Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: In this episode, we consider whether our society is regressing to a more simple minded meme in light of a recent article in the Atlantic that discussed how society may be entering a post literate era.
Hello, welcome to the Call Like I See it podcast. I'm James Keats, and joining me today is a man who uses this podcast to get out his confessions. They Ogunlana Tunde, are you ready to show us how you keep it? Good, good.
[00:00:40] Speaker B: Yeah, man. Does that mean you're the priest though? Like, we're in the booth here?
[00:00:45] Speaker A: I guess so, man.
[00:00:46] Speaker B: I guess me, you, and like tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, whatever, the audience.
Yeah, exactly. So. Okay, cool.
Let's see what. Let's see what you draw out of me today.
[00:00:56] Speaker A: There we go. Now, before we get started, if you enjoy the show, I ask that you subscribe like the show on YouTube or your podcast app. Doing so really helps the show out. We're recording on July 21, 2026. And Tunde, we recently came across an interesting piece from Rose Horowitz in the Atlantic, and it was called the End of Reading is Here. In it, the author talked about how widespread reading and literacy is really an exception in human societies and how written communication shapes not just societies, but actually our brains and how we think about things.
And continuing on how the decline in reading that we're seeing that's following an explosion in video content changes us and changes our societies. Now, for us, this was kind of preaching to the choir.
We've already done a show which extrapolated the concepts talked about in Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death, which looked at the effect of television as a medium on, on how people process information and what they're looking for to video content more generally. But the article did a great job. I thought of adding more meat to this bone, so to speak, for the, you know, for the purposes of people to consider and discuss. So, Tunde, to get us started, what stood out to you most in the stats or the stories that were used by the author to illustrate how much less people are reading or how much more people used to read?
[00:02:18] Speaker B: Yeah, this was great. I think what really stood out to me was the correlation between the decline in literacy rates and the kind of proliferation of screens.
There was some really interesting statistics. I mean, I think that sometimes a lot of us feel that something is changing in society and these kind of things that feel nebulous a bit.
But with some of the stats, it was really interesting. I learned that in 1952, only 9% of U.S. households owned televisions.
But 10 years later, by 1962, that number had increased to 90%.
So that kind of was teaching me, okay, this is kind of the middle of the 20th century, is when the screens became something that most of Americans were dealing with. And then the more recent stats I found, which were interesting, like back in 1962 only, or, sorry, an American household spent five hours a day on average with the television screen on. And by 2010, that was nine hours a day.
So the attention that the screens have taken, and it made me think, James, of the documentary we did a show on probably about two years ago called Join or Die. It was about the loss of civic engagement by people, and mostly on the latter half of the 20th century. And it also correlated with the dissolving unions and things like that. So it really made me think of the bigger picture of the last kind of hundred years, 80 years of American life, which is the screens have had way more of an impact than I realized. I think that's kind of what I took away from it.
[00:03:59] Speaker A: No, it's a good point. It's given us things to do that has replaced other things that people had to do, whether it be joining an organization and as you pointed out, or whether it be reading a book. Reading a book used to be entertainment. That was like what you would do for fun. And the thing about it, actually, that was really interesting to me was one of the anecdotes in there talked about Harvard sociology students and them being upset that their professor was giving them a lot of content to read on the premise that, hey, give us a video that's much easier for us to get all this information in. And so that kind of got me thinking. It kind of just know humans, you know, we do look for easier ways to do things. And so video, at least on the surface level, seems like. I mean, people watch YouTube to learn about, you know, it's not just, you know, brain rot. People watch YouTube to learn about different things and all type, you know, all these types of, you know, the astronomy content and all this other stuff. And it's an easier way to do so, so to speak, than reading, especially because reading is something that the more you do it, the easier it gets, and the less you do it, the harder it gets. But so this. This ease, it also, like you pointed out there, takes a chunk out of. It's easier to watch something on TV than it is to go down to the local hall or to go to the little league thing to take your kid to play sport. You know, it's Easier to just sit there and watch tv. So to me, I think that the where video, where we're really seeing here is how easy it is. And television made it easier than going to read a book or going to the park or anything like that. But there's still some friction whether or not the show you actually wanted to watch was on, you know, or something that really caught your interest was on or not, you know, still existed. When you're talking about linear tv. And now this is on steroids because not just can you watch almost anything at any time, but the recommendation engines and so forth know how to, you know, while there's. The volume is endless. They also. It's better at finding things specifically that'll catch and hold your attention. So the friction on watching something is so much lower than the friction for doing anything else that, yeah, reading goes by the wayside, leaving the house goes by the wayside for a lot of times. And. And so it's like, okay, well, where is this going? I mean. And I think that question, as this is happening all around us, is worth taking a look at.
