Why is reading important?

Submitted by SeriousQuestions111 t3_126oew0 in books

Hey, everyone. I hope it's a right place to post this. Just wanted to make sure I'm not an alien or anything. No, no, listen, it's about reading I swear.

Recently a person asked, why I read books (especially all that made up fiction, it's a waste of time etc). In response I asked why do they watch movies and the answer was - because movies are shorter and wastes less time. I get that it's probably an insecurity thing, since the person is prone to saying that they learned from life experience while all I have is a college education. But my train of though ran ahead and produced a theory. Maybe if this person actually read some books, they would not have to ask such strange questions about reading. And it's not the old 'try before you knock it' thing either. Not with reading anyways. In my opinion, most readers, do it for mental stimulation (I might talk about empathy next time). And what is mental stimulation if not exercise, for the part of your brain that deals with comprehention and imagination (I'm not a scientist or biologist, just an experiencer of life).

For the sake of clarity, I want to compare it with physical exercise and this is where it gets tricky - if you don't train your body, you cannot lift/run/jump etc much, but if you don't train your brain you can't even understand why it's imortant to do so. In my opinion, the most crutial ability of the brain is not to solve some math problems or something (in case someone's paradigm pushes them to believe that's the only form of intelligence and that you should only read nonfiction). The most important function of your brain is, very likely, comprehension and creativity (I should say the most interesting or humane, because obviously brain is also responsible for regulating our bodily functions). I mean those two things have brought us so far as species (actually I don't believe humans are strictly animals, but that's a conversation for another time). Humans figured out their environment and thought up ways to interact with it, changing their very lives by doing so.

Now we come to the crux of the question that I have - please, someone explain to me, why is it that so many people refuse or feel no need to train themselves mentally? Don't they have all these question piling up in their heads, that must be answered? Don't they want to see what else is out there (since brain is our comprehension device). What could be their own advanced form as a being (or of being)? Why don't they want to improve themselves? I find it hard to believe that they lack the ego or the drive for it (when it comes to making money, suddenly ego shines oh so bright). I understand why people are more interested in physical training/ well being than mental, but for the love of God, why would anyone feel good about not reading books? Or even preach to their own children that they should not read about made up worlds/ characters since it's a waste of time (happened to someone I know).

In my opinion, reading is an amazing exercise for your brain. A book is basically a whole gym full of equipment ready to be used. Authors do most of the hard lifting for us, by building it from sratch. All we need to do is show up and genuinely connect our minds to it (effort is very important in any type of improvement). It's basically a cheat code, people. It's either that or you have to go and think up the whole structure and direction of learning for yourself (might be hard to do even for advanced mindbuilders - yeah, that needs to be a thing). Which, I believe is the next step of training, since eventually you get the urge to apply your jacked up imagination to your own specific circumstances instead of reading about someone elses' adventures (but that's another conversation as well). Thank you all for reading this and reading books, please, never stop.

5

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

soph_sol t1_jeampta wrote

Honestly.....as someone who loves to read, I don't think that reading is actually vital. People can learn how to use their mind from many different sources. Non-literate societies can have brilliant, insightful, imaginative people, just like literate ones. I read because it's the way that I most enjoy spending time in the world of a story. Other people read for other reasons. Other people prefer not to read, or to read only occasionally, and spend their time mentally engaging with other things. All of that is okay!

20

South_Honey2705 t1_jeana50 wrote

Very nicely put. I think reading gives you mental stimulation, empathy the ability to see the world through another's eyes amongst many other things. I don't know if people are plain lazy about not reading and they value physical over mental.

8

wongie t1_jeaqhgn wrote

It's not, ultimately it's just a medium to transmit something and each medium has their own merits and which you use is down to preference.

7

lucia-pacciola t1_jeazgxo wrote

Written language - conveying meaning through abstract symbols - seems to be unique to humanity. If you're not reading, you're just a beast that wears pants. Why even bother?

6

SpiritedCabinet2 t1_jee15wf wrote

I don't like to think of reading as brain training, even though that is what happens. It does feel more like a cheat code like you say, and that's backed up by science.

By far the craziest scientific finding on reading to me (I still struggle to believe it), is that, to your brain, reading about an experience is almost the same as living them.

