21 Answers

  1. British philologist and psychoanalyst Mikita Brottman considers reading a “vice” comparable to masturbation. In her opinion, a child who cannot read freely expresses everything that comes to mind. Starting to read and retiring with a book, he allegedly learns a language completely different from that spoken by others, gets used to internally pronounce his thoughts before expressing them, more often refrains from expressing himself, for fear of ridicule, and may move away from friends and relatives.

    Brottman's 2008 essay, “The Solitary Vice,” is accompanied by horrifying biographical details about how her addiction to reading transformed her from an ordinary girl into a dull philological maiden. The conclusion is something like this: rather than reading, it's better to watch a movie (the list is attached). In general, there may be a conspiracy of filmmakers behind this, because nothing prevents the author from teaching literature at the University of Maryland to this day, while being married to a film critic.

  2. A person can think about what he has read, from this he will have his own thoughts)) As my philosophy teacher used to say,”Doubt everything, even me.”

  3. Unlike television, while reading, the brain not only collects but also analyzes information. Borrowing someone else's idea (not necessarily from a book) will be easy only for a child who has not yet built his own picture of the world. When we read a book: philosophy, a work of art, etc., our imagination begins to create images. This procedure is very useful for the brain, as it begins to work. In addition, reading makes a person very literate. As a historical example, Stalin read 300 pages a day every day, roughly speaking one or half of a book. When arguing with politicians, he always emerged victorious, simply because his opponents simply had nothing to object to. The fact that you can borrow other people's thoughts or be zombified by books( for which, by the way, Mei Kampf was written) once again, this happens only to those who do not have their own picture of the world built in.

  4. I will say this as a person who does not like to read.

    Complete nonsense. It is a must-read, but no one forces you to think like the author of your book.

    For example, you have read two books on the same topics, from different authors with their own meaning and message, and now in your head you are already forming YOUR OWN opinion, of course it may be similar to one book or another, but you still add something of your own.

    On the contrary, what you read helps you think bigger, develop your own imagination, and supplement any of the information you receive.

    There are no people who took something from the void and got knowledge, we all take the base from the knowledge stories of our ancestors and based on this base we get new knowledge, continue to improve.

  5. .. If the evil is stopped: take away all the books and burn them.” Great A. S. Griboyedov! But does it make sense to brainwash your brain with books and science? What “abyss” does enlightenment lead us to? Is it to the torn-up hornet's nest of spiritual torments and contradictions, where thought-wasps sting and torment our educated souls? We know that patriotism should come first. And the KING himself told us about this. Why fill sick souls with the suffering of Griboyedov's Chatsky with an eternally stupid question: “Who are the judges?” You'd think we didn't know who. Isn't it easier to grunt pigs, bleat rams and sheep, push everyone out, run a race to the trough with swill and food, than to grieve from intelligence and reading? By the way, I'm glad that many people don't have a mind anymore. To read and possess knowledge, and this is the way to science, means to throw off the blinders of darkness from the eyes of darkness. Oh, what the fuck? You'll accidentally blurt out some crap, and the judge will give you a fine for the first case for dissent, and for a relapse he'll give you 2 or 3 years in prison. To study and read, does it mean to suffer from the soul? You'll also need a lot of money, but for what? And where to get them? We haven't been getting smarter for centuries, but now we don't need a lot of thoughts in our heads. Only torments from knowledge and many years of study. All the troubles of reading and enlightenment. Famous people in power talk about this. Know how to tighten the waist straps on your belly and think about patriotism. And is there any need to see boorish existence without slime traps and retouching? Unnecessary suffering and the illusion of hope.

    Enlightenment, culture, science and intelligence – the misfortune of slaves and the terrible fear of masters! Why live in trouble and make the gentlemen nervous?