[00:06:14] Speaker B: Yeah, it was interesting as you're talking. It made me think of, like, TV back and even when I was a kid, I remember in the early 80s, my mom would sit on the couch and I would sit in front of the tv because back then we didn't have a remote. It was the kind of TV you had to turn the dial. So I became the remote. And it made me think of, though, if you think about from, let's say the 50s all the way through the 80s, even though we, like you said about the term friction, even though we were on screens, there still was a little bit more communal engagement. Like, most people only had one television during that period in their whole house. So you had to, like you said, your show had to be on a certain time. You had maybe had to negotiate with your brothers or sisters or your parents or, you know, to kind of. And then usually people would settle on things that everybody liked to watch the sitcoms, things like that.
And by the 90s, as technology improved, TVs became smaller. Cause TVs used to be really bulky and take up some real estate in a house as well. And today we have, you know, most TVs have a depth of maybe 1 to 2 inches and can be put on a wall.
So it just changes the nature of kind of how we relate to the screens. Even just the way that the technology's
[00:07:28] Speaker A: improved, that doesn't even go. I want to say, though, the people walking around with TVs screens in their pockets.
[00:07:34] Speaker B: That's what I'm saying about.
But that's what I'm saying, like use the term friction. And I realize, yeah, there was a lot, it was different. Even though the screens existed, like we're talking about, the technology wasn't there yet for one individual to be just trapped into a screen by themselves at any given point of the day. And I really think that it has done something to society. One of the stats I wanted to run by you, I mean, what did you think about?
I saw this one in 1975, about half of 20 something said they read a newspaper every day. Today, less than 10% do. And the other one that stuck out to me, which I wanted to cite because you kind of alluded to this. In 2004, 28% of Americans said they read at least for pleasure at some point. And in 2023, that was down to 16%. So speaks to what you said about reading is something that not that long ago, we're not talking in 1950s, but in 2004, more than a quarter of Americans said they read for leisure, for fun. And that number is now at 16% and dropping. You know, seems like the trend is going down.
[00:08:43] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:08:44] Speaker B: So that's the question, is what is that going to do for society? I think is the bigger question. Right.
[00:08:48] Speaker A: Well, and that's what, you know, that's kind of what the article gets into, is like, well, yeah, what is is. Does reading serve a purpose? One, putting the idea, the context out there that reading and wide numbers of people being able to read is not normal to the human condition, so to speak. Like that is a something that happened along the way with humans. First, you know, you invent writing and so forth, but then it's only certain elites that actually deal in written communication. And again, not just knowing how to read is not what this is talking about. Not being capable of understanding the characters that are in front of you, but actually reading or using written communication yourself, those, those will be the things that actually change the way and we'll get into how it changes the way the mind works. So, but if reading and doing this is a blip, so to speak, and we just happen to grow up at the tail end of that blip, there's a whole different context here than if it's if, if, if you walk in with this assumption. Well, because things were a certain way when I was young. That's how they've always been. Well, no, actually it appears, you know, based on a lot of things that were Laid out here that yes, people used to read the newspapers every day, but you know, newspapers are a relatively recent invention as well. You know, like newspapers are a few hundred years old from that standpoint. Now it doesn't say that people aren't getting news though, it just says that they're not reading a newspaper, they're getting their news in other forms. And again, like the video. And that's to me where I found the most interesting thing about this article.
And it talked about how reading changes the brain. And so I wanted to get into that with you, you know, in terms of, because we're not talking about just like, oh, it affects the brain, you know, yada yada, yada. But it like, it affects the way your brain structures information, the way that you then can follow logical trails and so forth like that. And then one of the things you talked about, like, man, I can't believe it, it actually affects the physiological composition of your brain, like what's there and what's not and what's connected and what's not. So, you know, getting into that, what did you make of kind of the discussions in there on how reading affects people's brains, like the structure of them and then also the way that they organize and order information and so forth.
