Screens however, are you including something like an eReader as _not_ reading books?
Very different brain processes. They're the same in that they are both forms of entertainment based on a written story, I guess.
I read books, but I also read essays, newsletters, blogs, Wikipedia articles, discussions and so on. These also contain important and useful information. It's not a dichotomy between books and slop. Hell, a lot of books should have been blog posts.
Audiobooks are also valid, as are podcasts. Sure, they might not engage you like text does, but they still impart knowledge.
To me, this is like ranting against electric bikes because they're not as difficult. If they get more people to engage in a fun activity, then they serve their purpose.
Just that if someone asks you if you were reading this morning, you should probably say "no" if you were listening to a podcast. It's not a value judgement, just a category.
Im assuming that screens dont count because its not novels/literature
but audio books are the same content but delivered by a different medium, I am genuinely curious as to your opinion on is not counting
Leaving my devices inside and sitting on the porch, reading a book feels much healthier for my brain. And more intentional consumption than passive noise to kill time.
Isn't that how tarot cards and all that bollocks works?
So audiobook genre fiction is reading, but audiobook War and Peace or audiobook The C Programming Language doesn't count. Not for arbitrary gate-keeping reasons, but because reading those books implies a more active form of engagement than marching linearly through it.
Listening to audiobooks, IMHO, is a more passive and less focused way of consuming literature.
You're not the first person to say this. I have some empathy for this view, even though its the opposite of mine.
For me, audiobooks offer, more space for imagination. More recently its also a more consistent way to get unbroken narrative into my head. However I strongly suspect that is down to how I process information.
I didn't really read properly until I was quite old, however talking radio was quite ubiquitous in my house. There were lots of audiobook-like content. so perhaps its training?
A talented reader can work magic. Ukemi and Naxos have great titles.
And reading on screen is reading.
Audio books are passive content. It's not reading. Not remotely the same brain process.
Also, I'm very much convinced that the brain is distracted away from the content by the voice acting and intonation; same way that most people physically can't concentrate when listening to music with vocals, evolution made us really sensitive to the human voice.
All that said, [I find] reading books is overrated. They're often outdated, low effort slop, and even more so in this AI era.
-edit- I said "non-fiction" when I meant "fiction". Of course non-fiction books become obsolete quite fast sometimes.
For those who put in the work, there isn't even a cultural bond to enjoy since most of the people who originally consumed those works are themselves dead and buried. (Modern niches and widely studied "classics" notwithstanding.)
What a crazy take!
> Appreciating it often requires social context I don't really have time to learn.
????
> And many fictional works from the past are chock full of racism, sexism, irrational social phobias, etc
I have some news for you. That stuff has lasted for as long as humans have existed, and will continue to exist as long as humans do. It is intrinsic to humans, unfortunately.
Shakespeare is so old it's now undecipherable to any English speaker without a cliffnotes explaining it all.... for instance
No doubt. Doesn't mean I want to consume more of it via fiction.