As an introvert, this makes so much sense and places the phrase "having a rich inner life" in an entirely new light. Just because I prefer alone time, doesn't mean I don't live a rich, fulfilling, even adventurous life. Very few people, places, activities, works of art ... make me feel things as hard and as clearly as a book that I get completely immersed in. And I do wish more people would give it an honest go, but that's a tall order in a society where we have dopamine machines in our pocket 24/7.

6

minimalist_coach t1_jeb3zki wrote

We are usually the product of the environment we grew up in.

My parents were divorced and I was raised by my father who highly valued education and was a lifelong learner. My sisters were raised by my mother, who valued homemaking and birthing children. I was teased about reading so much, I was told the only reason to go to school was to find a husband. When we were raising our kids my sisters would complain that the schools gave too much homework and allowed their children to not do it and blame the school when they would fail classes. My kids went to college and both still love to read and take classes.

I'm retired and I'm the only one of 5 siblings that read and continues to actively learn new things. My siblings continue to mock me about it.

4

SeriousQuestions111 OP t1_jeb5ha8 wrote

That's a great viewpoint, thank you. It's the exact reason I'm asking - to get an objective feel for it. I was blessed with having a linguistic educator for a parent and have been reading as early as I can remember. Environment is definitely an important factor, but now I'm wondering whether thirst for knowledge is inborn or passed on to intentionally.

3

minimalist_coach t1_jebonb7 wrote

I know there is also a belief that we need to be "productive" all the time. I don't subscribe to that philosophy and choose to spend some of my time just enjoying what life has to offer.

I can't recall ever being asked by people outside of my family why I "waste my time" reading, but if I ever was asked, I would probably respond that I have created a life that allows me to spend time doing what I want to do, and reading is top of that list.

1

philosophyofblonde t1_jecr3mk wrote

Listen, I’m a think-y person and I just need a break from my own brain a few hours a day lest I turn into a woodland hag muttering to herself grumpily. Check yo’self before you wreck yo’self.

4

SeriousQuestions111 OP t1_jednbka wrote

Thanks for the advice. I do realise that mental training might be somewhat dangerous if pushed too far, precisely because our brain conveys the reality to us. I do something I call conscious resting (similar to meditating, but less restrictive, you can open your eyes and basically do nothing, allowing you brain to rest from registering physical surroundings and allowing it to naturally flow to any thoughts it likes, without any outside stimulation).

1

philosophyofblonde t1_jeel28y wrote

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I was being flippant but I was saying that I read because I don’t like being subjected to my OWN thinking and self-generated ruminations all day and I prefer to hear other people’s (printed) thoughts to avoid getting stuck in my own bubble. I don’t use written narratives to generate more hypothetical scenarios where something might be applicable — I read specifically to avoid it.

2

mg_ridgeview t1_jeaxxe5 wrote

Presumptuous of you to assume the non college educated person is insecure because they don't have a degree.

2

SeriousQuestions111 OP t1_jeazsll wrote

I'm not saying that not having a degree is a bad thing, or has any indication of person's intelligence. Honestly, I did not learn even a fraction in college of what I learned after it, by my own choices of educational direction and pure interest in various fields. But from experience, the people I know who haven't studied, often are bit touchy about the subject. For one, I thought I was worse than someone with a degree, before I got one. I guess it comes from having no experience with higher education first hand.

3

Superb-Draft t1_jeclcgp wrote

Well they are dumb enough to make statements like "what is the point of reading" so they clearly are no genius, and insecurity is a reasonable deduction. Degree is neither here nor there

2

CartographerAware412 t1_jed1fdt wrote

I understand why that person tells you stuff like the life experience, you come off as presumptuous and arrogant. Just because we like reading doesn’t mean everyone has to or if they don’t read, they are less than you.

2

SeriousQuestions111 OP t1_jedo8z0 wrote

Hey, listen, everytime someone asks hard or uncomfortable questions, they are bound to come off as something to someone. I'm interested to know which part sounded arrogant to you personally? I don't feel elitist for reading, on the contrary, I'm praising how approachable reading is to people in any circumstances.

1

ReadWriteHikeRepeat t1_jecia17 wrote

I think humans have been telling stories since they developed speech. Story-telling was entertainment and teaching and holding onto history. So I think that telling stories are deeply engrained in us. Reading books is just an extension of that. It's fine if you don't like reading, but I do not think of it as wasted time. There is so much to learn from fiction and nonfiction alike. And so many books are just delightful. Or calming. Or inspiring - all good things.