[00:10:55] Speaker B: That to me was fascinating and scary at the same time. Because you're right, I kind of like the imagination of where the human brain can go. Because you know, the thing that came to mind, James, was the old saying of use it or lose it. I was thinking like, kind of like with working out or anything else, I was thinking about what I've heard of that. You know, the astronauts that live on the space station lose about 30% of their bone density over a 12 month
[00:11:21] Speaker A: period just because there's no gravity that their bones are working against to hold themselves up.
[00:11:26] Speaker B: So it's use it or lose it, right? If the human body, and that's the thing, the human body, nature is very efficient.
So if you, if you're going to be in gravity for a year, your body's going to say, well, we're not going to make as much bone matter, right? We don't need to spend that energy doing that. And, and if you don't work out, your muscles will atrophy, right? Like your body's not going to need to produce all that, all that, all that muscle. So the same thing that I realized in reading this article, the brain is no different.
We had something happen in a human experience called the printing press that allowed for literature to proliferate. Around the world. And for like you said, it going from something that was limited to only a select group of elites like priests and kings and emperors and the people around them to everybody that now I think in first world countries I think are 95% plus literate. I think the world is over 60, 70% literate. So James, you're right. And I never thought this article is fascinating because I never thought to even contemplate the idea that literacy would not be something permanent to the human experience. And for the first time I realized it doesn't have to be.
This is something that the printing press brought to us and now the digital age is going to bring us something different. No, no, that's to me kind of.
[00:12:49] Speaker A: You know what it made me think of is another one of our kind of base assumptions that people talk about. When people talk about things like the long ar of history and how that's bending towards progress and y. Y yeah. And it's like, well maybe that's not the case. Maybe if you stop and look, if you say okay, let's look at just the first.
Let's look at a 5,000 year block of human history and let's say you know, or 3,000 block year block of human history and you say from 3000 BC to, to 0 AD or whatever. And there's a lot. Let's look at the long arc of history there they were doing stuff in Egypt at the beginning of that time that was better than things they were doing in at the end of that time anywhere in the world, so to speak. So there would be no person who, if they look at the period of 3000 BC to 0 AD saying oh yeah, the long arc of history bending for progress and all that kind of stuff. What we may be observing is that the time since literacy, printing press and so forth, and widespread literacy and the capability, the ability for common people to create a critical mass of people who have read in ways and like you just talked about or like it's mentioned in the article, even more detail.
It changes the way your brain works.
You become better at linear thinking, logical thinking, putting two and two together and so forth, abstract concepts, understanding that, how that happens, maybe that is we're observing the last 500 years or so of a arc bending, so to speak, and that's it. But before that it was just fits and starts. Things would go up, things would go down. Roman Empire was cool. Then it's gone and it's nothing. And then you know, you got the Muslim world, you know, for a thousand years is doing Great. And then they go to more of a dark age. And so it's a popping up and then disappearing all over the world. So maybe this idea of a long arc of history, what we're observing really is literacy taking society on a path that oral based cultures weren't able to go or if they had it, weren't able to sustain. And then that leads into the open question of, okay, well then if that goes away, does the world just become more of a fits and starts kind of place again? If video content, which is easier to consume but doesn't confer the benefits to the brain, that. And it also doesn't promote a depth of learning. Another thing, one of the things you said to me one time, actually I think it was during the amusing ourselves to death conversation, is you really made a big deal about the fact that when you read something you control the pace of it and that it really impacted me because you know what, that, that's so true. And I know that it was mentioned in the book, but your emphasis on it really impacted me because it's like, yeah, being able to control the pace that the information is coming at you. If you don't catch something, right. You back it up or you flip the page back and let me read this paragraph again, make sure I have it versus the video, which is continuous and you don't control the flow of it, so to speak. It was really impactful to me because it does allow you to get a depth of understanding and knowledge versus if you didn't catch something, you just kind of gloss over it and then you just keep going because the stuff is still going at you. So I was fascinated by that part.
[00:15:43] Speaker B: Yeah, man. No, I want to keep going on that because I think what you said a lot there, man, I think. So I'll start with your allusion to history because I've been going down. I haven't told you this, I've been going down this rabbit hole personally about the Bronze Age collapse, which happened around 1200 BC and historians are yet to really be able to explain it. But it's kind of like you're saying those ancient empires that we've learned about, the Carthaginians, the Hittites, the Egyptians, all those biblical kind of groups and ethnicities that they had these thriving societies and then it basically collapsed in one generation.
