Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The Written Word?

Expand Messages
  • Dick.
    The Written Word? [ The written word is seen by most people to have been a human evolutionary leap, just as structured speech was presumably. But you claim
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 4, 2012
      The Written Word?

      [ The written word is seen by most people to have been a human
      evolutionary leap, just as structured speech was presumably. But you
      claim that reading does not impart knowledge. Yet you spent years
      reading? ]

      Indeed it was an evolutionarily leap, and quite a new one at that. But
      writing is a tool just as speech is and it can be used for positive and
      negative intentions and results as can any other tool. What I have said
      is that reading does not impart the knowledge of experience to the
      reader. It passes on data, information, and that information may or may
      not be about the personal experience of the writer. But even if and when
      it is about the writers personal experience it does not become the
      personal experience of the reader, thus reading is not a substitute for
      experience and the knowledge of. But some folks take it to be so do they
      not; and that is dangerous. Like any other tool you have to be careful
      how you read it and you have to be careful how you write it. It is of
      course only an extension of talking but it is the way to talk to
      millions and not just one or two people. You can also talk to the as yet
      unborn via the written word.

      Between the ages of seven and ten I taught myself to play chess by way
      of reading books. It worked. Not only that but it was fun reading about
      the history of it. It might not all have been true but it gave me a
      taste of what had gone on in the past. But nonetheless reading it was no
      substitute for doing it. But it gave me a springboard into my unknown at
      the time. But I did find that choosing the right writer to read, for me,
      was important. It was an American bloke which I read mainly. For he
      wrote it as though he were talking to me.

      Writing however is also an evolutionary leap in the potential to
      brainwash people with utter nonsense. Does one really have to set out to
      prove this empirically? Isn't it obvious? Just as that can be done on
      a one-to-one basis it is even better if you can communicate with
      millions, for you might be able to brainwash them all to your advantage.

      Then there is the bit about the written word being useful to the masses.
      What if the masses cannot read or cannot get access to the written word?
      And what when communication gets turned into 1 4 U 2 ? The whole point
      of both the spoken word and the written word is to broadcast a message,
      and the message carries a meaning, so the point of sending a meaning is
      for the recipient to understand it. One CAN come to understand it
      without personal experience of the thing in question. But that kind of
      understanding is not meant to extract from the superior understanding of
      that from personal experience. One should keep this in mind when reading
      anything. You cannot live YOUR life by proxy. Reading about love, for
      example, is not the same thing as living it, is it. Same too with the
      stuff which I wrote about. You cannot buy it from a book. But you can
      pass on information about it. For whatever that might be worth. Not all
      human being are shysters and crooks. But some are. Getting the masses to
      send you money and donations beats robbing their individual houses. And
      what is your house of knowledge and understanding based upon? Reading
      or experience? Study yourself.

      Dick Richardson

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.