Well read Vs. Well Thought

Is being well read more important than being a person who thinks a lot? There are some people who are veracious readers and spend most of their time reading the thoughts and thinking of others. However, every moment spent reading the thoughts of others is a moment taking away from forming ones own thoughts through philosophical examination of life and existence.

Reading is a necessity. Reading is the primary conduit to knowledge about things that we cannot observe or bare witness to directly. However, there is a difference from reading objective facts and data, as opposed to reading subjective analysis, opinions and conclusion. Hence, there is a difference between reading data, mathematical laws and theories, facts, events, and the like…versus reading another persons synthesis of these things presented as information.

I do think that reading and learning objective truths is very crucial to the success of modern thinking and philosophy. Thus, what I am juxtaposing is being well read in the non-objective truth categories and being a person who through their own pensive pondering, formulate their independent conclusions based upon and analysis of objective truths and facts and deductive reasoning.

I can recall something that a college professor told the class directly before passing out exams. He would always say “Remember…if all else fails….THINK”. In truth, thinking is like exercising and many people are simply mental couch potatoes. They do not want to do it unless they have to or can find profit in doing so. The path the least resistance does not traverse through thinking and pondering, because thinking can be frustrating and draining.

In light of this, many people seek the path of co-opting others thoughts and conclusions. It is akin to cheating or copying off another persons work, because they did not take the time to do their own work. This is what most people do in America in regards to social issues and world events. They do not take time out to think things through, but rather, simply co-opt the position of others who opinion maps to their preexisting emotional predisposition to the subject. In that way, they do not have to think but simply read or listen to the argument of someone who has thought and analyzed (correctly or incorrectly) it, and then co-opt that opinion and propagate it as their own.

This is the danger of reading and or listening to the synthesis of others as opposed to thinking on ones own. It’s a double edged sword because people and societies can control what you believe by controlling the information that you receive. It can be and is used as a form of brain washing. One can think that they have freedom of choice on what to input into their minds, but what one chooses is nearly always based upon some bias….and what formed the bias? One cannot have freedom without the absence of bias because bias prevents the exploration of other points of view and hence people become prisoners to their bias. For a good example of this one has to just examine the phenomenon of conservative isolation. They want to have their “own” space to share ideas because they are not open to the ideas of other that are counter to their own and they do not want to be forced to maintain the tenability of their beliefs against non-believers.

What we believe and how we see the world is mostly product of what this society has given us to read and this society has a vested interest in perpetuating itself via having its citizens conform to its ideologies. This is popularly referred to a propaganda and societies propaganda is designed for the entities self preservation of the status quo. By being a “thinker” one is therefore less subject to bad or good propaganda and is hence actually more free than those whose lives are shaped by what others input into their minds.

I can always tell a “reader” from a “thinker” on blogs and forums. The readers or co-opters of others thinking rely mostly on providing quotes and links to what someone else has said. The funny thing is, it is hard to trace back to the original source because so many people are in on the co-opt that it creates great savings from having to not think and use up ones own energy and time. They all simply just past the thoughts around to be shared by all and sometimes co-opters add something of their own too.

I think that humanity will be well served to start stressing the need for “thinkers” and philosophizers as opposed to those people who simply regurgitate the thoughts and conclusions of others. I do believe that reading the thought of others, to a degree, is healthy. However, I do think that there is a pandemic of lazy minds that would rather co-opt the thoughts of others as opposed to thinking on their own.