Live data from Hacker News

It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

theatlantic.com

171–180 of 349 posts

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#171
> > London. Michaelmas term lately over, and the Lord Chancellor sitting in Lincoln’s Inn Hall. Implacable November weather. As much mud in the streets, as if the waters had but newly retired from the face of the earth, and it would not be wonderful to meet a Megalosaurus, forty feet long or so, waddling like an elephantine lizard up Holborn Hill.

> The researchers quoted students’ attempts to parse the passage. “So it’s like, um, the mud was all in the streets, and we were, no … so everything’s been, like, kind of washed around and we might find Megalosaurus bones but he says they’re waddling, um, all up the hill,” one student said. At least a quarter of the subjects interpreted the figures of speech literally, leading to the inference that dinosaurs walked the streets of 19th-century London.

It's less that we've forgotten to read and more that technology has made maintaining the historical pretense of mass intellectualism non-viable. The mass bulk of humanity has always been this stupid. Curiosity, epistemic discipline, critical thinking, and counterfactual evaluation have always been the privilege and burden of a few. We've only pretended otherwise to flatter our sense of fair-mindedness, which itself is sparsely distributed among the primate biomass of humanity.

Reality punishes you for refusing to model it properly. A non-predictive theory is worthless. An anti-predictive theory is a hazard. Let's remediate the epistemic toxic waste that is the idea that everyone is capable of the highest level of thought if only properly trained. If you're out in public, look around. A good chunk of the people you see can't understand, having had breakfast, that if they hadn't, they'd be hungry. When you're selected into an environment of concentrated rigor, you lose track of just how dumb most people are. The article is sad yet unsurprising.

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#172
Who cares about reading? Take a step back - humans don’t exist to read, reading is a tool, a means to an end. It’s to transmit information from one to another. If we can do that with more information-dense, less lossy methods, all the better.

Lamenting the end of reading is like lamenting the end of manual farm work: the goal isn’t to work in fields, it’s to harvest. We found ways to harvest more than ever for less effort and time than ever, let’s celebrate it.

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#173
post #11

I refuse to believe that the decline of our education system is some inevitable, intractable problem.

Decline since when? A few hundred years ago most people were illiterate farmers.

Even in the 1800s the literacy rate in the US was over 50% (the highest in the world), because it was founded by "sola scriptura" Protestants for whom Bible reading was a religious duty.

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#174
> Margaret Rennix, Harvard’s assistant director for humanities and social-sciences support, told me she’d spoken with a student who was struggling to read a book written in Old English. The culprit: Anthony Burgess’s 1962 novel A Clockwork Orange. (The student used ChatGPT to “translate” the book into easier language.)

Has the author read A Clockwork Orange? It is filled with made-up "slang" that's basically just Russian. Needing some help to understand that is totally reasonable to me -- I definitely looked up a bunch of the words when I read it!

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#175
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then maybe you should not read prose. It is about conveying an experience, a story. You might have simply picked a bad author. Personally, I prefer long reads. I understand that some people might not enjoy that style of storytelling, but saying “give up reading” overall is a shame. Try something like Warhammer 40k novels. They are simple, entertaining, and split into shorter parts. What you are describing does not ha…

I read The Goldfinch a while back. Not at all my usual fare. The plot progressed at a snail's pace, but I enjoyed every page of it. (The movie treatment was horribly shallow in comparison, but there's no way they could possibly convey the depth in two hours.)

I thought that The Goldfinch had a contrived beginning and a weak ending, but a long, delectable middle that made up for both ends. Also try the author's earlier novel The Secret History if you haven't read it yet.

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Most of my learning now is via audio books while I'm doing something else. You're not actually learning anything then. Memorizing trivia, sure. But not actually learning.

That seems like a pretty controversial take. Why would you not be able to learn things orally?

You're not actually using your brain to do much, just as OP said, sort-of badly memorizing trivia.

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#177
post #130

I read non-fiction all day long. I'm sure you do too. Even as a kid I was never really interested in fiction. I'd rather read the encyclopedia.

I know there are a number of us who read encyclopedias over our breakfast cereal as kids. Ours were World Book.

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#178

Who cares about reading? Take a step back - humans don’t exist to read, reading is a tool, a means to an end. It’s to transmit information from one to another. If we can do that with more information-dense, less lossy methods, all the better. Lamenting the end of reading is like lamenting the end of manual farm work: the goal isn’t to work in fields, it’s to harvest. We found ways to harvest more than ever for less e…

If you can’t read, you can’t write, and if you can’t write, you can’t think.

Depending on your place in the class hierarchy, and the orientation of your moral compass, this may or may not be a good thing.

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#179

Who cares about reading? Take a step back - humans don’t exist to read, reading is a tool, a means to an end. It’s to transmit information from one to another. If we can do that with more information-dense, less lossy methods, all the better. Lamenting the end of reading is like lamenting the end of manual farm work: the goal isn’t to work in fields, it’s to harvest. We found ways to harvest more than ever for less e…

Culture is "a tool, a means to an end. It’s to transmit information from one to another"?

Re: It seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history

#180
post #34

Books have their advantages, but I don't think you necessarily need to read books—in fact, I think books can sometimes be worse. One strength of books is that their structure, starting with the table of contents, trains you in logical composition. But books also have drawbacks: 1.If there's incorrect information at the time of writing, it becomes fixed at that point. 2.The author's worldview can become overly authori…

There's a quote from Marcus Aurelius: "Perhaps there are none more lazy, or more truly ignorant, than your everlasting readers". People who just believe whatever they read in books don't actually learn to think, just to regurgitate, and often become out of touch with how the world actually works (although this happens to heavy consumers of any kind of fiction).
Post reply on HN