3 ms·
> The accuracy, scope, density, longevity, and reproducibility of written information has clear advantages over speech-based transmission. 37,000 years of oral
by fit2rule 7y ago
> The accuracy, scope, density, longevity, and reproducibility of written information has clear advantages over speech-based transmission.
37,000 years of oral tradition versus .. 5,000 years (?) of written? The jury is still out.
- Jedd 7y ago> 37,000 years of oral tradition versus .. 5,000 years (?) of written? The jury is still out. Recency of invention is not synonymous with inefficiency. Consider that you're trying to assert oral tradition is more efficient than writing systems ... in a written format on a construct accessed by hundreds of thousands of people around the world over many years rather than demonstrating the validity of your claim to a half dozen people around a fire.
- fit2rule 7y agoI don't disagree with your position on the strengths of written media - I'm after all a major user of the media - but I do think that there is great value in recognising that 37,000 years ago, someone told a story - and here we are, still discussing it. That's not something that we in the West can predict will happen, or not, too soon - especially given the immense amount of material that has been lost, even in our lifetimes, because it was written and forgotten.