>

Ok someone’s mom 🤦🏽‍♂️
None are lazy or unproductive, you can do them lazily or unproductively.
It's all about how you engage with it and what you get out of it. >

They are all sedentary activities, which are seen as lazy. You're right that they can be very productive, like watching educational programming or the fact that videogames can help with hand eye coordination, decision making, reaction time, and be social activities. 
But they all involve largely sitting g on your ass not moving, which is pretty lazy.
Unless you're playing wii sports or some augmented reality VR that has you up and moving, I guess, or you watch movies while on the treadmill or exercise bike. >

Not everything needs to be physically stimulating in order to be productive. Mental and cognitive activities are important too. This is how the dumb jock stereotype started!
Also, this is a bit ableist… >

As I said, it can be productive, but it's still lazy if all you do for entertainment is sit around watching TV, playing video games, or reading.
And fuck off with your ableist comment. Laziness doesn't include people who don't have the choice to be more active. >

Then why not clarify that (re:ableist)? >

Why would I need to? No one brought up ableism except you. >

Grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, proper use of literary devices, and more can be gathered from reading. It’s not unproductive to activate your imagination as you read either. >

Can also get that from most video games, especially rpg games that require a lot of reading. Not to mention subtitles for movies and tv shows. >

….but you’re READING in the game and READING with subtitles. >

That’s kind of my point, it’s still reading… >

I would argue that movies and video games (especially RPGs) tell and very clear story because the visuals are given to you. When you read, you have to imagine, interpret, and remember everything purely on your own. Now the level of visualization is different for everyone. People that have creative tendencies will usually be able to "see" more as they will fill in the gaps that the author does not provide. Analytical people will often pick up on subtle  details that other people miss altogether. Philosophical people will usually be able to understand the symbolism and metaphorical themes throughout the story. But no matter who you are or what your interpretation techniques are,  you're likely going to have the same understanding as everyone else when the visuals are provided for you, rather than having to imagine it on your own. This means that reading is generally harder because there is more that your brain has to process and visualize.
If reading was as easy as watching television or playing video games, then we would not have students that struggle to read. >

Now that’s an unpopular take >

Because it is wrong. Not in a moral sense but factual. 
Watching normal children shows has no positive side effects for the child and excessive watching does cause harm in the sense that it shortens the attention span of the kid. 
Reading has proven side benefits for lanuage skills (vocabulary, gramma, spelling) and for the attention span and ability to concentrate. >

One of the biggest predictors of a child's future success is words spoken with them per year. Reading with them is a good way to do this. >

If we start this argumentation a lot of hobbies would be "lazy" and "unproductive". But what's the problem with either of it? Not everything has to be the opposite to be enjoyable.

They are all essentially the same thing in my mind,

Sidenote: they are not. Kids are encouraged to read because well, they still learn reading and it helps learning. And second it also animates them to use their imagination, which isn't a bad thing. >

I suggest you take a look at Homo Ludens (Johan Huizinga).
You've just described one of the properties of games: a game is unproductive per se; you might get some knowledge or skill that can later be used in everyday life, but that's incidental.
Again, the activity of playing is itself not useful and technically only useful to itself, so according to this point of view, all the things that you've just described (i.e. videogames, movies and book) are not the same thing, but they fall in the same category and thus have the same properties (with respect to games).
Also note that, at least for book, this is only true if it's a leisure activity, if instead you're reading a book for university (for instance) then it's not really a game. This would be also true for other activities like videogames or movies, but I guess it's more common reading a book than playing videogames if you have to study. >

A lot of people always skip over the fact that it also depends on what kind of books are being read. >

The post refered to fiction books, so everyone talks about fiction. >

An advantage of reading over watching movies/video games is being able to imagine the scenes with my mind and engage in more active thought processes. Reading also helps improve your vocabulary, which is pretty productive imo. >

