Reply to: 78% said they had lied to appear smarter

[Old Greg]

You and me both.

My house is a (clean but untidy) tip.

However, if I tidy it up I can thenceforth never find anything.

Distributed horizontal storage, my friend.

[Mich the Tester]

No comment

Yes, perhaps it's better like that.

[doodab]

That sentence is not really a 'point', but more a rambling stream of consciousness that has very little meaning for the rest of us. But maybe we aren't smart enough.

No comment

[doodab]

Does that include "Idiot's Guide to Blah" and "Blah for Dummies" type books too?

I'm looking for a book about programming Windoze.

Written in crayon so I can understand it.

Bluff Your Way in Computers (Bluffer's Guides): Amazon.co.uk: Rob Ainsley: Books

Worked for me.

[Mich the Tester]

My point was really that if people read books that made them smarter, whatever they think smarter is, or otherwise tried to make themselves smarter, they would get all the benefits of actually being smarter as well as appearing smarter as a by product.

That sentence is not really a 'point', but more a rambling stream of consciousness that has very little meaning for the rest of us. But maybe we aren't smart enough.

[doodab]

My point was really that if people read books that made them smarter, whatever they think smarter is, or otherwise tried to make themselves smarter, they would get all the benefits of actually being smarter as well as appearing smarter as a by product.

[d000hg]

You're being your usual simple, limited, IT-nerd self with that statement.

The best novels (not pretentious ones), and literature in general, should expose and examine some aspect of life that is universal and timeless and therefore educate you in that area of life, even if you have experienced it before; maybe particularly if you have experienced it before.
Thereby making you wiser or smarter.

Wiser maybe, smarter is too vague a term. I read lots but I would never read a book just so I can tell people I have. Also I dispute that literature 'should' educate you. Novels are entertainment and should be read for pleasure - or at least reading purely for pleasure is A valid way of reading. Stating that one should read for education, that slobbing out with a thriller paperback is lesser, is pretentious. Novels should be interesting or fun to read, it's great if they challenge and educate you but that should happen naturally, it should not be forced. The story should be first.

[Mich the Tester]

ZeitMater managed to lose her shopper on wheels thingie last Friday.

Oddly, it turned up in the pantry not long afterward.

I suspect the fairies put it back there.

This Al Zheimer's disease is ever so much fun.

Surely you could make some electronic wheelyshopper detection device?

No, bad idea, she'd probably lose that.

Personally I often find I have to use the landline phone to call my mobile, then follow the sound and rummage around in jacket pockets to find it. I hope this is not the calling card of Mr Zheimer.

[Mich the Tester]

My mate sells 2nd hand books & he looks through them all.

The lot he bought off a demented old physics professor turned out to have no money inside, but plenty of underlining.

Fortunately said underlining was in pencil.

37 erasers later, he's managed to sell some.

Granny was old and confused and apparently wealthier than anyone thought she was. As you might imagine there was a minor altercation over who got the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Socialist Aunt from Liverpool insisted she should get it because she's 'poorer than the rest of yous'. We all backed down, hoping she might actually read some of it.

[sasguru]

Because reading novels, even pretentious ones, doesn't make you smarter merely better read.

You're being your usual simple, limited, IT-nerd self with that statement.

The best novels (not pretentious ones), and literature in general, should expose and examine some aspect of life that is universal and timeless and therefore educate you in that area of life, even if you have experienced it before; maybe particularly if you have experienced it before.
Thereby making you wiser or smarter.

[Mich the Tester]

I read books and immediately forget everything that's in 'em.

I think it's my advanced age.

It gets worse. My granny hid money in books and then forgot what was in them. Turned out nicely for the family when she conked it though.

[Old Greg]

I read books and immediately forget everything that's in 'em.

I think it's my advanced age.

My dear departed dad found this a great money saver. He'd pick up a book off the shelf and read it. By the end of the book, he'd get a vague feeling that he'd read it before.

[Old Greg]

Nobody is going to pretend to have read Tom Clancy novels to appear smart; I bet many of those 62% do actively read novels by mainsteam authors.

I used to read literary 'clever' books, but after five years of small child induced sleeplessness, if I get through a John Grisham, that's a major achievement.

[d000hg]

Are you saying that those authors don't write novels?

78% said they had lied to appear smarter, with around two-thirds (62%) pretending to have read books including Crime And Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky

Nobody is going to pretend to have read Tom Clancy novels to appear smart; I bet many of those 62% do actively read novels by mainsteam authors.

[Ticktock]

But that could just as easily be Tom Clancy, Dick Francis, Iain M. Banks, rather than "smart people books".

Are you saying that those authors don't write novels?