compartments.  I do tha t for internal thinking and debate, but not when inputting information 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
19 hours ago, danydandan said:

No it's physically impossible, in terms of eye movement and restrictions in our brains.

Read the links the studies show it's BS.

I provided links which show it is not just physiologically possible, but actually normal.   it does not require eye movement to read a whole page of text.

We only do  that  because we are taught to read one word at a time moving our eyes as we do so    You can learn, fist to see a sentence as one symbol,  then a paragraph, then a page, all as one piece of information.

The eye can see and the mind can process a full page of text as one image without moving your eyes. 

The mind can then decode and process the relatively small number of symbols on a page in milliseconds  You can read as fast as you can turn a page.

  I know it is possible because    because that is how i used to read seeing all the information on one page in a second,   but also, research confirms this abilty in humans .  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
16 hours ago, XenoFish said:

Is speed reading supposed to somehow impressive? I'd be more impressed by someone who'd read the same book on astrophysics 50 times than a skimmer.

Why would you do this, IF on first reading you got most of the info, and a second reading gave it all to you, OR if on reading it you had it stored in your mind for later recall (not saying my mind is quite that good  but i remember the gist and most important points from anything i have read, and seem to keep them in my mind forever )   

Not only is it wasteful of our limited time, but it would mean 49 other valuable or interesting books were left unread.  Even if you got all the knowledge from that one book, you missed the 49 times more knowledge available in the books left unread :)  Knowledge is like something organic.  The more elements you add in, the more synthesis, cross referencing, foundation knowldge,  and   thus construction skills, your mind has available to it    it becomes something greater tha just the elements you put into it as your mind works on all the data from all the sources you have read.

This allows a greater comprehension and understanding, because many factors are always linked to make up a whole understanding

(something  I learned particularly from studying revolutionary theory but also from life)   

And sped reading is NOT skimming  ( that is what non speed readers do to try and get thorugh a book they have to read )

it is just a person reading the same book and getting the same information as someone who takes 10 times longer to achieve the same results.  it does not compromise comprehension, and given the skills required to learn it ,may  actually increase comprehesion and retention rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
15 hours ago, third_eye said:

I'm still puzzling as to how and when all  this devolved into a Dick measuring contest ... and Sherapy WON ... :o

~

In what way do you consider she won?   Not even with the psychological ploy she attempted, has she won anything.  People will believe and think as they please regardless of what is true or factual,  but there is no quantifiable or objective measure of assessment, to prove anything :)

I could make the obvious comment about, if you think she won   does this then  show who is the bigger  D...  and i will    :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Sherapy said:

I would keep the reading at 1 minute, match the words to his speed reading test score. He claims he can speed read and answer questions in one minute. 

His argument is kids are inept and can't read or comprehend because they don't know the JFK method of speed reading, this is not even offered in education. 

As a learning coach, my kids had lessons in reading for comprehension ( read slowly and a few times) as opposed to scan reading which is basically what he is arguing is valid. It is not. 

I am setting the test up according to his claimed capabilities. 

Of course, it is impossible, but more importantly MW admits it is impossible and declined, and I have discovered he really doesn't have a photographic memory (either) and by default he admits that speed reading is ineffective. 

I won this round, I was correct and MW admitted ( to the best of his ability) that reading for comprehension using scan reading ( speed reading) is not practical in an academic setting, where comprehension and retention are required. 

 

Quote me saying anywhere that  kids are inept.

 That is your interpretation.

I said i've never taught a child whom i considered a failure in life.

i also said many humans, including children,  are never encouraged or enabled to achieve their potential.

I also said many people don't find learning important  enough to put the time, effort and discipline into doing well with it     (kinda like me and football really ) And that's ok because its not for everyone  i fell in love with learning ealry and with teaching by the time i was in pre school,  but i've never said children, or anyone else, are inept. 

Any failure by them is a failure of their parents, society, and maybe their teachers.

  if you have good reading skills as  a child this is a statistical pointer to not just success at school but in life, and unless you read well enough for it to be a  joy and a pleasure,  rather  than a pain and a struggle, you will never read more than you have to, or read very well 

And i explained that you cannot make those assumptions from my declining your test   i am happy to do it for my own self  learning but i wont tell you how i went even if i did very well.  Only i need to know. You just have to trust me (or not)  :) 

And no you just don't get it. Speed reading is NOT skimming. It is reading and comprehending every word, but just much  faster than those caught up with reading one word a t time as the y were taught to do.

it is called cluster reading.  You begin with seeing a whole sentence at once, instead of just one word.

Then you work up to seeing maybe 10 lines in a paragraph all at the same time.  You see and remember that paragraph just a s child sees and remember one single word. 

So, having read it you could close your eyes and read it back to someone, just a s child can remember the last word they read.  Eventually   you can see the whole page of text as it it was one word (you cant do more than this because you then have to turn the page) I reached the point while a t uni where i could read a page, close the book, then recite the whole page.   i cant do that now . because it requires constant practice and mental discipline which, in turn, is produced by a need to read like that.    As i write this and proof read it  i  see/.read, not one word a t a  time, but i see and know the content of  each paragraph, up to  maybe 10 lines of text,  as if it was one word 

 

Speed reading is quite different from skim reading, where you race through a text looking for key words and phrases to inform a university essay or article on a particular subject. 

