h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Sorry Clarke, but I agree with Ralph... I don't understand how anyone could think that reading isn't important... The places books take you are infinate... you use so much more than just "reading skills" when you read a book... you have to use creativity, imagination, abstract thinking,... I mean, Its the most wonderful feeling to be lost in a good book (maybe you've never been there, but you should try it)... Its not just a silly pasttime... it has actually been stated that reading can help decrease the advance of Alzheimer's disease, lower stress, and help children pass more quickly from the Concrete Operational Period of developement into the Formal Operational Period where Abstract Thinking occurs (Piaget's theory of psychological developement - I don't guess you've ever read him)... So, I suppose "reading is beneficial to thinking" afterall...

By the way... Socrates did dictate most of his thoughts... they were largely transcribed by his followers who sought him out for his wisdom and knowledge... he wasn't a teacher who imposed his views on his pupils... he showed them how to "think" and helped them find the gift of following their own minds... The world would definately be at a loss without any documentation of Socrates works... - this is why the world is so blatantly stupid today... everyone has lost respect for the "real" great thinkers and have started worshiping all things plastic and disposable -The mind is not disposable and it's a terrible thing to waste.

You must be forgetting that "Communicating Clearly" and "Thinking with Accuracy" both benefit from and contribute to the gift (yes, I see Reading as a Gift, not just a Skill) of reading.

I don't have to question the "veracity" of the statements of teachers and the media either... I don't read for them... I read for ME!

Blessings...
~The Gypsy~

The problem with that, Ralph, is that you're processing the data that someone else already prepared and translated for you. All you're doing is finding what other people think, and reading which facts they've selected to prove it. Self-taught is an impossibility. It would require complete understanding of EVERYTHING. not knowledge of, just complete understanding. If you have no platform, you you have no stairs.

Actually, reading is not beneficial to thinking, as I've said to Ralph already. What you are reading is, ! Another persons understandings and opinions. You're psychological references don't impress me much, either, as this "abstract thinking" and movement from different periods is, again, a thing other people than you decided was important. Why did you accept this as important? Because you read it. You're willingness to totally accept the written word just because you've been told that the written word is amazing, stupendous, great, is exactly what I meant when I said people defend and advocate reading because they're told to.

For all the benefits reading gives you, you cited most the entertainment value. >>>infinite places etc<<< which is true, it is a form of higher entertainment, but it is still only entertainment.
You pointed out the benefits to your health, well, pets do that too. Hiking does it, and so does running.

Research Maslows hierarchy of human needs, and while the ability to think artistically and abstractedly is there, it isn't a NECESSITY. -food/clothing/security/love. And that's just for the mental developement. You can be completely moronic and think in two dimensions and still live, provide for yourself and be happy.

Actually, I believe the world is so blatantly stupid today because people are willing to let people they believe are great thinkers to either influence their own thoughts to an unnecessary degree, or think for them completely. People need to become more able to think for themselves, correctly or erroneously, without being forced to just ingest the thoughts of others.

Actually, last time I moved, I went off reading for a month or two, and spoke more with actual people. if anything, my ability to communicate and understand others was greatly heightened.

And I don't know why you put veracity in quotations, it was spelt and used correctly. Look it up if you want.

This is NOT a quote from Walden, as I don't want this post to be censored, but it IS inspired by a section written my Mr. Thoreau.

Who will have learnt more, a boy who studied for a year to become a smith, reading only books, not coming near a forge, or an illiterate apprentice, who learned by having a master show him what he should do exactly.

Just because you read something someone else wrote doesn't mean that you're not thinking for yourself... If you read several books or articals on a subject, you get several views on the subject... then you form your OWN opinion... you don't have to follow someone word for word just because you read it... and, although you seem to not believe it, some people actually have very interesting and relavant things to say in their books and articals... You seem to want us to believe what we read in YOUR postings.

As for entertainment, the world would be a really boring place without it...

And I think the psychological aspects of reading ARE important... I'm a psych. major... and I've read Maslow (You must believe Maslow because you read it - I doubt you spoke to him)... I read what I can and then I form my OWN opinion... but I do have respect for those who have spent their whole lives researching and documenting their findings... If I don't read their research, then how am I ever going to be able to improve on their research, or perhaps prove them wrong... I obviously can't go talk to them one on one because a bunch of them are a little bit DEAD...

If you think all things you read a worthless, then why do you put so much stock in what people say to you in person?... One is on paper, One is Verbal... Whats the difference?... Reading is a tremendously helpful way of communication and is absolutely fundamental when it comes to finding out stuff about people you can't talk to in person.

And noone told me to "Advocate Reading" (I put that in quotation marks because it is a direct quote from your posting, as was "Veracity" which is also why I put it in quotations)... I Advocate Reading on my own accord... noone told me to read... my father introduced me to it and I continued it because I found it fascinating and I wanted to do it...

If reading has nothing to do with thinking, then how come children who read score better on Standardized IQ tests than children who don't... children who read are statistically better at math... at music... at communicating in general (even in the verbal sense)...

Pets and Running may benefit SOME people's health... but what if you have an elderly person who CAN'T run and who isn't capable of taking care of a Pet... but they can READ... they can excercise their mind by keeping it active... this will help their heath and possibly prolong their ability to function mentally... I have SEEN this first hand with several elderly people I know...

Isn't it a little Ironic that you ended you "Hatred for Reading" post with a Thoreau quote... that you obviously read somewhere...

And if "being completely moronic and two-diminsional" (as you put it)is your goal in life, then more power to you,... but being a Moron has never been high on my list of the things that make me happy...

