Is reading morally superior? It seems like greater society (with the apps) is rapidly changing back to an oral culture which seems to be humanity’s default setting.

Edit - via the visual boost of short form video

▲

JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Is reading morally superior?

No. Of course not. Someone who can't read due to mental disability isn't morally inferior to someone who can and does.

▲

BoingBoomTschak 2 hours ago | parent [-]

He obviously meant "is choosing to spend your time reading morally superior", though.

	▲	JumpCrisscross an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> He obviously meant "is choosing to spend your time reading morally superior", though Sure. I'm answering it by another measure. Killing is, ceteris paribus, morally inferior to not killing. I'd argue a psychopath is henceforth morally debilitated despite it not really being their "fault" that they're born without empathy. This, in turn, helps me conclude that a murderer is, in fact, doing wrong. Same here. Someone who can't read isn't inherently less morally capable than someone who can. What reading gives one is the capacity to gain a better understanding of ethics and morals. So I'd guess folks who read books are, on average, more intelligent and at least seeking to conduct themselves in a more moral fashion than someone who doesn't. But that doesn't make spending time reading morally superior to some other activity.

▲

Yizahi an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For a long time learning required a primary attention of a person. Usually a monopoly attention. You can't read printed text and do something else in parallel (fidgeting doesn't count). Radio and TV facilitated background viewing and listening but there weren't many options to personalize those. And then IT revolution happened and humanity discovered that they can do something as a primary attention task and "learn" in background by listening to a narrated educational media. And with the invention of speed-up, those people are now debating is x2 speed-up too slow, and just how fast can they go while still discerning words.

it's my personal hot-take, but I think that a majority of those background listeners are doing performative "learning" and aren't learning anything really. It's just to brag once a year that they have "read" 100+ books in a year and post a wall of covers or a number on their social network feed.

Basically, books aren't morally superior media than anything else really. But focused and monopoly attention dedicated to some media is morally superior to a performative background "learning". Books simply eliminate even a possibility of reading them in background.

▲

augustocallejas 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48830868

▲

szundi 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]