Skimmers discard anything not immediately relevant to the subject at hand; only the most salient information is retained. But speed reading is far more demanding — it’s not only about how quickly you can get through a text but how much of it you retain afterwards. It requires intense concentration rather than a cursory scan.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/books/article-3168948/How-read-novel-25-minutes-remember-plot.html

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/books/article-3168948/How-read-novel-25-minutes-remember-plot.html#ixzz5Egt0yuZO 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I am tempted, ...

~

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I provided ..

~

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Why would you do this, ..

~

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

In what way ..

~

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Quote me saying....

~

You've been busy Mr Walker ... look how quick and fast you were ...

~

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

In what way do you consider she won?   Not even with the psychological ploy she attempted, has she won anything.  People will believe and think as they please regardless of what is true or factual,  but there is no quantifiable or objective measure of assessment, to prove anything :)

In the manner that is beyond your comprehension ..

~

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I could make the obvious comment about, if you think she won   does this then  show who is the bigger  D...  and i will    :) 

Go ahead ... either way you lose ...

~

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I am tempted, but no thanks. if it has occurred to me that i could cut and paste the article and have it there while answering the questions, then it will have occurred to others and so this would prove nothing and still leave me open to being called a liar  

I am not sure just how much i can read and comprehend now.

i can no longer just see a whole page as one word and flip a page as fast as i can while seeing everything on it and committing it to memory, but i know from real experiences that i COULD do this and used it in exams etc.  But I did the online tests several times and read around 3500 words a minute That s enough for me to know  i can still read and comprehend that fast, and this is about me, not others.

if i did this test i would not report my results  even if i did very well, because its really only important to me that I know and not important what others believe. 

You might accept the results as valid, but from experience those who dont believe me would still not believe i had done it fairly. 

  i dont have to prove anything to anyone, as long as i can know that the claims i am making are as true as i can ascertain them to be 

What gets me is  that this is totally normal for me and something i've been doing all my life, yet so many peolpe seem to think it is so exceptional that i must be lieing.

And it surprises and disappoints me, that more humans (who all have the same potential)   never utilise these skills Maybe reading is just not a very important  part of their lives, but for anyone who is studying, or an academic, or a teacher, it makes life so much easier.  

My brother can do the same thing , but he can take in and comprehend  3 separate sources of information simultaneously, and respond  accurately to all .  He uses a technique which splits the processing of his mind into 3 different compartments.  I do tha t for internal thinking and debate, but not when inputting information 

I would not expect anyone to do a test they aren't comfortable with. Also it's not your prerogative to prove anything to anyone on a website to people who you are probably not even on a first name bases with. But you keep making unsubstantiated claims and expect people to read your words as gospel.

However I'm highly skeptical of your claim in this regard, because as a member of a sketics group here in Ireland a number of years ago I debunked and got a person thrown out of university for trying to sell speed reading classes. He was charging 100 euro a class.

Physically it's literally impossible and that's that, unless you have a something similar to a photographic memory, even with a true photographic memory, you still need to read each word and comprehend what your reading. The issue here is comprehension not the ability to read fast. I am highly skeptical of your claim of 3500 words a minute which is three times faster than one percent of reader's. I'm even more skeptical of your comprehension of what you read, I am guessing you skim read, which means you read pages in a z pattern like everyone else, Studies in advertising, PR and industrial automation all show this is how everyone sees book, screens etc etc. This is why advertising places ads in these positions on your web browser, it's why scadas and dsc systems place important alarms strategically on screens so they are seen first.

Studies, real studies, have shown A, speeds reading is a fallacy and is detrimental to your comprehension, B, it's physically impossible due to eye movement and speeds of electrical signals in our brains. This was all covered in my previous post and supported by reputable links.

The test I concieved allows for you to keep the article or what ever open for the whole duration the only other way of doing it was if the link had a timer on it and deleted it's self after a minute, then you could answer the questions in the next minute. However I know with differences in time and download speeds youd need a minute or two leeway.

Edited by danydandan
  • Like 3
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
6 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

it is just a person reading the same book and getting the same information as someone who takes 10 times longer to achieve the same results.  it does not compromise comprehension, and given the skills required to learn it ,may  actually increase comprehesion and retention rates.

You do not convince nor impress me Walker. I'd rather have a doctor with a through knowledge of what they are doing than a skim-artist (that's a play on words). Reading a text specially on stuff such as medical procedures should be done slowly and repeatedly. If you want to skim a sci fi novel go ahead, I wouldn't get any joy from it. Plus "Mr Superior" not everyone is the same. You think way too highly of yourself. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
On 5/2/2018 at 7:02 AM, Mr Walker said:

 Indeed i have been clinically assessed a number of times, just a  i get my physical health regularly assessed  ive also had regular brain scans done The only thng of consequence from the scans   was an enlarged frontal cortex and you can look up what tha signifies  :) First a person with my experiences wold be foolish NOT to have their mental health checked out.