Playing video games is even more engaging than reading. Most games involve active problem solving and considerable hand eye coordination. Video games are continual information processing and reacting so it’s better than reading and watching tv imo. 
But I’m not a gamer. I’m a reader, I just think everyone should be able to enjoy their chosen hobbies without judgement. >

Well its not an opinion. Its like saying my opinion is that eating chips makes me run faster. Its simply wrong. Reading does train your patience, vocabulary, reading speed and it does decreased the risk of developing alzheimers and thats not an opinion but observerable facts. >

Absolutely not. It takes much more mental effort to read and there are many more opportunities to learn something (not that I care - I don't read anymore).
Not an opinion just flat out wrong. >

Video games can be very stimulating and challenging. >

but VG are often designed to give much more common short-term rewards etc, keeps the attention of people more easily >

This. Books don't hand dopamine out like candy like video games do. >

Kids are encouraged to read because it sharpens their language and concentrations/ focus skills- even if reading fiction. 
It makes absolutly sense that parents prefer their kids to read for hours as opposed to watching tv. While watching tv your brain aktivity is extremly low and exessive watching shortens children attention span and does little to nothing for their development. 
This is factual and you could've easily googled it. >

College students: Am I a joke to you? >

I read on my phone. Not just comments, I look up a lot of informations online. But peoples see it as unproductive, you must read books. So I agree with you. Plus, depends on the book, it could be very expensive but there is literally Wikipedia where I find really superior to books and it's free. >

Reading engages your brain more, increases your reading skills and vocabulary, and exposes you to new ideas.
Television and video games don’t increase skills that help in life.  You just get better at gaming.  If you enjoy gaming, then by all means game away (lord knows I play more than enough video games)!  Same for tv.  Hobbies are important, destressing is important.  But reading helps develop and stretch your brain in ways that are applicable to other aspects of life.
Reading isn’t less “lazy”, because it doesn’t take any more effort really, but I guess I would argue that it is more productive.  You get more out of it. >

Videogames definitely increase skills that translate to life. It is not a passive act like watching TV. >

Please, please stop with that stupid playing video games increases life skills etc. 
Video games is an alternative to real life and a sign of dissatisfaction with real life. I personally love video games but the truth is i most often play them when i get depressed with work/life/family etc as a way to relieve stress. So while video games are a good way to relieve stress/ get entertainment, it's really not much more than that. 
If what you said is true, i would be a social god in real life already based on how many hours i spent playing them. It's about time you wake the hell up like i did bro. >

Hate how Fantasy and Fiction are "lower classes" of reading.
Arguably you can have the same stories with more twists added in these kind of settings. >

I think reading both fictional and non-fiction books fulfill different purposes. The former excels in stimulating your creativity by you imagining these fictional worlds, the latter excels in you trying to ponder complex topics and problems. Both are userul and train your brain, just in different ways. >

Depends on what you read, what games you play and what movies you watch. >

Games can be better for brain development than books. I personally hate movies because I have no interaction with it, but I'm sure they can still cause brain development, too.
By the way i can read really fast and don't suffer from a lack of recall on things I read, but I prefer playing games while listening to audio books because you can perform tasks in games and listen to language at the same time with 0% detriment soooo best of both worlds for me.
Just a random thought popped into my head but you can actually earn money back while playing games, you can become a translator or a tester or something on the production side or you can become a streamer, reviewer or anything on the clients side of things... at a bare minimum you can just sell the cards you get from the game on steam, you literally get them for playing, and some games you can sell skins and stuff for real money too, so it can be very productive to play games nowadays. >

Yeah, i hate how reading is always pushed as an activity or behavior that smart or successful people do or something you need to do to be successful or smart. It's not reading that does it.  In the same way, gaming and movies don't make you lazy or unproductive >

You are mixing up adults and children. 
Reading for children is important to learn, advance and fix spelling, gramma and vocabulary. It is proven to increase the ability to concentrate. 
Reading is encouraged because it has proven beneficial side effects besides fun for the child. >

