> For example, you don't get dumber because you read children's books, you just get better at understanding what makes a good children's book. I don't think th

> For example, you don't get dumber because you read children's books, you just get better at understanding what makes a good children's book. I don't think this is an accurate analogy. It's not books for children -- well-written material at a lower educational/cognitive level -- it's more like books by children -- which is necessarily lacking skill and background context (connection to reality). Think about how children constantly pass around misleading, invented, and incorrect stories among themselves -- and they don't do it maliciously, they just don't know any better. Legends like "Candyman"/"Bloody Mary" for example. They need an outside influence, an adult or a book or website, to nudge them out of that knowledge rut. (Of course the same thing can happen with a (closed) group of adults, too, but it's more of a "natural state" with children because they simply haven't had time to encounter as much knowledge.)