How To Read A Book (An Intro to Liberal Learning) v1.1 by Jarett Sanchez

Posted on August 26, 2011 by TriviumEducation 29 Comments


First Year Teacher Edition

Here is the first of two parts of my presentation on “liberal learning” or what has more recently come to be known as “the lost tools of learning” or, the Trivium Method.

The first three of the seven liberal arts, the Trivium, focus on the use of language and thought- the world of the mind. Since these methods are products of the rational abilities of the human mind, this type of education is quite universal, although its image has been tarnished for many, many centuries. Only in the past few decades has the Trivium emerged as a viable educational model once again. While not a complete education in and of itself, it empowers the student to pursue the full capabilities of the mind, giving a comprehensive method, a time-tested suite of subjects, and numerous intellectual skills which will benefit them throughout their adult life. Instead of teaching you “what” to think, the Trivium method teaches you “how” to think.

This is a way to increase your intelligence.

Part 1 covers the introductory information on the Trivium Subjects and Method, while Part 2 covers the Trivium Skills.

Send feedback to:
thenextsteppodcast@gmail.com

***Show Notes***

Center For The Study Of The Great Ideas:
http://www.thegreatideas.org/

“Philosophy is everybody’s business.”

Gnostic Media Podcast w. Jan Irvin:
http://www.gnosticmedia.com/category/gnosticpodcast/

Richard Grove’s podcast and networking site:
http://peacerevolution.podomatic.com/
http://tragedyandhope.ning.com/

The Trivium Binder:
http://triviumbinder.blogspot.com/

How To Read A Book (An Intro to Liberal Learning) v1.1 by Jarett Sanchez

29 comments

  • will says:

    my dad has been trying to give me a set of great books of the western world. i think ill take them.

  • Mike says:

    I just wanted to thank you for grounding the Trivium in something resembling an example. I have asked others for an example of using the Trivium before I purchased a $300 logic CD set, but those request were ignored.

    So thank you for taking it out of the land of pure theory and actually showing how one might use the Trivium to learn a subject.

    • J Sanchez says:

      Thank you for the appreciation! Check out the Trivium Binder Project for more evolution of my presentation.

  • lj says:

    Honestly, this was a horrible podcast. Should’ve been 15 minutes long at most. There might’ve been one thought-provoking sentence in the whole podcast. Really should edit this stuff if you don’t want to turn people off of the trivium

    • Honestly, how do you consider this constructive feedback? In what ways has your review strengthened the presentation for the next go around? Where are your presentations where you’ve done a better job? If you have none, then where do you find the room to comment like this? If you can’t post intelligent, constructive feedback – completely lacking in your own application of the trivium, maybe you shouldn’t post comments either. It’s sort of like the pot calling the kettle black. But really you’re just hating and offering nothing constructive.

    • J Sanchez says:

      LJ, I would definitely like to know what you mean, I certainly have many edits in the future of this presentation so your feedback could really help.

      Can you give me any specifics? How would YOU present the Trivium, and also in what way does my presentation turn you off from the Trivium?

      Be just as blunt and honest as your original comment, but give me something to work with, please! :)

    • elaine says:

      …well, Jarrett did say at the beginning of the presentation that you would be bored by it if you had no interest in developing your logical thinking. Could that be the reason behind your cooment?

  • Sean says:

    This comment from TriviumEducation sounds like an old hag teacher, projecting her frustrations onto her students for their “misbehaving”.

    Try a different tone to make money on the internet, dawg. :)

    • J silva says:

      The fact that you put the word “dawg” totally discredits you from any philosophical thought. How could you use that word and say you practice the trivum. One of the parts of the trivum is Grammar. Which you obviously have none.

  • Nancy Thompson says:

    A beautiful piece of art.
    Please understand there are those who are trying to destroy this great country of America.
    We have been hijacked by a powerful banking group of pirates who’s ultimate goal is to rule the world.

    When you see nonsensical marks of destruction on society, look to the Esoteric methods of destruction by the British Crown of London and their minions .

    TragadyAndHope.com is a real construction of beauty.

    To get an idea of their (from the top of the pyramid) thinking
    go to:
    http://www.archive.org/details/platos_republic_0902_librivox1 and listen to item#20, seven minutes in. where Plato discuses deception of the masses, war, eugenics, and population control.

    • Thomas Thayer says:

      Now I can see very clearly why the elitists have such a fondness for Plato. Control of the masses has quite a long history.
      Thank you, Nancy for pointing us to that link.

    • J Sanchez says:

      “A beautiful piece of art.”

      Thank you for the compliment!

  • Paul Short says:

    I’m downloading the podcast to listen to later today. I just can’t get enough of this stuff. I (I, I, I… I know!) will probably have more to say once I’ve had a chance to absorb the info.

    BTW, really like the new design and layout for the site. It feels open and inviting, just the way a site with such valuable info on learning techniques should be.