It also depends what you’re reading. Reading a history book or a physics textbook is different than reading a fiction novel. >

Very dependent on what you’re reading vs. watching, as much as how well you’re engaging with it. This is a pretentious take but reading the After series vs. watching a Coen brothers movie, I’d rather want my kid to be doing the latter. 
That said, reading objectively engages with your cognitive abilities more than watching something, so long-term effect wise it is a less “lazy” form of mental exercise. Reading hunger games and watching hunger games can both be incredibly rewarding for the child’s imagination and world-building, but when we’re talking about “laziness” it’s hard to argue reading can be described as such.
It isn’t even about how much mental energy you need, but what parts of the brain the activity simulates the most that. >

Yeah I definitely should have emphasized that more as "reading" is such an incredibly broad term. 
The Coen brothers take actually illustrates the point I wanted to make perfectly thought. 
On the surface people would argue that reading is always better then watching a movie. But if compare the depth of the two particulars, its a lot less black and white. 
Also Coen Brothers movies are fucking awesome. >

I would argue that you can learn a lot more in general from reading than you can from video games. I read a self help book recently that had changed my life! Can’t say a game has ever impacted me so profoundly. Definitely disagree with this opinion lol >

You mention “escaping from reality”…I don’t think that’s the same thing as being lazy. You work an 8-10 hour day, contribute to society…come home and do whatever you want as far as I’m concerned. Read, play games, dress up as Deadpool and engage in some autoerotic asphyxia, who cares? It’s all about balance. Get your work done, enjoy your “me time”, regardless of activity. >

None of those are lazy and unproductive except for close minded inferior people who can't think about things for a second >

The problem lies when it starts to consume your day to day. I know guys who would play Rust 30 hrs a week for months.. never met someone who read that much. >

Look at neurological research which studies the brain activity of people while they read. This will change your view, at least regarding reading being lazy. >

So in your mind reading is just always more beneficial then any other form of media no matter what because... paper? >

because language and words, not because paper. >

How can thought do even be become more than?
- philosoraptor >

It's not. Reading is much more mentally stimulating and beneficial as you are turning printed language into visual landscapes, and experiencing it in your own unique way. 
I don't feel even remotely the same after reading a book compared to watching a show. I sleep better after the book, my mind feels more more engaged and in tune with the world around me, even my emotions are a bit more grounded. >

all 3 are entertainment really, they can be as productive or inproductive as you want. >

The entire canon of human knowledge, pedagogy, LANGUAGE and peer-to-peer CONSENSUS DRIVEN RESEARCH would literally not exist if not for those who read and digest the work of others. Without reading, there would be no technology beyond wheels and chisels. We would literally still be in the stone-age, without all those people who do the heavy-lifting for society, and READ. EVERY facet of human-society, culture, and economics is underpinned by written works, that had to have been read by millions, for our reality to formulate beyond primal instinct. It's a shame that reading is mostly a thankless task. Our ability to read and share ideas, philosophy, etc via the written-medium is perhaps the most important and binding aspect of the entire human-experience. Don't get me started on history, which we are seemingly doomed to repeat. OP has the dumbest, most thoughtless perspective, from an obvious lack of reading... displaying the insight of an amnesiac gold-fish; yet surrounded by the infrastructure built around him by ideas that started out in research-papers and BOOKS... Anyways, thx OP, for posting the dumbest shit I have read all year! >

This isn't unpopular, it's just wrong. Reading makes your brain work much more than watching tv so it's much more productive and better for you. Reading betters for example your grammar, vocabulary, memory etc. >

I like seeing old pictures of people on the train and everyone is reading a paper. Now, everyone is on their phone. Same scene. >

That's actually pretty much what I was getting at! >

This has been proven wrong >

Before TV and radio kids were chastised for wasting their time reading. >

Agreed, although reading is probably less damaging to you than video games >

Probably because reading doesn't bombard you with dopamine hits and instead you have your brain have to work for it. >

