51–60 of 108 posts
Paraphrasing "rich kids are more literate than poor kids despite both having a lot of screentime" doesn't prove anything about books and literacy.
This is a pure opinion piece with cherry picked facts.
This article is the epitome of "back in the day, everything was better". There are no links to back up claims or credentials, and lots of relative facts without context. Paraphrasing "rich kids are more literate than poor kids despite both having a lot of screentime" doesn't prove anything about books and literacy. This is a pure opinion piece with cherry picked facts.
Oh okay.
A lot of comments are debating the important of physical reading versus screen reading. I think that’s actually missing the point. > “Behind our screens, at work and at home, we have sutured the temporal segments of our days so as to switch our attention from one task or one source of stimulation to another. We cannot but be changed.” This part rings true for me. Last summer I read Cal Newport’s “Deep Work” and then…
This is really missing the point, IMO. The difference between paper print vs digital "print" is not the issue. The problem is more that TV, movies, social media and YT have created a post-literate culture where the primary model of communication is visual and emotional, not textual and abstracted. That culture is extroverted rather than introverted, geared towards triggering simplistic emotional responses rather than…
To put things in contrast: the Russian Empire, home of many great writers, such as Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, and Checkhov just to name a few, had a literacy rate of about 24% overall; and at that, less than 13% of women were literate[1].
The truth is, reading has never really been the pastime of the masses, save, possibly, for a brief period in the 20th century.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't notice much of a difference with reading, but I do feel the same way about writing; digital todo lists or notes just don't work for me. I used to think this was about the act of writing in itself - that doing it by hand forced me to be more conscious of the information - but writing with e.g. an Apple Pencil on an iPad is just as useless as typing. I'd really like to figure this out because I love the idea of…
The single-purposeness and simplicity of non-digital tools is important, I think. Paper doesn't have a web browser hovering behind that icon, waiting to be easily clicked at any moment. Our brain knows that infinite oceans of content and stimuli are lurking there.
Eh, cry me a river. To put things in contrast: the Russian Empire, home of many great writers, such as Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, and Checkhov just to name a few, had a literacy rate of about 24% overall; and at that, less than 13% of women were literate[1]. The truth is, reading has never really been the pastime of the masses, save, possibly, for a brief period in the 20th century. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likbe…
A lot of comments are debating the important of physical reading versus screen reading. I think that’s actually missing the point. > “Behind our screens, at work and at home, we have sutured the temporal segments of our days so as to switch our attention from one task or one source of stimulation to another. We cannot but be changed.” This part rings true for me. Last summer I read Cal Newport’s “Deep Work” and then…
I agree with your points about distraction, and I think "Deep Work" is a critically important book. That said, it's easier said than done. I only have one iPad and I do use it for many things including work, and it is shared with family members. That makes it full of distractions. I have thought about getting a second iPad dedicated to reading, but since you can't uninstall Safari, I feel I'm going to end up getting…
For even more effective control, let someone else set your Screentime passcode :)
This is really missing the point, IMO. The difference between paper print vs digital "print" is not the issue. The problem is more that TV, movies, social media and YT have created a post-literate culture where the primary model of communication is visual and emotional, not textual and abstracted. That culture is extroverted rather than introverted, geared towards triggering simplistic emotional responses rather than…
Simply not true. There is more writing in the last year ( digital and print ) than there was in all human history prior the 2019. Each movie now creates countless textual/abstract comments, posts, essays, analysis, etc.
> That culture is extroverted rather than introverted, geared towards triggering simplistic emotional responses rather than exploring complex arguments with nuance, and actively hostile to abstraction and focused deep insight.
I have to disagree. There certainly is more overall fluff, but there is also more substance.
> Without a strong written culture that refuge ceases to exist.
Except that there have been more textual and abstracted content created in the last year. More people are literate and writing than ever before.