Subject:
|
Re: The value of reading (was: If you could leave any book on Kjeld's nightstand...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 1 Apr 2002 17:29:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2703 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> I don't get TV, but I'd been under the impression that these channels
> had some pretty good stuff even if it was _Popular Science_ caliber rather than
> _Nature_ caliber. What you're describing sounds more like _Omni_.
Upon further reflection (and watching) I can say that certain mainstream
"nature" type programs aren't bad, especially the stuff on deep-sea
exploration. Some of the military and "justice files" stuff might be good,
too, but I can't speak with any expertise on them. And Discovery does have
a real and unforgiveable lust for wacko pseudoscience.
> I agree that the fact that people don't do it much does mean that they think
> they have better things to do. But not that they think it's hard. Surely some
> people do. But I don't think that most people have to strain to read street
> signs or restaurant menus.
In that case, I agree absolutely. The act of reading for utility is
itself quite simple--it's the deeper, reflective reading that takes work.
> > This is a counter-factual, of course.
>
> Is it? I guess I misunderstand the term.
Doh! That's what I get for trying to sound like a know-it-all. I thought
that was the term, but perhaps I need to read more! Anyway:
> It was asserted essentially that people couldn't do anything better than
> reading. I was merely pointing out that this might not be true. Really, I
> think my goal was very close to yours in pointing out the futility of such
> hypotheses.
Ah! Then I re-agree with you again.
> > Barring a book-destructive catastrophe and the sudden world-wide
> > accessibility of electronic information technology, electronic media won't
> > likely extinguish the hardcopy written word for at least several centuries.
>
> Certainly not while I live.
Is that a "from my cold, dead hand" comment, or simply an expression of a
timeframe? 8^)
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
59 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
