undefined

points

[-]

No doubt. That’s one of the reasons I find the 1911 edition interesting — the authors have more license to express their own opinions, which naturally reflect those current at the time.

by genghisjahn17 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

"Not, of course, that there is any magic about the past. People were no cleverer then than they are now; they made as many mistakes as we. But not the same mistakes. They will not flatter us in the errors we are already committing; and their own errors, being now open and palpable, will not endanger us."

On Reading Old Books C. S. Lewis

https://bradleyggreen.com/attachments/article/97/Lewis.On-Re...

by yieldcrv17 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

It’s only shocking to write it, or declare it as sacrosanct

Many people practice it, and women’s movements that put most energy on doing the opposite have since dialed back to pointing out that they were fighting for choice, including that choice of not being in a workforce. An option of a “soft life” that is wildly popular, and timeless. People just needed a new way to say it.

If it was culturally supported for men to be subsidized by another, a large percentage of men would immediately take that graduated and intellectually diminished role too. This is not a reliable option and is rare.

If common, it would unironically solve representation imbalances in other fields, since it would no longer be about shoehorning women into them, because enough men would leave on their own. A level of enlightenment still missing from Women in <field> fireside chats at every industry conference worldwide

by zozbot23418 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

You can nowadays paste the text from pretty much anything that's in the public domain into a near-SOTA LLM such as Kimi or GLM and it will give you a pretty nice summary of what it's about in modern language (Extremely useful: the LLM tendency to go overboard on formatting nicely balances out the wall-of-text format from historical publications, which was aimed at saving paper and minimizing manual layout effort), and then gladly tell you about all the things in the historical text that would be absolutely beyond the pale today. (Sometimes you have to nudge it by prompting "How would this text be received today?" or something like it after it has put its nice summary in context, but once you do that it tends to be quite thorough.)

by doubletwoyou18 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I beg of thee, use that brain of yours and read a text that was made scarcely more than a century ago, a blink of an eye in the grand scale of the changes of the linguistic features of English, and interpret it for yourself.

by mapontosevenths16 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I'm in favor of using all the tools available to better yourself, including LLM's. However, for things like this the I would argue that one should first try to understand it on their own.

Sometimes the work is the POINT. We read things like this not just to learn about the past, but for novelty and to exercise our critical thinking powers. To outsource that labor before even trying is like going to the gym and having your butler lift the weights. The weights got lifted, but what was really accomplished?

by zozbot23416 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Historically, these texts were often consumed (especially in formal or semi-formal settings) by either having them read aloud for you or reading them aloud yourself. They were more like a written-down formal speech to be slowly pondered upon than something to be read smoothly and silently on one's own, which is how we now regard almost all texts. There was "labor" involved but that labor was not really about being more literate or exercising more critical thinking: it was simply about slowly recreating in one's mind the kind of broad structural scaffold we now expect to see in a text as a matter of course. It's in fact easier to think critically about a text when its sections and structure are clearly laid out, and having a LLM do this for you is a nice way of avoiding personal tendencies and biases that might lead one to misinterpret what the text is really about.

by simonklitj16 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Yes, let the LLM bias and misinterpret it instead.

by stereolambda6 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Entertaining to think that "that's too difficult to read for us nowadays" and "look at these unacceptable things" already sound pretty much like some poor Medieval literates who got their hands on Ovid or Lucretius, while under the rule of king Theodoric or something.

I don't have to say I don't question that we are very civilized and powerful.

by quamserena18 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

You can also read the text yourself and draw your own conclusions...

by BigTTYGothGF18 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

How is that not "modern language"?

by smallerize18 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

You didn't really explain what that does for you. Why do you paste it into an LLM?

by zozbot23417 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I'm not sure if you're familiar with public domain texts from around the 19th or early 20th century, but they were not intended to be skimmed or speed-read the way we'd skim a modern text prior to getting into a more attentive close-reading. Even their short magazine articles were actually the near-equivalent to our scholarly papers, and were often read aloud at length in parlor gatherings. So having a LLM split the text into manageable sections for you and provide a hint of what each lengthy wall-of-text paragraph will be about is actually a huge gain in readability.

by smallerize17 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Oh well that was the whole point to me. If I wanted to read something that's not from 1911 I could just do that lol

by BigTTYGothGF17 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

The trick is to have a basic level of literacy and then you don't need the machine to chew it up for you like a mother bird.

by Dylan168074 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

So before you were talking about summarizing whole articles and asking the LLM to find the things that would be "beyond the pale", but now you're just suggesting using it to insert paragraph breaks and section headings?

by zozbot2341 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

The LLM will easily do both for you. Particularly the thinking it does when constructing the summary generally involves a structured close reading of your text, and you can easily think of it as providing "paragraph breaks and section headings".

by keane17 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Mostly from a bit further back but you might enjoy https://earlymoderntexts.com/texts

by qmr13 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

> So having a LLM split the text into manageable sections for you and provide a hint of what each lengthy wall-of-text paragraph will be about is actually a huge gain in readability.

Perhaps your attention span needs improvement.