The context of the subject of change comprises also the
terminology developed around it. The variation of the meanings
assigned to the words literacy and illiteracy is symptomatic of
the various angles from which they are examined. Literacy, as
someone said (I found this credited to both John Ashcroft, once
governor of Missouri, and to Henry A. Miller) has been a moving
target. It has reflected changes in criteria for evaluating
writing and writing skills as the pragmatic framework of human
activity changed through time. Writing is probably more than
5,000 years old. And while the emergence of writing and reading
are the premise for literacy, a notion of generalized literacy
can be construed only in connection to the invention of movable
type (during the 11th century in China, and the early 16th
century in Western Europe), and even more so with the advent of
the 19th century high-speed rotary press.
Within the mentioned time-frame, many changes in the
understanding of what literacy connotes have come about. For
those who see the world through the Book (Torah, Bible, Koran,
Upanishads, Wu Ching), literacy means to be able to read and
understand the book, and thus the world. All practical rules
presented in the Book constitute a framework accessed either
through literacy or oral tradition. In the Middle Ages, to be
literate meant to know Latin, which was perceived as the language
of divine revelation. Parallel to the religious, or
religion-oriented, perspective of literacy, many others were
acknowledged: social-how writing and reading constitute a
framework for social interaction; economic-how writing and
reading and other skills of comprehending maps, tables, and
symbols affect people's ability to participate in economic life;
educational-how literacy is disseminated; legal-how laws and
social rules are encoded in order to ensure uniform social
behavior.
Scholars have looked at literacy from all these perspectives. In
doing so, they have foisted upon the understanding of literacy
interpretations so diverse and so contradictory that to follow
them is to enter a maze from which there is no escape. One of
Will Rogers' lines was paraphrased as: "We are all illiterate,
only about different things." The formula deserves closer
examination because it defines another characteristic of the
context for understanding the relative illiteracy of our times.
The degree of illiteracy is difficult to quantify, but the
result is easy to notice. Everything carried into the
self-constitution of the individual as warrior, lover, athlete,
family member, educator or educated in literacy-based pragmatics
is being replaced by illiterate means. Nobody expected that an
individual who reads Tolstoy or Shakespeare will be a better
cook, or devise better military plans, or even be a better lover.
Nevertheless, the characteristics of literacy affected
practically all pragmatic experiences, conferring upon them a
unity and coherence we can only look back upon with nostalgia.
Champions of sexual encounters, as much as innovators in new
technologies and Olympic athletes are extremely efficient in
their respective domains. Peak performance increases as the
average falls in the range of mediocrity and sub- mediocrity. In
this book I will examine many aspects of literacy pertinent to
what is usually associated with it: the publications people
write and read, communication at the individual and social
levels, as well as many aspects of human activity that we do not
necessarily consider in relation to literacy-military, sports,
sex and family, eating-but which nevertheless were influenced by
the pragmatic framework that made literacy possible and
necessary.
With the evident demise of philosophy as the science of
sciences, began fragmentation of knowledge. Doubt that a common
instrument of access to and dissemination of knowledge exists is
replaced by certitude that it does not. A so-called third
culture, in the opinion of the author who brought it to public
attention, "consists of rendering visible the deeper meanings of
our lives" in ways different from those of literary
intellectuals. This is not C.P. Snow's third culture of
scientists capable of communicating with non-scientific
intellectuals, but the illiterate scientific discourse that
brings fascinating notions into the mainstream, via powerful
metaphors and images (albeit in a trivialized manner). This is
why the relation between science and literacy, as well as
between philosophy and literacy, will be examined with the
intention to characterize the philosophy and science of the
civilization of illiteracy.
But are we really equipped with the means of exploration and
evaluation of this wide-ranging change? Aren't we captive to
language and literacy, and thus to the philosophic and
scientific explanations based on them? We know that the system in
place in our culture is the result of the logocratic view
adopted. The testing of skills rated by score is to a great
extent a measure of comprehension characteristic of the
civilization of literacy. The new pragmatic framework requires
skills related not only to language and literacy, but also to
images, sounds, textures, motion, and virtual space and time.
