Does reading books make you smarter?

Does reading books make you smarter?

no.. it most certainly does not. you should try to form your own opinion rather than reading the opinions of others.

Its generally beneficial but it doesn't just make you smart.

No. Proof: It would be possible to compile thousands of Veeky Forums posts into a book.

>dagashi kashi
My nigga.

The answer is that it depends on the source. Assuming a good and correct source then trivially yes because you either know more things and are exposed to processes so you refine your skill at that process.

By processes I mean that if you read a mathematics book and it has a worked example then just by reading it you are reinforcing your skill at solving similar problems.

If you are just reading a novel then you are reinforcing your skill at reading and comprehending.

So overall you end up smarter than you were before but not by that much. Nowadays in 2016 I'd even say that the people who read the most traditional books (mainstream novels) are the most retarded people walking this earth. This result implies that there are better ways to become actually smart, which may involve a little reading but mostly some other activity.

This is the laziest possible attitude, and is generally expressed by the people who are actually stupid.

Reading books exposed you to other ideas that you can use to improve your own. At the same time there is the possibility to recognize your own rejected thoughts in the works of others, which you were either not able to express or forgot.

If you can't read books for fear of being consumed by other's opinions you are so easily lead that you are effectively a child.

depends on the books

the opinions written in books are stupid. show me one good book that isnt just yapping around

For me, personally, it's very beneficial to the way I structure my thoughts. The internet lets you jump from one source to the next, which fucks with my concentration.

It doesn't make you smarter though.

>which fucks with my concentration.
thats very intresting to hear. I love jumping from one source to another. I can easily deal with dozens of thoughts at the same time. It is what makes the internet experience so fun for me

how would you say you think about things? do you let your thoughts run through your head with words; so that you imagine talking to yourself in silence? or do you simply let the thoughts go their own way without actually actively going into the matter, letting your brain forge your opinion on something all by itself?

Yeah, I mean all scientists should just attempt to create their own disciplines from scratch, I mean fuck what others say, right?

science isnt about opinions, its about facts

Don't get me wrong, I like it too, it's amazing having a thought and just typing it into google and learning everything about it. However, running through a shitload of thoughts, for me at least, means not paying enough attention to memorize information well or notice faults in logic. I'm talking casual reading through wikipedia, following 20 links one after the other, without putting your mind into everything you read.

My thinking is just my voice in my head, sometimes I visualize sentences when I want to know something by heart. I do have a problem when I try going to sleep, because with no stimulus my thoughts just keep going.

Of course it does if we're talking about history, philosophy and humanities (all right, some of the fiction books also). Vast knowledge allows you to have wide horizons and the ability to anticipate and draw the right conclusions. Read few books by Fyodor Dostoyevsky and enjoy that sudden shift in your mind.

Hypersphere - anonymous

>Veeky Forums's published Masterpiece : Veeky Forums - Reddit

i saw enough

>Hypersphere, written by Anonymous with the help of the Veeky Forums board Veeky Forums (of The Legacy of Totalitarianism in a Tundra fame) is an epic tale spanning over 700 pages. A postmodern collaborative writing effort containing Slavoj Žižek erotica, top secret Donald Trump emails, poetry, repair instructions for future cars, a history of bottles in the Ottoman empire; actually, it contains everything since it takes place in the Hypersphere, and the Hypersphere is a big place; really big in fact.
>$54

Yes.

Depends on the books

You gain knowledge but not intelligence
Thats not the same thing

Indian, Thai, Chinese, Filipino, Egyptian, and Czechoslovakian people read the most.

Yes and no, there are several factors that determine the amount, if any, benefit you'll get from reading.

unless it's a book of critical thinking exercises.
then you may be exercising your intelligence.

Take your pedophile cartoons back to .

You re fucking retarded

no. the most well read person i know is a "not real communism" delinquent who thinks there is an "unhealthy fixation on productivity and efficiency"

one day your meat pea will ripen as well

>hurr durr

they probably meant gaining raw data vs immediately practically applicable information, everything begins as nonsense until 'someone' sees a pattern

DURR DARP HAARR

He said you don't gain intelligence, genius

No, books expose you to knowledge, ideas, and opinions. It is incumbent upon you to select and integrate reading material in such a way as it benefits your understanding of the world. Anything that doesn't have application is trivia, not knowledge, and what is useful obviously depends on the person.

Basically, books can give you vicarious experience. Real-world experience is preferable, but obviously books are easier to come by.

The opinions written in books are opinions of a person. The book is just a medium. Obviously some people have bad opinions and others have good.

Fuck off.

Ahahaha get the fuck out, degenerate

Nope :^)

How about almost every maths book ever?

You should try to have a "conversation" with the author. Take the ideas and reformulate them, ask additional questions, generalize, analogize, and create your own examples.

>You should try to have a "conversation" with the author.
I get what you're saying, but I find this a really weak analogy for it. The author is going to say the same thing no matter what you ask, you just need to focus on what is actually said, possibly re-read, and understand what is meant by it.

this guy is reading people

we arent talking about maths books. we are talking about literature

Pretty sure maths books falls under "books" as in the OP.
Reading literature from any academic field makes you smarter.
[spoiler]unless it's engineering[/spoiler]

you dont read maths books, you study them

Gotta read it to study it in the first place.

the read you are referring to is different from the one OP meant.

also knowing maths doesnt make you smart

Want to define smart then?
Also:
>Reading literature from any academic field makes you smarter.
To please you we can replace "any literature" to whatever field you believe makes you smarter.

im not sure if im ready yet to define smart just yet. neither can i define the word "intelligence" clearly or the word "clever".
but i have made up my mind on what being smart isnt:
-general knowledge
-knowing trivial facts
-being good at something (for example Veeky Forumstards thinking they are smart because they know how to deal with maths)

Wouldn't it be easier to say something like "smarter at x" or something if it's so difficult?
Someone who's done a postgrad in maths is undoubtedly smarter at maths than someone who's still in highschool right?

you are not smarter at maths, you just know more about how to solve math problems and so on

I'm not really sure what would be a satisfactory definition for you then.
Is google's definition okay?
>having or showing a quick-witted intelligence.
>intelligence; acumen.

>Is google's definition okay?
No

Guess the rest of the discussion is semantics in that case, i.e. very boring.
Tried to get a definition in for discussion's sake, but you don't really seem cooperative, so I'm out.

youre butthurt, and that does make you stupid. thats how much i can tell you, at least

In a perfect world, maybe.

true. science is something between facts and opinions then.