Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
But my point was that the articles reading_context_1 is of course not all possible ways to consume text. We can have reading_context_2 and my point was that this the author might have missed. But a lot of people here have missed that a context is necessary for this discussion and that just consuming text is not what the article was about.
|
Reading is reading is reading, regardless of the context. There is no "reading_context1". There is only "reading + context1", because it is still reading in a different context. If changing the context doesn't make it not reading, then the context isn't part of what makes it reading. The author makes a fatal mistake in assuming that how he prefers to read is an inherent part of reading. He likes the tactile sensation of paper books. That's fine, but it is a mistake to think that it isn't reading with out it.
To borrow from Dr. Seuss:
I could read them on a boat,
I could read them on a goat.
I could read them in the rain,
I could read them in the train.