If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   This just in: Reading books is good for your brain. In other news, the world is round, Obama is president   ( huffingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, banned books, Jonathan Franzen, young-adult fiction, Grand Central Publishing, organizational structure, McSweeney, female genitalia, Random House  
•       •       •

3047 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Sep 2012 at 6:56 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-09-16 07:03:26 PM  
5 votes:
What are "3 things Tea Party Republicans don't believe in?
2012-09-16 07:11:14 PM  
2 votes:
Counter-study finds that reading books isn't good for your brain which means Sarah Palin is automatically president and Obama has to make love to the president of the Flat Earth society while the Timecube guy films it
2012-09-16 07:08:40 PM  
2 votes:

MrEricSir: Not the books I'm reading, that's for sure.

Indeed, I find it hard to believe this is good for your brain.

photo.goodreads.comView Full Size

I've actually read it (don't ask) and felt dumber for it afterwards.
2012-09-16 08:19:50 PM  
1 vote:
I have a real problem with blanket statements like this. You cannot tell me that reading "50 Shades of Grey" is better for my intellectual development that watching TedTalks on Astrophysics, Sociology and World Politics.

No way.
2012-09-16 07:44:04 PM  
1 vote:

wildcardjack: fusillade762: MrEricSir: Not the books I'm reading, that's for sure.

Indeed, I find it hard to believe this is good for your brain.

[photo.goodreads.com image 299x450] 

I've actually read it (don't ask) and felt dumber for it afterwards.

You are a rare person to have read the book. I see a lot of that book unread in the thrift store. Most of those people buy the book thinking it's readable.

A friend of mine got it as a gift from someone. He had no interest in reading it so I thought I'd give it a shot. Ugh. Part of me wanted to get a pen and mark all the falsehoods, hyperbole and flat out lies it contained. But then I realized I'd probably be out of ink after the first couple chapters.

The funny part is I tried to sell it at Powell's later (with a bunch of other books) and the buyer there almost laughed at me. Needless to say they didn't want it (it was the only one of the bunch they didn't take).
2012-09-16 07:28:30 PM  
1 vote:
It's funny because the people who deny Obama's presidency also can't read.
2012-09-16 07:16:46 PM  
1 vote:
In spite of these findings, Philips warned against "historical nostalgia, or assuming those of the 18th century were less distracted than we are today." She asserts that Enlightenment-era writers (her area of expertise) were just as concerned about withering attention spans as we are today.

I...don't get the path this article took. I can infer, but how about the article writer stop trying to throw out some tangential comment and instead make an informative article, such as the one you basically used which says exactly what is meant by "blood flow increased beyond executive function regions" by including the fact blood flow increases to regions associated with concentration. Just another sentence or two, just a few more details...
Displayed 7 of 7 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.