  • Kurt says:

    The main difficulty for me as a listener is that you spent too much time setting up your talk. If someone came to this site, they should have some idea what the trivium is and are eager to hear the more in depth part, so I recommend just a short intro/history (5 min) and then delve into the material in an organized, efficient, and non-chatty manner.

    For example, you mention liberal education multiple times. Just define it once and move on. There is no need to address what you expect to be people’s preconceptions. If I miss it I can easily go back.

    • J Sanchez says:

      Well, as it is I chose to address as general an audience as possible, but realizing that most people were going to come to this presentation with an interest in the Trivium already. So it is a tricky “balancing act” of giving too much or too little of the context necessary to utilize the deeper parts.

      But, as I said in regards to the grammar stage of learning, repetition is one of the keys!

      Putting this presentation together, as flawed as it is, required a tremendous amount of time and energy (in between full time work and family life) so that had a lot to do with how I arranged the whole thing.

      Realize also that this is what I consider a “public first draft” so yeah. . .it needs a lot of work! Your comments, as well as all others given, are extremely helpful in shaping all future iterations of this presentation of which there will probably be one per year for the next few years as I continue to grow in my understanding of this field.

      Thank you!

  • whiteman says:

    Dr. Leonard Peikoff. logic study group.

  • Kevan B says:

    Hallo Jarret . I would also have been interested to read a reply from lj . I have one point regarding Grammar, and education. I went to an old fashioned private school , thrown out at 15, then had to spend the last few weeks, until I was old enough to leave school, in a state secondary school . I saw that indeed I had been getting an education for ” masters” and that in the State School they were being prepared for mostly manual work. In the” old fashioned” private school we were taught how to think analytically, critically, self teaching, and curiosity. To analyze written pieces, and précis, extracting, and explaining the essential ideas, even distilling a book down to one sentence. I was fascinated by the pure logic of Pythagoras Theorems .
    A point I´d like to suggest to you for clarity is firstly; an example regarding language, and grammar. You mentioned apples, and oranges. The thought occurred to me their could well be a language in which apples, and oranges were the same word. For example; the language might have only have three words for fruit; tree fruit, bush fruit, and ground fruit. What I am trying to say is, having learned a couple of languages, I see words more as an Agreement or contract . We agree what the words mean in particular context or culture. Consider the hi-jacking of the word “liberal” in the U.S. . Further, it is very hard to find an exact equivalent in German for the English word “Fair” the nearest translation is probably “Freundlich or lieb ” friendly, or loving . I am getting into linguistics here, but it does reveal that words are a language specific, approximate equivalent symbol. Worth bearing in mind. So; Mary little lamb had, would be correct in many grammers, or(Agreements). I hope I am not sounding pedantic here. I am trying to suggesting an insight . I found your piece very interesting as I am thinking of buying the Trivium book. I most probably will.
    All the best.

    • Craig says:

      Actually the german word for “Fair” is “Richtig” – “Falsch”is the opposite. Often with languages, you can not “directly” translate. French for “fair” is “juste”(french being grounded in latin also).
      But in all languages it is context that sets the definition. For example in french “Pomme” means apple, where as “Pomme du terre” literally translated means “Apple of the earth” but actually refers to a potato. I think grammar is applicable across all languages its just that you can’t apply it as directly as you seem to be trying to here. Hope this sheds some light for you. I also speak fluently two languages and bits of other languages here and there. To be honest my knowledge of latin has helped me learn french in more ways than I can possibly describe, in fact it made it quite simple.

  • MiamiHeat87 says:

    I found this podcast very informative and engaging. While the hour long size was daunting at first, the amount of relevant information contained within was outstanding! Really, how can you communicate everything you did in this presention only in 15 minutes would be watered down and diluted so much there would be no causing it at all.

  • Marcus says:

    where’s the previous audio link? I wanna listening to it, but I can’t find. Thanks

  • Bernard says:

    This was my first time listening to anything dealing with the trivium. I am very green. You did provide a basic understanding of the trivium and quadrivium, but that’s about it. I thought it would get a bit deeper. I do appreciate the podcast.

    • Please note that on the front page of the website there is a “start here” at the very bottom – with Gene Odening.

      Thanks.

    • Sanchez says:

      This is a two part series, but keep in mind that this is not a full blown presentation, its a first attempt at recommunicating what I’ve learned about the Trivium. Much was left out but there’s enough here to point you in the direction of deeper research and understanding. Gene’s interviews are probably the best place to start.

      My second run will be much juicer, I promise. ;-)

  • michael says:

    i enjoyed it – Wicked track at the end!!!

  • Ali says:

    “it’s image ”

    Isn’t the first element of the trivium grammar? ;)

    • The notes were copied from the person who created the presentation. Try to focus on the message and not kill the messenger. Also, general grammar and specific grammar are different. Have you studied it yet? Or did you even get past the intro?

      I’ve corrected the error.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>