[mtabini]

> why should I read?

Because reading is not just a utilitarian activity. Reading widely—things that may not be immediately useful, things that may be against your belief, things that may just turn out to be completely wrong—is an important step towards forming a critical appreciation of anything you may encounter.

Personally, I've long come to realize that much of my attitude towards everything from work to politics has been shaped by reading materials that often covered wholly unrelated topics. More importantly (and much to my chagrin), it seems that many crucial lessons came from works that I outright hated and was forced to drudge through against my will.

I don't mean to discount your conclusion: Almost always, almost everybody doesn't know what they're talking about. But almost always, almost everybody is a little right, and bits and pieces you pick up from the most unusual places will inform your solution to a problem many years down the road, or at least remind you that every story has more than one side.

[ashark]

To reinforce:

You'll usually not be led too far astray if you read works (fiction, poetry, philosophy, non-technical nonfiction) that are widely agreed to belong to some kind of Canon. Odds are if you think one of those books is crap, you're just not ready for it.

(There are definitely truly great books that don't often make those lists, though.)

Reading (non-technical writing) well is a skill (just like reading technical works is) and it may take time to develop it. Pretty much no-one starts off their reading career getting more than a fraction out of most books they read than they might when they've had some more practice—practice, not just thoughtless experience.

If you want a utilitarian reason to read: reading improves one's writing.

One widely-agreed-upon effect of reading good writing is expanding one's sense of empathy. A good book will often give it a workout. Books can also reduce feelings of isolation and loneliness by exposing us to others' intimate thoughts about life, some of which will match up with things the reader may have thought were unique to them—and here's proof that those thoughts and feelings aren't just not unique, they're probably not even rare!

Books can be a mirror to one's self. A gut-punch just when we need it. Inspiration when we're down. Something human to hold on to when nothing else is there.

But they don't give you all this for free.

[RileyKyeden]

> Books can also reduce feelings of isolation and loneliness by exposing us to others' intimate thoughts about life, some of which will match up with things the reader may have thought were unique to them—and here's proof that those thoughts and feelings aren't just not unique, they're probably not even rare!

I had this happen reading this book: http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Waterways

The main character described the experience of watching all his friends vanish as they started dating, feeling abandoned, wondering if something was wrong with him. It felt like a sick joke everyone was playing on me. I mentioned experiencing the same on Twitter (referencing the book), and the floodgates opened.

Apparently that's a very normal experience for gay people.

[mordocai]

> Apparently that's a very normal experience for gay people.

Not to invalidate this but I was under the impression that this is normal for a large majority of people in general, not just gay people.

[RileyKyeden]

A non-gay person probably interprets their isolation differently. It'd be "why can't I get laid like all my friends?," not "why don't I want to get laid like all my friends? Am I broken?" I had lots of offers, but I didn't want it from the people offering.

But that's my limited perspective as someone who's not hetero or bi. I could be wrong. I spent my first 29 years thinking everyone was making up the whole concept of attraction before I figured out what all those feelings I had for guys were.

[mordocai]

I readily admit it is probably different in the details but as said I was under the impression that the feeling of isolation and friends moving on etc was pretty normal across the board.

[RileyKyeden]

A person who rode a roller coaster and a person who survived a hungry lion experienced fear, but the details are what make the story. Being gay in the rural south is like facing a hungry lion.

From what I've read and heard, heterosexuality is like riding a roller coaster with a good safety record, and bisexuality is like riding the same roller coaster, but the other passengers are lions.

[jasode]

>Personally, I've long come to realize [...]

I specifically quoted that part because I think it actually shows what rayiner is talking about and it seems like you missed his point.

What's happening is that you sense a benefit from reading and because it feels true, it seems perfectly logical to project that benefit out to everyone else who is not you. But it's a post-hoc explanation instead of scientific research.

It's the same as someone noting that Einstein played violin so therefore, we promote the idea of learning musical instruments to help with creative thinking. Play piano to help unlock the mysteries of universe or write that next novel!

Or an ex-soldier that was forced to make his bed every morning is advising that everyone should make their bed because "the feeling of accomplishing something small snowballs into productivity for the rest of the day". Well, that sounds plausible but it's also post-hoc reasoning instead of something scientifically proven.

A lot of writing about history, diets, self-improvement, hiring, etc is like those examples above. Take an idea that feels true to me and therefore, it must also apply to everyone else. Some computer people do the same thing... we find that our knowledge of loops and IF/THEN statements is helpful to us outside of programming domains so we think everyone should learn to code. However, if we apply scientific rigor to that advice, we must be willing concede that forcing a child to write loops in elementary school may have zero measurable changes to the adult fireman or ballet dancer. (I'm not saying we shouldn't try it but let's not be seduced by post-hoc reasoning.)