• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Books and Intelligence

Wabbit said:
As to your argument with Monkeycather would you PLEASE not carry it on here.

I never had the intention of doing so.
As Ice is a “senior moderator” and decided to keep the theme going (however half-baked) I replied.
As I suggested previously, virtual phone lines are open: if one has an insult, an argument, a complaint, a question, gawd forbid a compliment or a virus you want to send me. I’m easily reachable and only a fraction of the monster you think I am.

If the postlady brings me a treat I’ll actually be able to report a new book here tomorrow, until then, oddly enough, it’s still Paul Auster.
j
 
Stewart said:
Sorry, to avoid spamming.

I'm currently reading Perdido Street Station. It's really fab!

I enjoyed the writing style but I felt the story was some what lacking. The characters were well drawn out and the world of was an interesting steam punk mix of tec and magic. It's a bit long and could have been chopped in half and the ending made little sense. Having said that, I have the Scar.
 
jay said:
I never had the intention of doing so.
As Ice is a “senior moderator” and decided to keep the theme going (however half-baked) I replied.
As I suggested previously, virtual phone lines are open: if one has an insult, an argument, a complaint, a question, gawd forbid a compliment or a virus you want to send me. I’m easily reachable and only a fraction of the monster you think I am.

If the postlady brings me a treat I’ll actually be able to report a new book here tomorrow, until then, oddly enough, it’s still Paul Auster.
j

I don't think you are a monster. You are obviously intelligent and your posts are often witty. I had a complaint and I have to act on it. All I am asking is just that you continue your dispute, if you both wish, outside of this thread.

Thanks for understanding.
 
Wabbit said:
I don't think you are a monster. You are obviously intelligent and your posts are often witty. I had a complaint and I have to act on it. All I am asking is just that you continue your dispute, if you both wish, outside of this thread.


yes, I didn’t mean you-you, Silly Wabbit.

and here I will *totally* avoid _any_ play on the phrasing "Trix are for kids!"
 
Wabbit said:
Well, depends on what kind of tricks ;)

Don’t play sexual innuendo with The Bad Guy your rep is on the line! [nudge, nudge, wink, wink]

And alright, thanks for understanding :)

I totally understand that you have to respond to such things. It’s outlandish that they even happen without first contacting me (or the source) but there we go.

j
(who *will* cop to completely, but temporarily, fouling up this thread now with this post)
(and maybe as suggested on another thread we break these MEGA-threads into monthly installments??)
 
jay said:
Instead of ‘rolling your eyes’, which really isn’t a great debating technique, could you actually try to put it into words why you disagree?
Books are, basically, food for the brain. Otherwise why not just turn on the TV?
Yes, junk food is desired by all and it has it’s time and place.

Book reading is a solitary engagement. TV, Music, playing an instrument, conversation --all these things (to a degree) can be done as multi-tasking.
Reading, for the most point, can not.
So sorry, what one **chooses** to read _does_ have some factors on brain usage. And if following current trends and The Madness of Crowds is a factor, this is also a gauge of, sorry, “intelligence”.
Also not being able to actually talk about WHY one “loves” such stuff instead of just getting defensive about it is, again, a brain-thing.
Hi Jay,

I apologise - I was at work and thus had limited time to post. I do agree that what one **chooses** to read _does_ have some factors on brain usage, however this is not a measure of an individuals intelligence. People may often choose to read a book that is deemed an easy read for many reasons. Does this mean they can not or are unable to read a more challenging book? Of course it does not. I guess it depends on how one defines intelligence.
 
You can read for either escapist pleasure of to be stimulated intellectually. Either one of these is a valid reason. It has nothing to do with intelligence. There are some very intelligent people on this forum ( ice is one of them ) who like to read escapist books. It's really not a good indication of one's brain power or anything else.
 
MonkeyCatcher said:
not everyone is interested in your posts

Can I just go on record as saying I am interested in jay's posts? In fact when I first came across him on the board (in relation to Patrick Suskind's Perfume: I liked it, he didn't), I went through all his posts as I thought he had interesting things to say.

The moderating issue is up to Wabbit and others but presumably if someone is being insulted ("get over yourself, and quickly") they are entitled to respond without that incurring a penalty?

jay, what book did you offer free copies of last week?? Are they still on offer?
 
Ok, first i want to assure you that this post is on topic. I apologise for my previous comments and will keep it to PMs from now on :eek:

I disagree that the kind of material that you read makes a significant difference in your intelligence. Intelligence is, after all (if you agree with the scientific way of measuring intelligence) a measure of your ability to reason /not/ how much stuff you know or how much stuff you are able to retain.

I don't think that the books deemed "worthy" for an "intelligent" person to read, such as adult literature, show you how to reason any more than "kiddies" books do, and therefore are no reflection on your intelligence whatsoever.

Oh, and for the record, I wasn't trying to defend Harry Potter nor am I an obssessed fan.. I was merely showing that I didn't agree with one of his comments.

~MonkeyCatcher~
 
The moderating issue is up to Wabbit and others but presumably if someone is being insulted ("get over yourself, and quickly") they are entitled to respond without that incurring a penalty?