    Why did V. I. Lenin urge us to ” learn and learn!”? It was not enough for him to have one “atomic bomb for Russia”, so he insured himself and with N. K. Krupskaya began to “corrupt” people's souls with literacy, culture and knowledge. J. V. Stalin also joined them. They created Soviet science, but why? And, after all, how good it is to be ignorant-a ram and a sheep! There is also a trough with grub and swill, a meadow with grass. The wool will be cut. And where is it not sheared from rams and sheep? No worries about the skin, either. And, here, an educated person has a head like a hornet's nest stirred up, where thought-wasps fly and sting the masters. Seek equality, justice, and the truth of being? What's the point? Why did the Bolsheviks organize educational programs, create a network of educational institutions, and develop science? To our undoing, perhaps? The fruits of the run-up of their neurons, however, are already in the only gyrus below the waist, so many of them are now reaping them! Study has become a drug addiction, study pulls, and there is no money for a dose. One hope for the Russian Orthodox Church! Stupid folk trying to educate their children. He spends money on studying. And why doom children to torment if there is no work? Ordinary people just need to know the prayer and the way to the temple and to the election hall. don't run to the polls. And why was it dashing in “dashing”? The “educated people” lost their fear, forgot about the usual bridle and bit, whip and whip. Everything was famously in the state from “education and bad manners”. Even today, the plume of that knowledge from the USSR corrodes the eyes. The nose, however, has already become accustomed to the stench of life, and the stench of elites and their luxury has become familiar. It was only then that the “young reformers” remembered that they were descendants of Noah, saying that they were 30-50 million people. enough to serve resource deposits and lackeys to palaces. Now we admire the nobility and actors on TV screens, we see their palaces, yachts and cars, Rublevsky dogs and “heifers”. And, after all, if the nobility were educated, they would hardly have reached such official and oligarchic heights. Isn't it time to throw out the muddy stereotypes of the path to reading, learning foreign languages, classical Russian literature and knowledge? Learning is darkness, not learning is light! We haven't been getting smarter for centuries, but now we don't need a lot of thoughts in our heads. Only torments from knowledge and many years of study. All the troubles of reading and enlightenment. Famous people in power talk about this. Know how to tighten the waist straps on your belly and think about patriotism. And is there any need to see boorish existence without slime traps and retouching? Unnecessary suffering and the illusion of hope. Maybe it's better to go to the temple, put a candle and pray. But no overheating of impoverished neurons in running along mossy convolutions . Or maybe they will move to one common one, which is now all the top officials and deputies think? What a sin to hide, the present one is pleasant, in the streams of sweet oil, naked and modernized, glossy Gogol's Mirgorod or Shchedrinky Glupov, in a more “moral” form with its revived heroes. Conversely, what is the sense of acceptance and rejection from the hustle and bustle of vanities we experience from seeing ourselves in teeming flocks of dead souls from the graveyards of the Empire? We need a ban on education in the laws, and let the gentlemen torment their children abroad. They have money and government positions for educated kids. Soon the literates will not even be allowed to remove manure from the barns.

  6. To forget how to think independently, you must first learn to think. Learning is best done in a conversation with an intelligent person. Most book authors are smart people. But “here” they will hardly be able to honor you with a personal conversation, so there is only one way out. And there are not many smart thoughts, you see, on fertilized soil and your own will slowly hatch…

  7. No, that's not true. If the book does not match my thoughts or it is not clear what is written, I will not read it. It happens that the thoughts of a vertitsa a cannot be formulated, but someone else has also written it down correctly. Why not use it despite the fact that you will not read much gloza get tired.

  8. If a person does not borrow thoughts, he will be no smarter than a tree. Language, culture, philosophy, and science are all based on data transmission and improvement. A person receives information and improves it. Otherwise, we wouldn't exist.

  9. Then the use of sight would make it impossible to imagine. But this is not the case. You know, novice artists are sometimes advised to look at more landscapespeoplewhat_on_tham_draw_they figured out that the mental library of images would expand and it would be easier to generate new ones from the fragments later. About the same with thoughts.