And so the historians are still trying to figure that out. So it's a great point. You make that 3,000 years ago or over the last, just 3,000 years, the kind of fits and starts, booms and Puzzles.
[00:16:33] Speaker A: It was society by definition. Like, you look. People look at ancient Egypt, right? Like, there's three kingdoms that we talk about. But no, people don't. People just mush all that together. And these are over 1500 years. And it's like there's a rise and a fall of a first kingdom, you know, and then there's a rise and a fall of a second. Like, it's like that wasn't just one continuous, you know, like. Oh, yeah.
[00:16:53] Speaker B: Think about what you're saying 500 years ago, I think the Great Pyramid of Egypt, I think is 5,000 years old. Built like 3,500 BC or some. It's like one of the oldest.
[00:17:03] Speaker A: Yeah, that's in the first era of stuff. They weren't doing that in the last of Egypt.
[00:17:07] Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, the main kingdoms ended in 1200 BC, but Egypt as a society still was lasting through the year zero, when there was the Roman Empire. So you think about 5,000 years, a long time.
And I was thinking, as you were talking too, about the Roman Empire.
You make a great point. Think about it. The Roman Empire had plumbing and hot and cold water available through a faucet in the European, Middle Eastern and North African areas.
And humanity didn't see that again after the fall of western Rome in 476 A.D. didn't see it again until the beginning of the 20th century. So that's 1500 years of not having a technology that was once had in humanity. So I agree. I think it's. It's amazing. And I think that that's what the
[00:17:52] Speaker A: printing record, by the way, it was. The historians place it around 2600 BC for the great Pyramid. Okay, my bad. No, no, I just, just.
[00:18:00] Speaker B: I was.
[00:18:00] Speaker A: Hold on.
[00:18:01] Speaker B: I was close because 2600 plus the 2080 is 4600 years, so. I said 5000. I was close.
If you round up. I was. I was right. But the rounding error.
[00:18:11] Speaker A: That's all rounding.
[00:18:12] Speaker B: Yeah, just rounding it. There's a few. Just a few hundred years on a millennia. So it's okay, you know, hey, we're in this new era where you don't have to be perfect, right?
[00:18:21] Speaker A: No, no, it's video, man. You don't have to be perfect.
If this was a book, we'd have
[00:18:25] Speaker B: to make it right.
Yeah, you're right. I can get an AI to update this later. But no, the last thing I'll say and then I'll kick it back is, so that's what got me thinking about the actual printing press in the year 1440. Because I was thinking about James. We just did a show last week about how the Dutch created capitalism with the Dutch East India Company. And that was in the early 1600s. And I was thinking, well, without the printing press, you would have never had the environment where you could have had a joint stock company. Because in order to have, like you explained so eloquently in the show, a company that wants to tie up your investment for 10 years, it accidentally created the stock market, a secondary market where people who couldn't wait 10 years to buy, you know, to unload their shares, they needed money for whatever reason, had to sell it somewhere. Think about it. You don't have the environment where you can print that many sheets of paper in stock and make copies to go around and show who owns what without a printing press.
[00:19:18] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:19:18] Speaker B: So I think that when the printing press was invented in 1440, no one could see what the world would look like by 1840 or 1940, because no one could have imagined the idea of capitalism in a business. And then no one could imagine how human beings would take that and use that to colonize other places and bring commodities back and create this new imagined order called a shareholder and a business class and all that stuff. And I think that we're at the cusp of that kind of societal change again, that just like the printing press, the Internet has changed the way humans do mass communication. And I just think that we lack the imagination to see what the world's gonna look like two, 300 years from now because of.
[00:19:58] Speaker A: Well, yeah, I mean, 20, 30 years ago, because even the Internet, look at the evolution of the Internet. The Internet actually started as a medium through which text based stuff was being shared primarily. And now it's evolving really.
[00:20:10] Speaker B: Like government stuff, right? Like sending messages.