I would respectfully submit that when members registered here, this presumption of putting up with insults and being expected to respond in kind wa not part of the agreement. The rules specifically state:

3.1 We do encourage lively discussions and debate.
Personal attacks against members of the site will not be tolerated.
Any person attacking another member of the site will have their post edited, and a warning issued.

Clearly from the rules, personal attacks are not to be tolderated and that those who feel they may have a compelling instance of being insulted cannot be presumed to just live with it or hash it out with the other party.

Shade, I completely understand your desire to protect your friend, but I'm afraid that his posts have contained a good number of personal attacks. It's one thing to go after J.K. Rowling's writing or the latest Potter book plot or ending, it's quite another to ruminate about others lack of intelligence, comprension, reading, and status as an adult.

More specifically,

Those who enjoy these books have empty lives-
My life really isn’t that vacant.

Once again, getting personal, nothing to do with the work at hand-
I’ve mention like very likes of a Lewis Carroll in various tirades against Harry Wanker supporters with pubic hair…

Not a person's post critiqued here mind you, but their ability to comprehend, that's personal-
We seems to have a *serious* diversion of “reading” versus “comprehension” here

People on this board are incapable of reading, hardly a compliment here-
A detective you will not make. I assure you. Maybe not even a reader.

Which runs along the lines of.....
certainly can’t even read my posts properly and want to dispense “advice”?

A fellow member is called a child-
but if you’re just going to whine and throws your toys out of the crib, simply don’t read my posts

Still a personal attack point, not one relating to a work
Most everyone else seems on the defence because they can’t form thought

Another reading ability personal attack-
didn’t “tell”. I asked.
Read and re-read before you try to analyze where I’m coming from.

Yep, members of the board are nothing-
Those reading “adult” books tend to spout of a bunch of nothingness too.

Do I really have to state the obvious?
I was under the impression you had nothing to say even before this.

I'm not certain how this is constructive in any way-
Please stop reading my posts until you can come up with something even vaguely coherent.

We're all children-
if anyone can recommend me a book-themed message board that isn’t filled with a bunch of people drooling over kiddie books

Now I don't doubt that other posters have gotten personal as well, but I really don't agree with this statement:
In my general posts, very rarely if ever am I insulting to an individual

So in summary Shade, I contend that the rules are very specific about this and that those who have complained about your friend are hardly delusional or simply easily offended. I also believe that the quotes that I have provided clearly show that contrary to Jay's last quoted comment, he has gotten personal.
 
MonkeyCatcher said:
I don't think that the books deemed "worthy" for an "intelligent" person to read, such as adult literature, show you how to reason any more than "kiddies" books do, and therefore are no reflection on your intelligence whatsoever.

Let's sidestep the intelligence bit for a moment. I'm going to go for the usual suspects here: Harry Potter and The Da Vinci Code (now that would be a book! :rolleyes: ). If I happen to read reviews of Harry Potter, I'm not bothered about the literacy of the reviewer - it's a kids' book and therefore I don't expect much more than i luv this book!!!!!!!!!!! Yes, maybe it is a fun story (for kids) but I'm never going to understand why adults read childrens' books - other than to read them aloud to their children.

Then, taking the reviews on Amazon regarding The Da Vinci Code, the opposite happens. I managed to enjoy this book and I am 12 says someone coherently, understandably not realising that the book is written at the literacy level of her age group. Some adults, of course, step in with excellent reviews such as u gotta read this book, its grate which, given the literacy of the aforementioned girl, should embarrass them.

Maybe the distinction here is not intelligence per se, but you aren't going to improve your vocabulary, as an adult, with Harry Potter (and if you do, be embarrassed) but having an improved vocabulary will certainly show that you are capable of intelligent thinking and can construct valid criticism and/or praise, especially far beyond u gotta read this book, its grate.
 
Stewart said:
Maybe the distinction here is not intelligence per se, but you aren't going to improve your vocabulary, as an adult, with Harry Potter (and if you do, be embarrassed) but having an improved vocabulary will certainly show that you are capable of intelligent thinking and can construct valid criticism and/or praise, especially far beyond u gotta read this book, its grate.
You are correct in saying that Harry Potter will not increase an adult readers vocabulary (nor would I expect it to). They are merely a form of escapism written with a wide audience in mind. They are certainly not a challenging read. However as I have stated before, just because a person chooses to incorporate a childrens book into their reading does not mean they are any less intelligent.
 
I don't really see any problem with adults reading Harry Potter, why shouldn't they? I read it and I like it and although this isn't the books that expand my vocabulary or affect my intelligence in any way, I still find it quite entertaining. I can easily get my vocabulary expanded by reading other books, which I of course also do.

I can't see why the person who writes the review of The Da Vince Code "u gotta read this book, its grate" should have any reason to be embarrassed. There are probably a lot of other areas where that person could make others look like idiots. I wouldn't be the slightest bit embarrassed if I tried to build a house and it falls down when you look at it. That is simply not my area of focus so naturally I would suck pretty much at that compared to a person who has been doing this for years.
 
