I have a good monitor and yet when I print things out and read them on paper, I always discover flaws I'd overlooked on the screen. This happens with both writing and code. Is paper better, or merely different?
Show this thread
-
Humans have engaged with paper for 2000 years and screen for a few decades, paper probably activates an embedded neural state which may not be possible with a recent screen behavior? Also whenever we move to any manual tool, we maybe having a more active neo cortex by default.
But that could only matter if engaging well with paper increased evolutionary fitness, which seems a stretch. Especially in Europe.
-
-
Maybe it did? Historically people with asymmetric information had superior mating success. Hidden knowledge passed on paper was asymmetric gold mine for many years before it became democratized and turned into information overload again making true knowledge hidden :)
-
In Europe till say 1300 literacy was definitely not correlated with superior mating success.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Do you hold the screen, the way you held paper? Do you read paper without holding it, and still find it better?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not true. Paper preference could be an artefact of another adaptation. E.g. Paper notes are memorised better than screen notes which I put down to more involvement and thus memory traces with the parietal lobe/motor area.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Doubt that it's historical, probably 1-we don't spot all the errors in single reading+change of format helps 2-it's tactile so ppl who are more kinesthetic will prefer paper /books 3-multi sensory (smell, texture, weight) 4-nostalgia (bedtime stories, lifetime of pedagogy)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.