Books can be terrible, but they can be good to a level that (most popular) social media can't, due to the limitations of the medium.

Without long text, to a good approximation, you just can't convey long, multi-step reasoning chains at the limit of human intellectual capacity.

Personally I've started reading again much more recently, and it's done wonders for what's going on inside my head. I was feeling so dull! I can only recommend it.

It's also common to think that you should only read non-fiction and that fiction is a waste of time, but I absolutely don't agree. Fiction is amazing and it'll help your reasoning, creativity, helps give perspective on things, and improves your outlook on life in a way that non-fiction has a very hard time to do.

Non-fiction is very good for other reasons and it's good to aim for a healthy mix of the too I think.

I agree, but struggle to find fiction books to read. Most of my reading just consists of a historical period / event that I find interesting and read more about. From that I sometimes come across an "alternate history" type fiction book, but not much else. What do you do for discovery?

> What do you do for discovery?

Walk into a library or bookstore. Pick up something that looks interesting (LITERALLY judge a book by its cover for this) and start reading right then and there. If the book doesn't capture your interest immediately, maybe skim a little bit, or just move on to the next book. Also, ask trusted friends that know you well for suggestions.

You have to first know what your own particular tastes are, and afterwards, do the harder steps of understanding why you like what you like, and expanding your horizons. Once you get to the point where you both know what you like and start to know why you like it, discovery just solves itself. Eventually, you'll be able to tune into any random discussion about a book or author, and discern from context whether or not the works in question are for you, even if you don't share the opinions of those you're listening to.

I'm currently in a big fantasy phase so what I've done is search for "best fantasy series", "most underrated fantasy series", gone through r/fantasy, and "books similar to X" type of searches.

I've also listened to some YouTube channels who review or go through books they've read. Of course it's important to find someone who have similar taste to you or you'll have a bad time.

On the point of "alternate history" I'll throw out "Matt's fantasy Book Reviews" YouTube channel where he also has some alternate history type books he brings up from time to time.

Yes! This so much! In my circles, I have seen a tendency to perceive fiction as a kind of low-brow, less intellectual reading. But then these people go on and pick up self-help non-fiction books.

Fiction has so much more to offer! On top of what you wrote, fiction helps you to develop an ability to put yourself in others' shoes. Empathy is anyway scarce in this politically-charged and ragebait-filled world.

Fiction has helped me develop empathy and to stay empathetic. It has helped me develop my philosophy of life; morals and values I strive to stay close to. The fictional characters have given me courage during hard times. And so much more.

Lot of people prefer to start with self-help kind of non-fiction which is, IMO, the least helpful category of books. I don't know what draw people to it.

The problems with social media aren't its capacity or limitations - it absolutely can be at least as good as books for long-term, coherent narrative building and multistep reasoning. The problems are the incentives against using social media for fostering and sharing deep experiences and thought. Hundreds of billions of dollars are spent yearly promoting disposable, reactionary content, at the expense of robust, complex work that's risky to create and takes time to engage with. The moneymen want the money now, their future selves and their own children be damned.

I don't know about that. Your analysis is correct in that it's ultimately about business incentives, but those incentives lead businesses to choose certain formats over others, thus promoting certain kinds of content.

It seems very far fetched that an app that looks like HN might become as popular as TikTok, and that's because the TikTok format is excellent at creating something that pulls people in by delivering short term rewards.

I'm not a Luddite, I'm sure there are some creators out there making clever tiktok videos, but that format really isn't conducive to, as you say, "long-term, coherent narrative building and multistep reasoning".

Just because before people had a concern and were wrong, doesn't mean if we have the same concern now we'll be wrong again.

I think the opposite, just like we used to tell people to "go read a book", now we'll tell people to "spend some time with an AI" to get cultured. The more AI time the better for your education.

My kids read plenty and I am indeed always telling them to "go talk to the LLM". It's more work than reading (I suspect), they have to engage more with the topic - ask good questions.

I don’t even let my kids watch YouTube. Imagine what an llm could hallucinate to impressionable minds.

Edit (addition):

How the fuck did we decide that a large language model somehow became artificial intelligence? It’s like claiming a dictionary is intelligent. I just don’t get it.

I don't think "go read a book" has really generalized in this way

"Go Read a book" was really meant to be synonymous with "Go educate yourself"

No one really says "Go read a blog" or "Go read your facebook feed" the same way, at least as far as I know.

I sure hope "go spend more time on social media" or "go talk to an AI" never becomes synonymous with "educate yourself". I shudder at the thought

If someone told me to “spend some time with an AI” I just wouldn’t spend any more time with that person. What a nightmare.

it's cheaper (2025) and more reliable to recommend someone surf Wikipedia than "getting cultered with AI"

the phrase you're looking for is touch grass

Books can be propaganda, certainly. However, books promote long attention span. Social media generally removes that aspect and focuses on dopamine hits. It’s hard to condition critical thinking when jumping from one truth sentence to another truth sentence without context.

You can brainwash yourself with some wild sh*t if you spend too long in the wrong heads/books.

"Go consume this form-factor because it's better" has always bothered me.

No doubt. However, I didn’t focus on any of that. It’s also not the premise of the article. The premise of the article is “don’t remain in your echo chamber, don’t trust just because it fits your narrative, step out and confront the world”.

Yeah. Just as an exhibit every radicalized leftist "reading theory". Whoo boy talk about epistemic closure.

What's weird about the kind of responses in this thread stating "books" or whatever "can also be bad so social media is no different" is that it's not as if we don't already have data about this. We have a lot of data on the outcomes of people that spend time reading books vs people glued to social media, regarding attention spans, etc. The proof is in the eating, we don't have to speculate about hypotheticals.

> The Licensing of the Press Act 1662 (14 Cha. 2. c. 33) was an act of the Parliament of England with the long title An Act for preventing the frequent Abuses in printing seditious treasonable and unlicensed Books and Pamphlets and for regulating of Printing and Printing Presses.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licensing_of_the_Press_Act_1...

I never understood this mentality, you can justify literally anything by saying "they thought X was bad but now X is OK, so we can't say Y is bad"

The scale and pace of modern changes have absolutely nothing to do with what we witnessed thousands or even hundreds years ago. Word of mouth in 1700 can also propagate propaganda but no one is going to argue 1700s word of mouth propaganda is "the same" as foreign propaganda being served straight to your citizen through third party services 24/7

All propaganda isn't created equal either. If 99% of the news you get comes from the state owned journal and the state owned radio you're drinking your own Kool aid, if the propaganda comes from a foreign source straight to your population through third party services you have a whole bunch of different problems