[xxxtentachyon]

I don’t subvocalize and haven’t for many years, but when I did (and more so now), the speed-limiting factor was never the time it took to read the word, but to comprehend what’s on the page in the sense of understanding it. You can probably get away with 200+ pages per hour if you’re not reading for comprehension, but it’s hard to imagine getting anything out of a difficult text at that speed.

[briga]

I think that’s an important point, and not all texts are made equal. Reading and understanding 200 pages of Heidegger is very different than reading 200 pages of Harry Potter. Part of reading well is know what to spend the time on.

[quickthrower2]

200 pages of math text is probably a year of full time undergrad study.

[HeavenBanned]

Heidegger was a Nazi, besides, and Being And Time and the concept of Dasein are rubbish -- he was a circular reasoner and a poor communicator -- and B&T really doesn't purport any new claim that hasn't already been made in some form or fashion since Socrates. 200 pages of Aristotle makes more sense. I would just watch Sugrue's Princeton lecture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaobMHescwg&t=476s if you're interested in getting the gist of Heidegger without having to slog through his nonsense. It all goes back to the Overman in some form or fashion. I'm rambling now.