    In 90 years of life, you will not analyze and think about everything yourself, and at least in some areas it is better to be satisfied with the thoughts already chewed by someone, laid out in concise and understandable maxims. This saves you time. Yes, and you will still check and think about the conclusions you read later – your brain will not rust.

    In addition, reading will not prevent you from generating your own ideas if you are inclined to do so, just as its absence will not help someone who just reads without analyzing and forming opinions (about the subject of discussion, of course, and not about the book itself).

  10. Development continues throughout life . After all, it is not for nothing that there is a saying – ” Live for a century and learn for a century.” Who are you listening to ? Those who are illiterate themselves ? If you don't want to be so stupid , take books instead of a computer and read more !!!

  11. In my life,I met only one person,a cat., without reading a single book-he was an excellent storyteller:funny, tragic, sad things…various options.This is an exception that confirms the rule)And you, gentlemen, generating content-a question-magazine, did reading interfere with you?Those who are now pushing this unworthy idea: “reading too much is harmful” – they themselves grew up on wonderful literature!And now, it took a lot of stupid, uneducated,(with ala fantasy)obedient slaves.Everything is simple.

    We need cheap labor.Silent,with no developed speech or skill

    read-understand the Constitution of your country.Non-readers are not dangerous.

    They don't know their rights,they don't know their duties,they don't know how empires were created and collapsed…They will never know or understand the cultures of different peoples.From not understanding-angry, constantly “on treason”, suspicion..The result is that they are easily deceived.Empty vessel-easy to fill..

  12. it depends on what you read, and how much your personality is natural and not fucked up by a fucking dectv. if a person knows how to think , he is hardly an unlearn, simply because he is aware of what is happening, and if he is stupid, then he will notice it and understand the reasons

  13. If a person doesn't know how to filter information, it doesn't matter if they read books or watch TV. Such people will believe in reptilians from the planet Nibiru, and when they read “Fight Club”, they will go to destroy monuments. In general, thoughts are formed in much the same way: a person studies different sources, adds his own and gets his own thoughts. To slightly paraphrase one literate type: “People can see far away because they stand on the shoulders of Titans”

  14. Reading books, magazines, newspapers, articles, flyers, tweets and statuses is useful primarily because it allows you to get as close as possible to feeling inside someone else's head, inside someone else's consciousness, which is often completely different from yours. The more a person does this, the more he develops a broad perception of reality, the fact that opinions are different. They become more aware of how life is happening in other parts of the world, and learn about the subtleties of social processes. And most importantly, a person who reads develops critical thinking. Without all this, a person is closed in the consciousness of his own and those who directly surround him — that is, people who are close to him demographically and socially, and this is a rather narrow and unrepresentative cross-section of the world's population.

  15. Just recently I read an article on this topic, which was called “The Dark Side of reading”. The point is not how much a person reads, but that the text is not a harmless scribble. It can influence the reader, especially the one who swallows everything indiscriminately. The text can be a tool, or it can be a weapon, so do not fall into the delusion that reading is definitely useful.

    That is, the point is not how much a person reads, but how they read, how much they are prepared to meet in the text what can affect them.. Thus, reading materials need to be selected and take into account the strength of the Other's psyche in your head.

  16. This idea is vulnerable on two sides. On the one hand, you can borrow other people's thoughts not only from books. People are influenced by their relatives and friends, school/university, TV, advertising in the subway, conversations on the street. If a person tends to reproduce other people's words rather than think for himself, the lack of books will not help him. On the other hand, thinking and imagination need outside information. If people don't read, they get less information on average than those who do, which means that their ability to think and imagine doesn't develop as much as it should.

  17. This Brotman idiot is one word psycho. analyst. The most far-fetched profession for the needs of empty philistines…..Reading is useful, reading develops imagination, thinking, rhetoric, increases vocabulary.Pushkin read a lot .Lomonosov, Vysotsky, Academician Likhachev. Yesenin, Einstein, and many poets and scientists have also achieved great heights…..Russia..he also reads a lot so far,the aSSSR has read even more ,but politics is not enough, hence the problems .In the US, on the contrary, they read a lot and study Russian classics, and many politicians also require education.So they live well…A person who doesn't read just gets stupid,I know a lot of them, and even those who hang on the Internet still read….

