Quote:
Originally Posted by BWinmill
Reading is exactly the same, it does not do anything to improve the world by itself. You may use that healthier mind to help other people, but it doesn't automatically happen.
That said, books aren't hugely different from television. People can choose to read garbage books, just like they can choose to watch garbage TV. People can choose to read quality books, just like they can choose to watch quality TV.
|
I agree, that reading combined with inaction is unlikely to improve the world. However, reading may contribute to action, and increase the quality of that action. By knowing more, considering more, and understanding many different viewpoints, an avid reader is more likely to be thoughtful, informed and compassionate in their response to real-world events. Which would you rather have voting for government officials: someone who has read thousands of articles and full speeches by the candidates, or someone who has seen a few hundred commercials "approved by" the candidates? Which do you think will make the more informed choice?
Again, I really think you need to read Jim Trelease's book. There is a snobbery that says that some books are "garbage" and others are "quality." One anecdote he uses is when he asked a mother if her son read. "Oh, never." She said. He poked around. "Comic books?" "No." "Magazines?" "He reads Sports Illustrated every week from cover-to-cover." Trelease then analyzed the complexity of the writing in Sports Illustrated and compared it to broadcast television. The writing in SI was orders of magnitude more complex than what was on television. His point is that what is widely considered "garbage books" (even comic books) is far better than what is considered quality television.
Television teaches us to make snap judgements about people. We see very limited information and then we decide, "I really like so-and-so." "I hope so-and-so gets voted off soon, I can't stand him." "She's an airhead." No problem because these judgements have no impact on our world, unless we happen to meet one of those people in real life. But then we go into the workplace and we make the same snap judgements about co-workers. Or we pick Presidents because we like their smile, or the way they speak. And then the lessons we've learned on television have a real impact on the real world.
Yes, I can learn more about how to do a particular task from a video. Watching tennis videos is far more instructive for me than reading a text about how to hit a forehand. But that doesn't make television a good format for learning what is wrong with Keynesian economic systems or why genetically modified foods might be bad for me. The more complicated (cerebral vs physical) the problem, the less television is able to convey.