Reading a book is a conversation between you and the author. If you do not internalize this, you are not performing deeper reading. You cannot be passive and just listen.
Once you have done reading a book, the activity is not over. You now have to critique it!
But: Only critique it if you believe you have truly understood the book! Never critique until you have!
While the first two stages (Rules 1-4 and Rules 5-8) can be accomplished concurrently, the next stage should be performed only after you have read the book.
Rule 9: You must be able to say, with reasonable certainty, “I understand” before you can say any of “I agree”, “I disagree”, “I suspend judgment”. And you cannot take any stance other than these three.
Criticizing doesn’t mean you disagree!
Rule 10: When you disagree, do so reasonably, and not disputatiously or contentiously.
If you regard conversation as a battle, you can win only by antagonizing. And with a book, the author is not there to defend himself, so winning such a battle is easy. Don’t fall into such a trap.
You should be equally prepared to agree as to disagree. Reading a book merely to find points of disagreement is flawed.
Any time you disagree, do not merely have a stance of informing the other. You must have the stance of being taught as well. In other words, if you are disagreeing only to teach someone else, and are not willing to be taught, you will suffer as a result.
When you disagree, first ensure you are not merely misunderstanding. Once satisfied, ask whether the point of disagreement is an issue of knowledge or opinion.
Rule 11: Respect the difference between knowledge and mere personal opinion by giving reasons for any critical judgment you make.