Slashdot Mirror
Read Better Books To Be a Better Person
00_NOP writes "Researchers from the New School for Social Research in New York have demonstrated that if you read quality literary fiction you become a better person, in the sense that you are more likely to empathize with others [paper abstract]. Presumably we can all think of books that have changed the way we feel about the world — so this is, in a sense, a scientific confirmation of something fairly intuitive."
It's a deeply flawed study. Basically, it's cherry-picking with a vengeance. There's a good discussion at Language Log: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=7715
... or causation ?
The last book I read was "The Prince," so fuck you asshole!
Read the article, it was a randomized study in which people were assigned to read specified books selected beforehand by the experimenters.
And now said researcher please tell me what "quality literary fiction" is.
One thing is certain: this is not quality reseach.
Over at Language Log, Prof. Mark Liberman gives an annoyed critique of this study.
Need I say more?
Three Squirrels
Interestingly enough, while many literary typse laud the New York Times or the Washington Post, the most popular 'news' paper in America is the National Enquirer. With most folks reading that, no wonder there is a lack of empathy (or thought or insight) in American politics today.
Or is this just another story about how reading comments on the internet just dumbs us down even more (assuming empathy is a good thing)?
I read a biography of Ayn Rand and felt really sorry for her.
...watch better TV to ... no, wait....
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Now I want to kill all the Bugs and blow up their planet...
Did the authors plot crime rates against sales of 50 Shades of Grey and similar "literature"? If so, they just might be on to something.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
So.. if reading quality works makes you a better person.. ..what does reading Twilight novels make you?
The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the 'social sciences' is: some do, some don't. -- Ernest Rutherford
I want to kill Paul Verhoeven and blow up his house.
It's the least he deserves for what he did.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
It would be news if it was on the front page of the National Enquirer with a headline like "Your Favorite Book Tells Your Personality!"
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
hmm ... do I really want to know the answer?
Books, songs, movies, comics, oral tradition, news, all of that brings a story with them, one were you can identify with it, recognize as a pattern, and use that pattern to seek a guidance for our actions to get a better outcome. They also draws a picture in how other people (should) think, the more clear is that picture, the better the concept is assimilated by us, and books usually have a bigger extent on showing how characters think and feel, but is not something exclusive of them. But books probably have the bigger set of good ones with different stories and good character exploration , even if copyrights are making a big portion of them almost invisible (and is important to see the vision of the world of previous cultures)
Empathy is good an all but I dont think its the leading quality to becoming a better person. I argue that becoming self sufficient (ie not a burden) makes one a better person because then one wouldn't have to depend on other's empathy.
The way this is set up, it relies at its foundation on a purely subjective concept - what is "quality" literature? I consider myself well read, and empathetic. But my favorite literature, which meets my personal criteria for quality, was written by authors like William S. Burroughs, Mickey Spillane and Louis-Ferdinand Céline. Not exactly a collection of empaths or good citizens by standard definitions.
Thank you, that was fascinating to read.
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
Well, in my personal view, you're still better off as an insensitive clod, than as an insensitive pebble.
N.B.: maybe this poem is accidentally on-topic as well!
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
Both "Quality" and "Better" are subjective. NEXT!
Literature, as a form of art, really is about the culture from which it originates from and that culture which is the subject. Any personal "enrichment" by a reader, regardless of the material, is based on their subjective experience. Whether the take-away experience positively or negatively affects the reader... I can't see how any valid generalization can be made beyond, "it may or may not happen, and to the degree and quality, that is indeterminate." The only thing we can really verifiably say is that the reader participated in the cultural narrative.
"if you read quality literary fiction you become a better person, in the sense that you are more likely to empathize with others."
That is a false assumption. Being more empathetic does not make your a better person. Too much empathy is a disease. It is also curable. There's a medication for that.
It's the other way around. If you are a better person you will read better books. The study is flawed.
It's the other way around. If you are a better person you will read better books. The study is flawed.
Even that is flawed. If you read books at all, you are a better person. (Flame on.)
I once heard a Yorkshireman say "I read a book once. It were a green one."
Seriously, though, I get very tired of any content available on the internet being reduced to 30-second video clips (of course, prefaced by 60-second advertising clips). I (for one) resent having to be subjected to all that noise just to read something I could easily read in less than 15 seconds.
"You are a product of your environment." --Clement Stone
Casteism