  18. Books are the experience and wisdom of our ancestors. Even after living the most fulfilling life, no one can surpass the knowledge accumulated by previous generations. Yes, other people's ideas have the property of influencing a person's consciousness. However, other people's ideas are not transmitted through one book. Ideas are transmitted mainly through the media, or personally from person to person. Let's ban communication, because we somehow fall under the influence of other people's ideas and they may contradict our perception of the world, they teach us to think independently?

  19. Um, I somehow doubt this statement.

    On the contrary, when reading, you get a lot of material for processing, for independent reflection. The interpretation of the text itself is worth something (you still need to prepare well for this); you also need to follow and understand the author's position on a particular problem, on a particular issue. And she, this position, as a rule, is veiled under the plot, details and other entourage of the work. Without such a real analysis of what you read, it's boring to read. Why spend time on such a quasi-reading at all? And the book will not be remembered for a long time. As in literature lessons at school it happens: “Well, I read, what's more?”))

    If the reader really learns these thoughts and gives them out at the right moment, or maybe not so much because of a lack of meaning, without burdening himself with reflection on what he has read and remembered, then yes, reading is of little use and benefit. However, for me, it's better to let them repeat the thoughts of writers, who are mostly far from stupid people, than the thoughts of Vovan from “Real Boys”. No, seriously!

    But it still seems to me that there are not many such” smart guys ” among reading people. After all, with this approach, the whole point, the fascination of this process is lost.

    And, by the way, I noticed by myself that if you try to remember an idea or an interesting thought from a book that you like or are interested in – and when reading Russian classics, every third reflection of the author is of this kind 🙂 – but you still don't fully understand this reflection, you can't apply it to modern events, modern life processes (and for this you need to think again, reflect), then after a couple of days, weeks-well, in a month for sure-it simply gets forgotten.

    And it also happens that after some time, under the influence of some situation or something else, you reach this thought on your own, and it opens up to you in all its depth. Then you freeze amazed, realizing all its truth, the correctness of the wording, the accuracy of each word!.. As Chekhov said: “Any idea must be experienced.” So let the memory of such “splagiachennye” thoughts will be, life will explain them))

    In general, I will sum up the words of Alexander Blok: “a book is a great thing, as long as a person knows how to use it.”

  20. there is an interesting phrase in the TV series “Dexter”

    to the prisoner:

    • Can I get you a book?”

    “Don't, I have an imagination

    yes, this is partly true. however, this does not mean that it is harmful.

    “we are what we eat.” reading is also consumption, and we absorb what we read.

    “oh, what a horror! my opinion – other people's thoughts!!!” but if you don't listen to other people's opinions, where does yours come from? according to the laws of physics, nothing forms by itself . therefore, your opinion is an assessment and analysis of other people's opinions and thoughts, carefully (or not very) filtered and weighted.

    it only follows that books, like food, should be chosen before reading, and we should keep track of what we read, and not forget to throw out waste (excess)

  21. This is partly true.

    Without delving too deeply into explanations, I say this: reading does not always mean thinking with someone else's head. Who do we trust more: an eyewitness or a historical researcher?

    Much less valuable is not a lot of thoughts as we have now, but rather a lot of thoughts that have not been processed by our own thinking. In the same way, the vast mass of knowledge, if it has not passed through the sieve of our mind, is incomparably less significant than a thoroughly multi-faceted limited information.

    There is no doubt that you can only reason about what you know, and therefore you must learn something; but you also know only what you can reason about. Therefore, it is fair to call reading a kind of surrogate for self-reflection. This is easy to see from everyone's own experience: we were all taught to read, but was it voluntary? Is this the same path to self-reflection?

Leave a Reply