1

Choice_Mistake759 t1_jeduju8 wrote

>since the person is prone to saying that they learned from life experience while all I have is a college education

I stopped right here. That person is not necessarily looking to find out, or to change their minds or to get a new perspective on why people do hobbies they do not, that person is looking to put you down, perhaps due to their own insecurity about their own education when compared to yours. Keep that in mind. You do not owe them any justification or rationalization.

> but for the love of God, why would anyone feel good about not reading books?

anti-intellectualism and also trying to turn lack of ability (maybe to focus) into a voluntary choice which validates it. Happens a lot also with exercise or food choices. People taking care of their bodies in ways which makes them happy can get a lot of criticism from others who choose not to do, that or believe exercise and healthy diet is a good thing.

> A book is basically a whole gym full of equipment ready to be used.

Well, not all books are the same and even great books, people can get there and not use that equipment.

1

SeriousQuestions111 OP t1_jedwvu3 wrote

> into a voluntary choice which validates it

Yeah, I get it, people feel like you wanting to improve yourself means you're putting them down (since it's in human nature to be competitive). Or that you are too egotistical and should stay in your lane. So I guess not reading books might come from having a closed mind which could be solved by reading. It's a closed cycle. I wonder what would force such a person to get out of it and try to learn instead of using ignorance as a shield.

1

Choice_Mistake759 t1_jeeajkv wrote

> So I guess not reading books might come from having a closed mind which could be solved by reading.

Reading does not necessarily solve a closed mind or actually "improve" a person. I am not a believer, or fan, of the mindset that reading is "good" for you, or always improving somewhat or better than all other hobbies at something.

And mandatory perspective I read lots and always have, own way too many books, but trust me a lot of books I read did not "improve me" necessarily and that is not why I read or I look for new things to think, or relaxation it can be on many things. Somebody iliterate can be observant and tolerant and intelligent.

3

SilverChances t1_jeen0iy wrote

Essentially, you argue that reading (fiction) is self-improvement.

Is it true? Can you measure such improvement somehow? If you can't, is it meaningful?

Regardless of whether it is true, if your goal is persuasion, I don't think this argument will work.

It puts you in the rhetorical position of knowing better than they do, because you've exercised your mind and they haven't. This is only likely to make your interlocutor more defensive and disparaging of your "book-learning".

People who disparage "book-learning" generally do so out of insecurity, because they don't have any. You can't win an "argument" with such a person by making them more insecure.

1

chortlingabacus t1_jeby5az wrote

All that 'brain-training' suggests to me are rehab after a trauma to the brain, having an overwhelming influence on someone's early childhood, and constant indoctrination by a totalitarian government,not reading in hopes of establishing neural connections.

I've not read every word of your post--reading French authors of the last 100 years might train your brain to condense many words into succinctness--but forgive me it has a ring of the self-help and of self-righteousness about it.

If it was people giving you stick about reading so much that provoked your post, never mind them; just carry on reading.

−2

SeriousQuestions111 OP t1_jec6one wrote

It's amazing how many contradictions and polysemous statements you've made in your overly succinct reply. You didn't have attention span to finish reading the post, but you persist on dismissing my opinion just to replace it with your own (self-righteousness indeed). So my brain is demaged because I want to improve? And on top of that I had a harsh childhood? You're being a psychic at this point (not a good one, but...). Btw, I don't need to write succintly, because it's not a book. The main goal is to paint a clear enough picture for anyone to understand, since I want an objective discussion. Your opinion is always welcome, and was quite refreshing, thanks!

0

chortlingabacus t1_jednm6h wrote

Good lord, if it's any consolation in no way whatever was I suggesting that you had brain damage or the like: I simply listed the things that that 'brain-training' called to mind.

1

SeriousQuestions111 OP t1_jedpjb0 wrote

I hope it's a good lesson to you that succinctness is in no way superior to clarity. Just to be fair, your long winded sentences are neither. I would highly recommend reading beyond the range of classics and getting outside your safe space.

0

chortlingabacus t1_jedu89y wrote

Clarity??

'The first thing "polysemous" calls to mind is Polyphemus.'--Whoops, I just implied that you're a very tall creature with only one eye; suppose that sort interpretation is inevitable when one doesn't write clearly.

The editors have now closed this correspondence.

1

SeriousQuestions111 OP t1_jedugee wrote

You should stop thinking of random things that words call to mind and read the actual meaning of them. If you're just trolling then please leave, I want an honest discussion.

0