The activity of reading does not stop with the work of understsnding what a book says. It must be completed by the work of critisim.
I think the critisim is very important. But crisitisim should be taken politely and the author is well displined, we shall take for granted temporarily.
Read not to contradict and confute; not to believe and take for granted; nor to find talk and discourse; but to weigh and consider.
We all know a good book is above the critisim of the average reader.Does critisim mean read to doubt or to scorn? Obviously, the answer is no. We should learn docility. Because the most docile reader is, therefore, the most critical. The reader must know how to judge a book, just as he must know how to arrive at an understanding of its contents.
One should be as prepared to agree as to disagree.
It is no meaning to win the argument. But the most important is one can learn from live or dead teachers and gain knowledge.
You regard disagreements as capable of being resolved .
It is common that the more learned, have a right to be critical of errors made by those who lack relevant knowledge. But how shall we talk back in a proper way? The anthor have gave us the answer.In point of view, the most important is all human disagreements can be resolved by the removal of misunderstanding or of ignorance.
The three together state the conditions of a critical reading and the manner in which the reader should proceed to talk back.