SFG75: jay is not my friend. I've never PMed him or emailed him and I don't recall even exchanging views with him on anything except Perfume and there we disagreed. I just said I valued his posts as I think they are generally intelligent, perceptive and amusing. And I don't think he needs me to protect him anyway.

However I do agree entirely with what he says in the course of this discussion. I think on some of the points you cite you are seeing personal insults where none arise:

I’ve mention like very likes of a Lewis Carroll in various tirades against Harry Wanker supporters with pubic hair…

It's not a personal insult against Harry Potter readers to call him Harry Wanker; and the reference to pubic hair is jay's idiosyncratic way of narrowing down his comments to adults who defend HP (implying that he has no quarrel with children who like it).

Some of his other comments may resulted in people feeling insulted. But just as in life there is no right not to be offended, so on this board there's no rule against feeling insulted: attacked, yes, but not insulted. People can feel insulted by all sorts of things, reasonable or not.

Moving on. If an adult reads only children's books, one cannot make any assessment of their intelligence on the basis of that. However if an adult reads only adult books - let's say fairly demanding, literary adult books - one can venture an assessment of their intelligence on the basis of that. Beyond that it's hard to go.
 
I just stumbled upon this thread today, and read if from the beginning... which seems to start in the middle of a shitflinging contest. Were the opening posts on this thread removed, because, if not, I see nothing insulting within Jay's posts, besides his trademark bits of sarcasm. I get the impression that the dancing Napoleon Dinomite (17yo Monkeycatcher?) fellow simply blew up about a post Jay made regarding "Harry Wanker" (as he is called on this thread). I must say I do occasionally pick up a Harry Wanker and the Vagina Code type book every once in a while, but take in the pages purely as entertainment. I don't go to the movies to see Spiderman to get some sort of intellectual stimuli; I go to the movies to see Spiderman for entertainment value... same goes for books.
 
Stewart said:
Maybe the distinction here is not intelligence per se, but you aren't going to improve your vocabulary, as an adult, with Harry Potter (and if you do, be embarrassed) but having an improved vocabulary will certainly show that you are capable of intelligent thinking and can construct valid criticism and/or praise, especially far beyond u gotta read this book, its grate.

First off, I don't really see why adults should be embarrassed if they are improving their vocabulary by reading Harry Potter. Just because it is written for children does not mean than all the words they use are childish. Maybe this adult had trouble with reading when they were younger or they were not privelaged enough to be able to go to school. Would you really ridicule someone for trying to improve their education in any way they can? Just because learning vocabulary from Harry Potter is the next step in their learning, does this really justify ridicule of them?

Second, having an increased vocabulary does /not/ show that you are capable of intelligent thinking. It shows that you know a few more words than you did before. As I stated previously, intelligence is not about what you know but by how you reason. Having an increased vocabulary is not going to help you reason any better and therefore does not have anything to do with an increased ability to think intelligently.

You probably would be able to construct "better" comments than the one displayed above with an increased vocabulary, yet this does not make you more intelligent, nor does it make your comment more /valid/. Saying a book is great and recommending people read it is perfectly valid IMO, as it is showing their attitude towards a certain book, which is what I thought the main point of this forum is.
 
sirmyk said:
I just stumbled upon this thread today, and read if from the beginning... which seems to start in the middle of a shitflinging contest. Were the opening posts on this thread removed, because, if not, I see nothing insulting within Jay's posts, besides his trademark bits of sarcasm. I get the impression that the dancing Napoleon Dinomite (17yo Monkeycatcher?) fellow simply blew up about a post Jay made regarding "Harry Wanker" (as he is called on this thread). I must say I do occasionally pick up a Harry Wanker and the Vagina Code type book every once in a while, but take in the pages purely as entertainment. I don't go to the movies to see Spiderman to get some sort of intellectual stimuli; I go to the movies to see Spiderman for entertainment value... same goes for books.

This is not what is was about at all. A couple of posts are missing from the beginning so I can see the confusion. I was /not/ defending Harry Potter at all - I had no problem with the Harry Wanker comment.. why would I? It's not even offensive and actually rather amusing. It was his previous posts not posted in this thread in which I had the problems.
 
Thanks for the clarification. I have no objection regarding intelligent individuals reading childrens lit. Last week I read The Giving Tree, by Shel Silverstien (sp?). Around that time I also read Don Quixote, and Inferno. Currently I am reading Harry Wanker VI, some E.A. Poe short stories, and The Tommyknockers, by Stephen King. I would die reading Great Gatsbyesque novels all the time... or watching Disney cartoons repetitively over and over again... Sometimes you've gotta mix it up. And, of course, I consider myself somewhat intelligent...
 
I respect your views Shade, thanks for the kind reply. You exemplified the true nature of debate and at the same time, mutual respect in your reply. I only wish that it was more universal on this board.

As for the topic-Yes, I would be concerned about a person who only enjoys children's lit. At the same time, I would be very concerned about someone who only read serious high-brow stuff. I don't believe any of us would want to become a Nietzsche. :eek:
 
Back
Top