Knowing this, we have to address the relation between a
relatively static medium and dynamic media. We should look into
how literacy relates to the visual, in general, and, in
particular, to the controversial reality of television, of
interactive multimedia, of artificial images, of networking and
virtual reality. These are all tasks of high order, requiring a
broad perspective and an unbiased viewpoint.
Most important is the comprehension of the structural
implications of literacy. An understanding of the framework that
led to literacy, and of the consequences that the new pragmatic
framework of existence has on all aspects of our lives will help
us understand how literacy influenced them. I refer specifically
to religion, family, state, and education. In a world giving up
the notion of permanency, God disappears for quite a number of
people. Still, there are many more churches, denominations,
sects, and other religious factions (atheist and neo-pagan
included) than at any other time. In the United States of
America, people change life partners 2.8 times during their
lifespan (if they ever constitute a family), and calculate the
financial aspects of getting married and having children with
the same precision that they use to calculate the expected return
on an investment. The state has evolved into a corporation
regulating the business of the nation, and is now judged on its
economic achievements. Presidents of states act as
super-peddlers of major industries on whose survival employment
depends. These heads of state are not shy about giving up the
ideals anchored in literate discourse (e.g., human rights). But
they will raise a big fuss when it comes to copyright
infringement, especially of software. The irony is that copyright
is difficult to define in respect to digital originals. Through
the literacy model, the state became a self- preserving
bureaucratic machine rarely akin to the broad variety of options
brought about by the pragmatic framework of the civilization of
illiteracy.
Many more people than previous records mention become (or remain)
illiterates after finishing the required years of schooling-a
minimum of ten years-and even after graduating from college.
Some people know how to read; even how to write, but opt for
scanning TV channels, playing games, attending sports events, or
surfing the Internet. Aliteracy is also part of the broader
change in the status of literacy. Decisions to forego reading
and writing are decisions in favor of different means of
expression and communication. The new generation is more
proficient in video games than in orthography. This generation
will be involved in high-efficiency practical experiences
structurally similar to the interactive toy and far removed from
the expectation of correct writing. The Internet shapes the
choices of the new generation in terms of what they want to
know, how, when, and for what purpose more than newspapers,
books, and magazines, and even more than radio or television
does. And even more than schools and colleges do. Through its
vast and expanding means and offerings, the Internet connects
the individual to the globe, instead of only talking about
globality. Networking, at many levels and in many ways, is
related to the characteristics of our pragmatic framework. As
rudimentary as it still is, networking excludes everything that
is not fast- paced and to the point.
Can all these examples, part of the context of the discussion of
literacy in our changing world, be interpreted as being in
causal relation to the decline of literacy? That is, the less
people are knowledgeable in reading and writing, or choose not to
read or write, the less they believe in God or the more pagan
they want to be? The more often they divorce, the less they
marry or have children? The more they want or accept a
bureaucratic machine to handle their problems, the more TV
programs they watch and the more electronic games they play, the
more they surf the infinite world of networks? No, not along
this line of one-dimensional, linear, simplistic form of
determinism. A multiplicity of factors, and a multiplicity of
layers need to be considered. They are, however, rooted in the
pragmatic framework of our continuous self- constitution. It is
exhibited through the dynamics of shorter and faster
interactions. It is embodied in the ever wider choices of
ascertaining our identity. It takes the appearance of
availabilities, fragmentation and global integration, of
increased mediation. The dynamics described corresponds to the
higher efficiency that a larger scale of human activity demands.
To call attention to the multi-dimensionality of the process and
to the many interdependencies, which we can finally uncover with
the help of new technologies, is a first step. To evince their
non-linearity, reflecting the meshing between what can be seen
as deterministic and what is probably non-deterministic is
another step in the argument of the book.
Without basing our discussion on human pragmatics, it would be
impossible to explain why, despite all the effort and money
societies invest in education, and all the time allocated for
education-sometimes over a quarter of a lifetime-despite research
of cognitive processes pertinent to literacy, people wind up less
literate, but, surprisingly, not at all less efficient. Some
would argue-the late Alan Bloom, a crusader for culture and
literacy, indeed a brilliant writer of the epilogue of human
culture and nostalgia for it, already did-that without literacy,
we are less effective as human beings. The debate over such
arguments requires that we acknowledge changes in the status of
human beings and of human societies, and that we understand what
makes such changes unavoidable.