This is a really interesting piece. I've been wanting to rage against illiteracy lately but I'm not too active in public discourse (even this).
That said, I don't think it's some secret key to improving humanity. I think this because literacy is ultimately a luxury, even in modernity. The literate may be able to form more nuanced opinions, but that matters less if they can't increase literacy consistently across populations.
There's an irony here that assumes deep literacy is productive and essential but doesn't use it to explain the proposed lack of deep literacy itself.
> The literate may be able to form more nuanced opinions, but that matters less if they can't increase literacy consistently across populations.
I'm not sure I agree. It would be preferable for everyone to have the quality of deep literacy, but it still seems like a worthwhile thing to pursue even if not everybody can get there. I can see why it would matter less, but not how that fact would negate the argument itself.
The Kissinger quote about 1/3rd of the way into the article talked about how, even people responsible for making strategic decisions had (what the author of this article would call) deep literacy issues that hurt their ability to make holistic decisions. This seems like a good example of how there's value in encouraging deep literacy, even if not everybody masters it.
I would say the ability to think critically, coupled with a good literacy foundation, is more important than just literacy.
I know many will say literacy is the building block to critical thinking, or something along those lines, but I don't know, I've now known many, many examples that don't support the idea.
I can’t imagine people trying to bring back a “golden age” of white supremacy are ignorant of the past.
I think there is a solid point made by the GP about what literacy is needed for. To me the end game is not to have a randomly erudite population, but well adjusted people. Literacy is only a small part of that.
The author also says this, but also basically claims literacy hasn't improved humanity. So you repeated him without adding anything (in fact subtracting much), and I repeated myself. If anything, we've either supported my point or demonstrated your lack of deep literacy.
That said, I don't think it's some secret key to improving humanity. I think this because literacy is ultimately a luxury, even in modernity. The literate may be able to form more nuanced opinions, but that matters less if they can't increase literacy consistently across populations.
There's an irony here that assumes deep literacy is productive and essential but doesn't use it to explain the proposed lack of deep literacy itself.