[00:20:13] Speaker A: Right in the government though, is what I'm saying. Like now it's evolved. Like text is so 2005 at this point, you know, like, and now it's about more video and so forth. The other thing I'll mention, I wanted to add this briefly was, you know, the part about training, you know, and that, that stood out to me also in terms of how your brain does respond. And they can actually measure this. Now your brain does respond to what you do with it. So if you read, you know, again, your brain can become more logical, can be able to put together multi layered thoughts. You know, I'm like, possibly we need to have a little bit more great, you know, grace with the ancients, you know, like we sometimes I'm mockingly on here talking about how they, they didn't know how the weather worked, so they would sacrifice virgins trying to bring it rain. But it's like, well that is, you're not able based on a lot of this, the, the literate brain thing, the easy connections that you can make that are established in a literate brain sometimes are harder to make those connections in a brain that isn't literate, that doesn't read. You know, and I like, to a literate brain, you know, the, the existence of corruption would also mean the existence of compromised decision making. But to the brain that doesn't have order information like that and put together multi layered thoughts, corruption may be able to exist and it not automatically mean that you have, you have decision making that is then corrupted, so to speak. You know, like, oh, I'll take some money here, but no, I, you know, I, I, as long as I get my bribe after I do the action, then that won't affect me actually deciding to do the action. You might have people saying stuff like that in a post literate society, which our Supreme Court said, but with a straight face by the way.
But the piece that reading isn't natural and it rewires your brain. The other thing that got me a little worried about this was just that it seems like right now we're going through a change on the other side as well, you know, with the use of AI. And I'm not here to down AI in this sense, but people using AI to compose, to write, to put together information.
I wonder if that's another one of these use it or lose it type of situations where we will, we'll start talking like people talked in idiocracy, you know, where it's like unable. Not only are you not able to understand multi layered thoughts if someone presented to you, but can you even put those together and put them down on paper yourself? Because you farm that out to something else. So I know we gotta keep moving though, man.
[00:22:39] Speaker B: Just I got something for you specifically on that.
[00:22:42] Speaker A: I will say this, this doesn't, this isn't a big departure, but I want to move us along just in historical, historical context though we've kind of touched on this already. So you know, kind of take this where you want the author points out or the author suggests that the literacy age, what we're talking about maybe post printing press or whatever, where again the common man, there's quotes in there from Ben Franklin and how he's talking about how just the common man now can be as educated as you know, the super elites were, you know, 200 years ago. But this literacy age is really just a small blip between like the oral age and the digital age. You know, what'd you think about that? And then also, you know, any other things you want to get out before we close up?
[00:23:18] Speaker B: Yeah, no, I think just from what I said earlier, I think, you know, this article amazed me because I. It's the first time I have contemplated a post literary humanity.
I just assumed that, you know, reading and books and all that would always be the same.
[00:23:36] Speaker A: How could you assume that if we've done amusing, if we read amusing ourselves to death. How could how like it calls it and this, this actual we talk or in this article it talks about Neil Postman amusing ourselves to death along with some of the other things. But go ahead.
[00:23:49] Speaker B: Because I'm a human and I don't like change. That's why.
And that's why I was going to joke with you and say don't beat yourself up for making fun of the ancients for the rain dances, because if it wasn't that, they'd have found something else to sacrifice virgins over. So that's just because people will figure out how to do that because they're doing that today, right? Figuratively. And we got files released about an island in the New Mexico ranch that they might be. Literally, they were doing that too. So, you know, that's what I'm saying. But to speak to your point, James, and the question, I think, yes, we seem to be on that path, clearly that we're losing the literary culture. Because where you were just alluding to, there was something in the article that discussed that and I wanted to mention it because you were right there. Nearly 30% of American adults cannot paraphrase or, or make inferences from a multi page text.
[00:24:38] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:24:38] Speaker B: In 2017 that number was less than 20%.
[00:24:41] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:24:42] Speaker B: And that's what to me, that's fascinating. In nine years, nine years we've got that kind of.
[00:24:46] Speaker A: Yes.
[00:24:46] Speaker B: So that's, that's, that's why I wanted to say it because you were talking eloquently about losing the ability to do that, to read from separate things and for the brain to kind of bring all that together.
[00:24:59] Speaker A: Yes, yeah, yeah.
[00:25:01] Speaker B: And make a finding. And I'm saying since in 2017
[00:25:05] Speaker A: over
[00:25:05] Speaker B: 30% or nearly 30% of American adults who do that, which is already probably a low number, meaning in 1917 it might have been a lot higher.
