That advice fights the natural tendency to read forward. It’s always hard to get people to stop and do the exercises.
Are there ways they could? Hmm… First, you could advise the reader to read through one time, then come back and do the advised exercises. That way they’re not fighting the urge to read through… but then they’re fighting the urge to put down the book.
You could structure it kind of like a choose-your-own-adventure, with the choices being how your encounter went. That way, there is no one, natural place to go next. Could help, but it would be obnoxious.
Third: get all the epiphanies done with early on. Throw them all at you. Part 2 is applications. It has zero epiphanies, and it should be dry, perhaps even boring, so you can go out and do things. Basically like the first idea, but with the two runs optimized for their respective purposes.
Third: get all the epiphanies done with early on. Throw them all at you. Part 2 is applications. It has zero epiphanies, and it should be dry, perhaps even boring, so you can go out and do things. Basically like the first idea, but with the two runs optimized for their respective purposes.
This means (if my experience is at all typical) that the second section is unlikely to be read.
That advice fights the natural tendency to read forward. It’s always hard to get people to stop and do the exercises.
Are there ways they could? Hmm… First, you could advise the reader to read through one time, then come back and do the advised exercises. That way they’re not fighting the urge to read through… but then they’re fighting the urge to put down the book.
You could structure it kind of like a choose-your-own-adventure, with the choices being how your encounter went. That way, there is no one, natural place to go next. Could help, but it would be obnoxious.
Third: get all the epiphanies done with early on. Throw them all at you. Part 2 is applications. It has zero epiphanies, and it should be dry, perhaps even boring, so you can go out and do things. Basically like the first idea, but with the two runs optimized for their respective purposes.
This means (if my experience is at all typical) that the second section is unlikely to be read.