Aside from the obvious of refining articulation skills, they give replete synoptic aggregates.
Although fiction novels can sometimes offer visualization skills as one imagines descriptive scenes, & I understand the usage of mnemonic devices to instill a strong impression, the concepts explained with struggling articulation in spanned chapters & hundreds of pages of fiction novels can be explained in a succinct definition. Why waste time? It is also actually much more of a challenge to try to memorize information, & a multitude of information compacted in concise grouping, grouping on pages with columns with more information than even some entire novels, with lessened hyperbole that would otherwise be designed for aid of cunctation.
You can’t think more wisely when distracted or addicted to emphasis on mostly descriptive reporting. That’s mostly infatuation when receiving something to the affect of: “………& it was a cool night, & the blouse was a shiny sea, which prompted me quickly to reminisce of that time….. the stern gaze…………….” – mostly infatuation. Possibly how the notion of rationalism being associated with “sensitivity” manifested – because of bad or mediocre novelists struggling with sensory descriptions rather than what is precise. It’s quicker to construct the former, therefore more of the former than realism. Addictions to sensation is generally situated, or the goal of it is generally situated, & because of that, they will not go to the science & realism antithetical to the struggling descriptiveness, so the inaccurate projections of rationalism continues.
There are scientists who attend schools for entire years in order to specialize in fields such as quantum mechanics. Their specialization confines them to a separate realm.
Prima facie impossible, if one were to linearly attempt to become omniscient – specializing in generality, one would have to condense most-encompassing knowledge to quicker, succinct generalities.
The Oxford English Dictionary, consisting of 20(+) volumes (possibly additional appended versions), is the longest series in the world, at least that I’m aware of. There are many encyclopedias that are more voluminious than the O.E.D., however, encyclopædias lack in the condensing of succinct definitions of more encompassing captions, & they also tend to include casuistic humanistic interpretations.
As well as the process of ridding of the trap that is the annoying distracting feelings for desire – the inferior feeling that is overestimated as ecstatic, studying explicitness – “calling-a-spade-a-spade” – free of opinionated additives, tastes, humanistic contrived delusion, sentimentality, etc., puts one in a detached state of mind that is absolute. This absolutist state of mind is an essential preliminary for higher science, as well as a much needed application to cure of the disgusting rampant epidemic of the hubris of populations, consented by bad presumptions & stupid archetypes.
The most generic misunderstanding would be: “Why would you want to do something like that?” “Sounds really boring.” It’s supposed to be boring. It’s not supposed to be “liked” or enjoyed. It’s supposed to be used. (If one can find fun during it, that’s nice.) It’s a way of becoming superior to the hindrances of concupiscence & infatuation. Paralleling the displeasure of how deflections occur by “painful” or “awkward” tones, the point is missed that realism is supposed to be grating. If you can’t disregard preference of style over the core of validity, you are weak minded. Fun is mostly delusion. There is very little validity about this human notion that we are entitled to attaining happiness & that it is a source of “superiority.”
On synonyms: Simply: Knowledge is termed by language. Synonyms are connecting labels. Therefore, if you make connecting concepts, you can make abstractions.
A large demographic read something like ‘Brave New World’ by Aldous Huxley. They think they know what they’re reading in their marijuana induced episodes, confusing their enjoyment with the “munchies” for “understanding”, but they really don’t know what they’re reading because of what is similarly typed on this article. The scene towards end when that person tries to state realistically is ostracized is actually what these demographics do. In fact, I’m “that guy.”