  Second i got not just a totally clean bill of health but was highly rated in things like the abilty to discern reality from  non reality and how grounded i am in reality.

ALos  i was assessed as highly functional in terms of mental skills and competency  

Ive explained  all that since i first started posting here in 2004 It is one reason i KNOW that my experiences arent unreal or a form of hallucination delusion etc.

i simply dont have those things. I have never even been depressed or suffered from  anxiety in my life 

And no i did not admit that at all Everything in a humans mind ie their total understanding of their reality, is actually a mental construct. The thing is, to get your mental construct as much in sync with the independent physical reality around you as possible  That requires good powers of observation, a lot of experience to draw on,  but also quite specific mental skills to develop tings like reality checking  and contextual relevance  plus an understanding of the workings of both your conscious mind and your subconscious one. 

I would hate the world to recognise my genius.  it isn't even the most important thing about me.  My character, nature and ethical belief system, and my behaviour, is the most important thing, and that IS recognised by all those who know me. I actually value my anonymity outside my local communities.  i follow in the footsteps of my parents, who were loved, honoured, respected by , and  important to, their communities   Your sarcasm just flows over me, like water over the feathers of a beautiful swan  :) 

The most interesting and telling thing about your post is that you refered to yourself in your post 26 times.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
9 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

  i dont have to prove anything to anyone

If that were true, you would have no need to respond whatsoever.

Again, that you refered to yourself  numerous times in this post as well (32 times) is quite telling. I have no desire to harp on that point...just msking an observation.

  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish

Oh Wally Walker. You are not as smart as you think you are. 

I guess having slightly above normal intelligence keeps you humble, because you know that you don't know everything. I'm proud of me.:lol::P

  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
10 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Quote me saying anywhere that  kids are inept.

 That is your interpretation.

I said i've never taught a child whom i considered a failure in life.

i also said many humans, including children,  are never encouraged or enabled to achieve their potential.

I also said many people don't find learning important  enough to put the time, effort and discipline into doing well with it     (kinda like me and football really ) And that's ok because its not for everyone  i fell in love with learning ealry and with teaching by the time i was in pre school,  but i've never said children, or anyone else, are inept. 

Any failure by them is a failure of their parents, society, and maybe their teachers.

  if you have good reading skills as  a child this is a statistical pointer to not just success at school but in life, and unless you read well enough for it to be a  joy and a pleasure,  rather  than a pain and a struggle, you will never read more than you have to, or read very well 

And i explained that you cannot make those assumptions from my declining your test   i am happy to do it for my own self  learning but i wont tell you how i went even if i did very well.  Only i need to know. You just have to trust me (or not)  :) 

And no you just don't get it. Speed reading is NOT skimming. It is reading and comprehending every word, but just much  faster than those caught up with reading one word a t time as the y were taught to do.

it is called cluster reading.  You begin with seeing a whole sentence at once, instead of just one word.

Then you work up to seeing maybe 10 lines in a paragraph all at the same time.  You see and remember that paragraph just a s child sees and remember one single word. 

So, having read it you could close your eyes and read it back to someone, just a s child can remember the last word they read.  Eventually   you can see the whole page of text as it it was one word (you cant do more than this because you then have to turn the page) I reached the point while a t uni where i could read a page, close the book, then recite the whole page.   i cant do that now . because it requires constant practice and mental discipline which, in turn, is produced by a need to read like that.    As i write this and proof read it  i  see/.read, not one word a t a  time, but i see and know the content of  each paragraph, up to  maybe 10 lines of text,  as if it was one word 

 

Speed reading is quite different from skim reading, where you race through a text looking for key words and phrases to inform a university essay or article on a particular subject. 

Skimmers discard anything not immediately relevant to the subject at hand; only the most salient information is retained. But speed reading is far more demanding — it’s not only about how quickly you can get through a text but how much of it you retain afterwards. It requires intense concentration rather than a cursory scan.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/books/article-3168948/How-read-novel-25-minutes-remember-plot.html

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/books/article-3168948/How-read-novel-25-minutes-remember-plot.html#ixzz5Egt0yuZO 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

"so few children learn to read competently, even at a slow to normal speed" (Walker). This sentence implies/suggests that the majority of kids are inept readers, according to you. 

 

in·ept
iˈnept/
adjective
  1. having or showing no skill; clumsy.
    "the inept handling of the threat"
    synonyms: incompetentunskillfulunskilledinexpertamateurish

     

     

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

"so few children learn to read competently, even at a slow to normal speed" (Walker). This sentence implies/suggests that the majority of kids are inept readers, according to you. 

 

in·ept
iˈnept/
adjective
  1. having or showing no skill; clumsy.
    "the inept handling of the threat"
    synonyms: incompetentunskillfulunskilledinexpertamateurish

     

     

Considering how often plain English is misunderstood in the forums, one does have to wonder.......

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.