Blessings...
~The Gypsy~

Uhm, excuse me, I don't seem to understand what you're getting at. When did I ever say reading was a product of the antichrist? I said it isn't necessary, becuase it's not necessary. Nothing created by a human being is necessary, and that's just a general rule. Now, I don't care if it's good for you, the question is, NECESSITY. Also, I hate to tell you, but standardized IQ tests are almost worse than useless, believe me, they're more based to the background of the child than on any actual intelligence. You're also taking my metaphors and, for some strange reason, you're applying them directly to me, but before you do, you alter them slightly, to be very isnulting, as well. You assume things which I've not even hinted, or given you any grounds to assume. You gave me a little psych nougat, I gave you one back.

Well, I'm sorry I questioned one of your unchallenged faiths, but i don't think I'm going to stay in this thread to argue with someone who resorts to name-calling. apparently, you can only be civil when we're patting eachother on the back, but I thank you for proving my point on complacency. Rather than attempt to think this through yourself, you immediately defended what society would expect you to defend.

Well, toodles.

Ok... I certainly don't agree with you on any of this about the whole reading thing... but I won't argue with you anymore... Its pointless...

But I did want to make a slight correction to your comments about Standardized IQ Testing... They are not in any way based on the background of the child... if they were they wouldn't be Standardized... when something is standardized, it means it is the SAME for everybody... it is always given the exact same way... the test giver even has to recite the same directions over and over... it is a Testing Law set down by the APA... Even if one step of the testing process is done incorrectly, it makes the test scores invalid... I would also like to note that REAL IQ tests aren't given to just anybody... there has to be a reason... and many times the participant isn't even informed of their scores, to prevent stigmatization... and also the Validity of these tests that are in use today is very high (they do measure intelligence - if the test is given right, there is no varience between test/retest scoring, therefore the test scores become a good indication of the intelligence level of the participant).-- All of this may not be necessary to you, but it is systematic.

Blessings...
~The Gypsy~

Yes, reading is another skill, but it is a very important one. The establishment (teachers, media) obviously get it wrong sometimes, but they're right sometimes too. Reading symbols translate to sharing and learning of ideas, and concepts. How else is one to transfer knowledge without a medium of communication? How reliable is word of mouth? Communicating clearly includes the ability to put down your thoughts on a relatively permanent medium so other people can understand what you were thinking... without the abilty to read, and read well, it would hardly matter whether the originator of ideas was a clear communicator or not, because the learner would not be able to understand it anyway.

I wholeheartedly agree with just about everything that has so far been said in this conversation.
People, especially here in the US, and even more so in the schools of the US, but also everywhere else on earth, are stupid. They are stupid because they behave like pack animals, never questioning their leaders. They do as they are told and conform to the system. You don't fit? Deal with it. Things aren't going to change FOR those who do occasionally turn on their brains. You either conform or go under. I experience this every day, being one of the few who think in a sea of mindless idiots (sorry to be so drastic, bu that's the way it is). You tell them something, point something out to them, and everytime, without fail, there will be one of two reactions:
a) they say "oh... I suppose you're right. I never thought of that." and then go on living as though you had never pointed out the scratch in the windshield of their lives
b) they goggle at you for a second or two, then come at you with any one of a million stupid arguments that refer to their standards.

It is so hard living in this. Accept their standards or forget ever achieving what you want. Conforming to their standards to get thorugh life while knowing every second that their world, their truths are built upon unreasonable, idiotic constructs of the minds of a select few who have decided to be leaders (and it is so easy to lead people who scream to be directed) - it's the hardest thing I've ever had to do and I'll probably be doing it for the rest of my life.

(sorry for that monster sentence, I can't help myself)

Thank you for this conversation! I'm so glad there are people who feel the same.

Tchaaa! I haven't even touched upon READING, which seems to be a controversial issue here.

Before I go on I'd like to point out my amusement at someone above using the phrase "psych nougat". Nougat happens to be a sort of sweet made from nuts. Insert mental image of psychology nougat, please. I'm sure the author meant nugget and I'm being finicky here, but hey, it amuses me.

Anyway, reading.
1) I believe it is not wrong to read something and accept what one has read as correct, IF ONE HAS THOUGHT ABOUT IT. Not everything someone else has already thought is wrong. There have been so many people in history that, even though the majority don't seem to get much deep thinking done, it is highly unlikely that there will ever again be such a thing as original thought. So: input, consideration, accepting or rejection. That's the way reading, or hearing, or any other type of intake of information should work. The consideration part is the important bit.

2)Reading, while of course elevated into the status of "absolutely vital skill" in the minds of system-controlled conformity, is not essential for survival. Nor is ever seeing the sky. Still, life is infinitely better when you can do it. If you can't read, but can talk and listen, or even signal things, you will stay alive. But there are worlds of inspiration, information and pleasure out there that are instantly availabe when one is able to comprehend the art of the written word.

I agree with just about anyone who'll quote Monty Python. I have a theory which I may call Cyclical Evolution. Take notes:

1. We started out with no clothing. Have you seen High schools these days?

2. The aforementioned lack of thought. We didn't do it 6 Million years ago, why do we need it now that machines can think (somewhat) for us?

3. Nobody takes a stand. The strong win over the weak, luckily the democracy is working pretty well, but we're slipping, and some countries still rely on a leader-pack relationship.

Humans, unite! We got a gift of sentience and we're not using it very well.

ThinkSoft

Complaicancy? Pah!

Ali