Does listening to an audiobook count as "reading" the book?
>>23818356No./thread
Yes
>>23818356>Does listening count as "reading"Of course not. But who cares?
>>23818356It's a good substitute for when you're unable to read during certain tasks. Great for passing the time while working.
>>23818356I can listen and retain non fiction as well with audiobook as reading but fiction I can't pay attention to what's going on unless I've already read it.I think because when i read fiction I create a movie in my head and don't see the words any more. I only do that sometimes with non fiction.
>>23818356>>23818356My take is that they are not the same because one is active and the other is passive but that doesn't necissarily mean you can't enjoy or even appreciate and fully understand a book solely through the audiobook but you have to actually be paying attention to it which is a lot easier not to do with an audiobook than an actual book. I do listen to audiobooks especially when working or exercising and would/do colloquially tell people I have read a book even if I have only listened to it via audiobook. This is especially true for non-fiction, imo which I think it largely perfect for the audiobook format. Things get a lot tougher with more dense or prose heavy fiction. Like I think listening to Faulkner or Cormac McCarthy is a fundamentally different experience than listening to it because, especially if you are working on another task, it is easy just to zone out and not really be paying attention. My first go through with blood Meridian was an audiobook and I probably only appreciated 60% of what the book has to offer in comparison to when I read the text. Again, I don't think it's bad per se to listen to the audiobook especially if that is the difference between you going through that book or not, but you are going to miss stuff that you probably wouldn't in the text.
>>23818356>>23818714>>23818757>>23818774>>23818828>>23818879How can you guys stand a man (or even a woman) whispering in your ears? Audiobooks are so uncomfortable to me. Imagine spending hours with uncomfortable breathing, lip-smacking sounds... ew.I'd rather read a book in total silence and think with my own inner monologue or just imagine a voice in my head.
>>23818901They don't whisper. And all extra sounds like "lip smacking" is edited out. Have you ever listened to someone tell a story.Listening to a story is a much more ancient form of story telling. Actually it's THE most ancient form of story telling.
>>23818922Or I should say telling a story aloud to another person or persons is the most ancient form of story telling. That's how The Illiad and The Odyssey were told before most people read it.
>>23818901Have you not ever listened to a podcast? It's basically just a big podcast.
Books are just a cope from before we had recordings. It went Oral Tradition -> Books -> Oral againHumans are made to listen, not to read, Socrates was right (yes I know he was talking about being able to have a conversation instead of just listening)
>>23819061Pretty based desu. Though reading is also good enough. Really reading is for those intelligent enough to do so. Audiobooks are a true revolution for the idiotic masses that can't comprehend a story without it literally being told to them. However, they're still good to listen to.
>>23818356I have yet to see any scientific evidence that the comprehension of audiobook listeners is lower. In my personal experience, I usually prefer them and find that I retain more, probably simply because the strain on my ears is lower than the strain on my eyes.If I need to read extremely closely though, I will pull out a physical book.
>>23818356You read with your eyes, not your ears.
>>23818356As a young boy I already listened to audiobooks, we did not have a television until I was 10. I enjoy audiobooks tremendously and I am good at reading but there is something so insanely comforting about just blocking out the world, doing mundane and mindless things while listening to literature, non-fiction, history etc. I retain knowledge so well and I often listen to the same book multiple times just because its so enjoyable. If I had to just sit down and do nothing but read, I would rather use that time to write, its more productive for me.
>>23819378You read with your brain, or would you say someone reading Braille is also wrong for not using their eyes? It's absolutely mind-boggling how stupid your opinion is. I could read with my penis if they made penis script, or if someone inserted a tiny rod into the urethra and a woman could read cylinders embossed with information by inserting them. You can read letters by touching them with your toes. Reading is about processing structured information, regardless of how that information enters your brain.
>>23818356I think they're nice for long drives. I have a 21 hour move coming up and have some audiobooks lined up for the occassion.
>>23818356The more relevant question is: Do you enjoy the book and absorb the ideas in it? Different people are good at learning in different ways.
>>23821005One way in which Braille and visual print might be relevantly similar to each other and dissimilar to a book on tape is that you go through them at your own pace, only advancing when you choose to, whereas an audiobook just keeps rolling forward and if you miss something you have to have the presence of mind to actively stop it and rewind it. But different people are good at different styles of learning, so hearing it might work best for some people.
>>23821044What does this have to do with anything? Is your point about how much of the Bible was transmitted as oral tradition before it was written down?