Where then now nine years later, we're down to less than 20%. So that tells me that the screen watching since the Internet started like you're saying about how the Internet's changed. And I would say probably since 2008, since the smartphone, the iPhone could play videos in our hands.
I think the loss of the literacy, the ability to comprehend the literacy thing has just grown exponentially. And it's, and it's.
[00:25:39] Speaker A: Well, it's also, and it's also Internet becoming faster, you know, like the ability to move data through the pipes, so to speak, has gotten a lot better compression techniques and all that. So you know, it was cumbersome to move a video around in 2008, whereas now, you know, videos snap around even without expenses, super expensive equipment.
[00:25:59] Speaker B: No, you're right. And so I think that's necessarily going to change the way that the human brain is organized over time, meaning not necessarily today, but we're talking about 30, 50, 100 years from now. Because this made me realize, James, this article, that the printing press actually changed the way human brains were organized over a few centuries to get us to the point where we were.
And now this is going to start changing the way human brains are organized going forward. So I think we're going to end up, we should probably look at, by
[00:26:29] Speaker A: the way you had, you know, right in the day, in the centuries that followed the printing press, you got the industrial revolution, you have, you know, liberalism and governments of the people and all these other, all these things pop out of nowhere, so to speak. But it's like, oh, okay, yeah, maybe, maybe these things are connected, you know, like in some ways that we may not fully appreciate.
[00:26:50] Speaker B: Because thinking about it, it's not just
[00:26:52] Speaker A: an arc that's just automatically ending that way.
[00:26:56] Speaker B: And think about what the printing press did to the pre existing ruling order like the Catholic Church. This guy named Martin Luther all of a sudden starts banging stuff on people's door, creating the Reformation, which created Protestantism. And that upends the entire control that the Catholic Church had on large swaths of Europe over time. So yeah, it's going to change humanity in the way the printing press did, but in different ways. And I think like what I realized, James, is it would be instructive for us to maybe look at how human societies were organized pre printing press, but recognizing it's not going to be exactly the same. Because one thing, and I want your thoughts on this, James. I found it very interesting, the article made a point to distinguish post literacy from illiteracy because I think it made a good point like we're not going to be all illiterate. People are still going to be able to read Words I thought about it. Corporate America is still going to need people to buy things, so we're still going to have to be able to read the words and make some sort of calculations or something. But we're clearly not going to have the brain matter organized in a way that it can focus and like we're saying, the ability to look at different sources of literature and begin to bring it together and harmonize it.
[00:28:07] Speaker A: It's not just different sources, though. It's being able to read a paragraph and understand if there are subtexts to the paragraph, being able to understand the things that aren't said, be able to follow logical pathways. There's all these different things that again, many of us, including myself, have taken for granted in terms of that's just the way your brain works. That's the way my brain works. But it's like, oh, okay. Well, actually, no, this unnatural thing of reading may have played a big role in organizing my brain in this way and then teaching my brain to work like this. In the same way that, you know, somebody who, who is playing sports learns how to shoot a jump shot, you learn a technique, you know, you're not just getting out there and just doing whatever. You learn a technique, that technique is refined. The more you do it, the better you get at it. And then you become, well, not, you won't be, you won't become Steph Curry, but a person can become Steph Curry, where they got the technique so refined that, you know, they can do it better than anybody's ever done it before, you know, and then eventually somebody will refine their technique and then they'll be able to do it even better than that, you know, so that it becomes something like that, this, this unnatural thing of reading. And yeah, it's post literate again, to be clear. I mentioned this a little earlier. It doesn't mean that people can't read. It means they don't read and therefore they don't get the benefits that are conferred from someone who trains their brain in this way, you know. And so I think that the ship is sailed, in my view. Like reading became as prolific as it were, as big a parts of society as it did, because it was the best alternative. If you wanted fiction, if you wanted fantasy, you know, you could distribute these works and people could read them in their own time and so forth. That was, I mean, that was great. You know, you could have this book. You're a farmer, you can have this book and you can go to another world. You know, when you're reading this book. And you didn't have any other options, you know, as far as that. You just talk to the people around you. Now we have other options that were. That were easier, so to speak. So the ship has sailed. Like it's not going to go back to that, so to speak. The question is whether we can do things within our societies to try to still organize these muscles in the same way that people.
