|
|
|
|
|
|
by zktrust
1307 days ago
|
|
|
u make one hell of a point that i thought about.
this is recursion but in different languages, which is not
really applicable with exception of Richard and Henry.
Read in latin, then translate it to THE ORIGINAL OTHER LANGUAGE ENGLISH.
You are diluting my genuine point that I am making. The content of
way back then was negligible to content that exists now.
In all fairness, the opinion brought forward by your messiah PG is not
really fit for standing judgement because of the point i brought forward. Good writer, good idea makers exist without the need to have been good at reading. |
|
|
But enough to fill a single person's lifetime regardless? So whether you take Shakespeare or Murakami, their individual perspectives are not that different since either of them could have filled their lifetimes with reading.
> The content of way back then was negligible to content that exists now
The burden of proof remains on you. You need to find us an example of an outstanding writer who didn't read much. This doesn't even hold for the classics (eg, Marcus Aurelius or Plato) as far as I can tell.
> your messiah PG
This is low-level, disrespectful, intellectually dishonest and a phallacy. GP said nothing about Graham and you are pulling this out of nowhere.