[zktrust]

i think that's also rubbish, just like PG's written opinion piece. How on earth did we then get the great work by William Shakespeare. ShakeSPeare born a time when reading a lot wasn't even possible. There was little to none good content material out there. He was writing more than he could have possible read anywhere else.

[pavlov]

Shakespeare wrote about Julius Caesar, Titus Andronicus, Richard III, Henry IV, and so on. How did he learn about these people if there was nothing to read?

[zktrust]

u make one hell of a point that i thought about. this is recursion but in different languages, which is not really applicable with exception of Richard and Henry. Read in latin, then translate it to THE ORIGINAL OTHER LANGUAGE ENGLISH. You are diluting my genuine point that I am making. The content of way back then was negligible to content that exists now. In all fairness, the opinion brought forward by your messiah PG is not really fit for standing judgement because of the point i brought forward.

Good writer, good idea makers exist without the need to have been good at reading.

[mikebenfield]

So you are under the belief that the written output of one man born in 1564 was of greater quantity than all “good” writing prior to his time? Are you sure you thought this through?

[zktrust]

no i am not under the belief of anything other than mentioning PG in a slightly bad light will get me downvotes or a ban on this platform.

> So you are under the belief that the written output of one man born in 1564 was of greater quantity than all “good” writing prior to his time? Are you sure you thought this through?

This is not the point i was trying to make.