Comment Re:so say our betters? (Score 1) 118
Let's try that again.
""reading not as a public duty but as a private pleasure, sometimes even a vice,""
Well, I guess I'd start with telling him to stop trying to "trick" people - even kids - into doing what he wants?
Doesn't mean it isn't true or that he's wrong. He's hardly going to trick kids into reading his article, to trick them. I think reading is the vehicle into learning things in your life that unlocks what you'd really love to do.
It's a routine fault of progressives AND evangelical conservatives: this inherent sense of moral certainty,
It seems that the only two sides of politics that exist is the agonist and the antagonist. Left and Right have become obsolete as a consequence of their absolute polarization.
Reading I'd say is symptomatic of intelligence. So what we really want are people who value intelligence, who value reason. Reading will more or less automatically follow.
Intelligence can manifest in different ways unrelated to reading, math, music, painting for example. I'd also say that language could be considered a limiter of intelligence when you're restricted to words. I seen high intelligence is as much of a curse as a blessing, thinking can be addictive especially if you have hard emotions that you're avoiding feeling.
I'll be honest, I don't think 'reading' alone is inherently magical. reasoning citizen we NEED in our Republic.
Well, that any democracy needs, not just ours.
I can tell you from reading thousands of pages of proposed Acts of law; it's a fucking tedious slog that takes weeks out of your life and is absolutely vital component of a functioning democracy - way better than just voting. What's magical is the patience to do it or face the consequences of not doing it. The best way to solve that problem is log onto your government's page where laws are proposed and start reading AND writing about a portion of law that interests you.
That's what democracy needs.
Reasoning adults need to be able to hold in their heads a fundamental RESPECT for the other person's ideas. Even if they don't agree.
Freedom of speech carrys with it an inherent responsibility to figure out what the reality is and make a judgement call. Respect is earned if someone can be civil, polite while they express that freedom.
What if they read actually-scandalous texts (according to Kirsch's orthodoxy) like something by Charlie Kirk? The Art of the Deal?
Hopefully it's something that really offends them.