The ship sailed on us living lifestyles that keep us in shape. So now we've had to build in things like exercise, you know, gyms and these workout studios and all that. We have to build in things and, and then spend extra time doing that stuff to maintain a physical fitness. So to maintain a mental fitness, you're going to have to introduce other things. And whether we have the will to do that is another question.
The other thing I'll mention, though, just sitting here in the United States, it was mentioned in the article and it's not lost on me. The United States is a nation built on a document.
And that's very. Not natural, very unnatural from a human society standpoint. People usually like to center their lives and their nations around people or on tribes. And you see efforts in that. Right now in the United States, people want to make it about a certain tribe or make it about a certain person, not about a document. You know, the documents are boring, you know, so to speak. So a literate society is more able, conceivably to. To live by a document. A post literate society, I don't know, that can hold itself together based on a document, you know, because it's just not the way that they would. Their minds would work in that sense. You know, it's not something. It's not something that would engender something, sufficient loyalty, so to speak, to bind people together in a way that you need to do for nationhood. So. All right, last thoughts. Man, I know I threw a bomb at you at the end, so.
[00:31:19] Speaker B: Yeah, I know you did. Which depressed me.
[00:31:23] Speaker A: So I can't just close up the show. I surrender.
[00:31:27] Speaker B: There's a few points.
I didn't even write notes. I got to do this off memory. So you got to work with me here.
[00:31:32] Speaker A: Hey, man.
[00:31:32] Speaker B: So one is you depressed me because when you said about the working out and how, you know, we used to be in nature because our bodies need to move, right. So that, you know, gatherers don't need
[00:31:45] Speaker A: to go to the gym, you know, Hunter, gatherers don't need.
[00:31:47] Speaker B: Yeah. And so it made me realize. So hold on. So you're right. We got to spend extra hours doing that to compensate for the fact we don't do it anymore. Now I'm thinking about we're going to have to read the same way. So it got me thinking, like, depressed, like, so what? So what am I doing with my time that I can't do these things? Oh, that means I'm working, I'm making money for the system. Right. They're cogging the wheel. And I was thinking like, you know, I'm thinking of the movie. Matrix is such a great metaphor that the humans in those pods being the batteries for the machines. You're making me feel like we're all being the batteries for the big machine of the economy. Right. Like, think about it. The things that are actually good for us, like reading, exercising, we got to figure out how to do that in our off time. Because if we're not running on a hamster wheel, you know, so the whole system's going to collapse. So, yeah, you got me thinking about going into the woods and being a hunter gatherer. So that's the first thing. And then the second thing was where you were ending up is it made me think of the fact that, yes, this country was founded, we've said this before, by a group of intellectuals who spent 10 years debating the Constitution.
And they said in their own writings, and we don't have time for this. And this is a different show. But if you go back and read Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, those guys, they basically said that the population in this society will do very well because of how literate the society was and how everybody.
You're right. So it makes me realize that, yes, the United States system may not survive this change in ages because
[00:33:24] Speaker A: it is a. Is an abstract concept.
It's an abstract concept. And abstract thinking is something that kind of goes by the wayside in a post literate society. So go versus loyalty to a person which is not abstract.
[00:33:36] Speaker B: No, I know. So going back to what we said earlier.
That's what I'm saying. Going back to what we said earlier. If this ends up being a world that's similar to the pre literate world, when it was more of an oral world, then, yeah, we can probably bet on the fact that the ability to keep people focused on something abstract, like a constitution that doesn't involve something emotional like a tribe, will be very difficult. And the fact that human beings are
[00:34:02] Speaker A: tribal difficult in the literary, in the literacy age.
[00:34:05] Speaker B: Yeah, right. So I said, you made me depressed. So that's how we're gonna end this show. Yeah, yeah. Well, glass half empty again.
[00:34:12] Speaker A: I promised some confessions from you, man. So. So you delivered on that. So there you go.
[00:34:17] Speaker B: Yes, There you go.
[00:34:18] Speaker A: So I think we can wrap this. This topic up from here. We appreciate everybody for joining us on this episode of Call Like I See It. Subscribe to the podcast, rate it, review it, tell us what you think. Send it to a friend. Till next time, I'm James Keys.
[00:34:30] Speaker B: I'm Tunde Ogunlana All right, we'll talk.
