Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
This emphasises what rcentros about paper books being considered "real" - in the sense of being tangible - because as long as you've got the paper book you can read it, you don't need anything else.
|
There are plenty of people for whom that statement is not true. People with vision problems, for example.
Moreover, "real" and "tangible" or "physical" are by no means the same thing. I would not take offense when someone said they only read physical books or paper books. I do take offense when someone says they read real books (in a conversation involving ebooks), implying that ebooks are somehow not real. That's insulting, no matter the context. There are plenty of nonphysical things in the world that are considered real nevertheless. But for some reason ebooks are not real, because they're not physical? Sorry, but that's totally illogical to me.