Writing out an argument as to why reading is lazy is maybe the most ironic thing I have seen on this sub. 
Not to mention your argument is based in comparing reading to other practices and pastimes like video games and t.v. which makes it look like you just have a chip on your shoulder about video games. >

I'm realizing now that I've done a piss poor job at articulating my actual agreement. 
The point wasn't that reading and writing are useless skills that aren't necessary. 
It was more its funny that if I'm sitting in a chair reading harry potter, I'm perceived a lot differently from someone sitting in a chair on a PC playing an RPG. Most arguments you could make as to why reading harry potter is more productive usually apply just as easily to the RPG player. 
100% my fault thought for making the argument in a shitty, way to vague way. 
This thread has still been interesting to read through though. >

Just take my upvote. This is so ridiculous >

Yikes. Is the hostility necessary? I hate how toxic this sub is. >

it is for certain cases.
imagine a kid spending 10 years reading books vs playing video games lmao. almost like those damn flat earthers.
I mean if you also think that reading about the holocaust is the same as playing fortnite then never fucking mind. >

I agree reading is such a lowkey boomer thing to do. I don’t think anyone even reads anymore bruh. Video games are for the intellectuals. >

Also, audio books. >

If reading wasn't such an important skill, we wouldn't spend so much time teaching it in school. Students are not asked to read outside of school for shits and gigs. >

I love reading and watching videos, reading I do for pleasure, but actively, and watching videos I usually do somewhat lazily, so yeah, I should also probably mention that I actively read fanfiction, and search for new fics regularly. >

The main thing to understand is that people associate reading a book with school or for other educational purposes. But watching TV with just having fun. The important difference to take note of is what is being consumed while performing these tasks. You can watch cartoons but read school/educational books or you can watch educational shows/videos and read comics at the same time. So I think both can be as useful in learning new things. >

None of those 3 activities are lazy or unproductive. >

Your comment from r/unpopularopinion has been removed because of: 'Rule 4: Be civil'. >

I always forget that being highly focused is the epitome of laziness. >

Maybe in your mind, but not scientifically. Reading is actually an active activity while watching is a passive one. >

Reading requires imagination and the effort to get better at it, especially for kids. Beyond that, the skill of reading quickly and comprehensively, especially with a large novel that requires you remembering plot lines, characters and past events, is invaluable academically and in life. The dumbest people I've met are pretty much always people who never read. The kids who struggle the most in school are the ones who never read as children, and thus struggle to take in information from textbooks as well or as quickly as kids who can read properly.
Getting a kid to read consistently and read well between the ages of like 8 and 13 is probably one of the biggest advantages you can give them for the rest of life >

Nope. Reading changes how you view the world, increases language skills, increases concentration, improves the way you express yourself. As relational beings (as all mammals) being able to communicate is one of the most important aspects for a happy and successful life. Gaming/movies does this to a much much lower extent (I still game a lot though lol) >

1922 parents: Theodore, you have to develop new interests, my son...all you do is sit around and read those silly fantasy books of yours
2022 parents: Maddox, you gotta lay off those dumb pc games and go get some bitches or sum idk >

well everything can be done unproductively, but if we compare watching some fiction movie vs reading some fiction book, than we have clear winner here in terms of learning things, and that is reading. When you read, you need to transform knowledge of written into the images, so you use your imagination, asociation and memmory. When you watch a movie, you use those too, but much less. Also you are learning vocabulary and how to speak and articulate your oppinions better with reading, because you have direct connection with words, and you need them read them first, and then asociate meaning to them. >

I've seen some really dumb unpopular opinions on this sub, but this one is so over the top that the OP is just trolling. >

In reading, your cognition is focussed on a single subject for long periods of time. Research has shown that it helps cultivate empathy, attention, creativity, and problem solving skills. 
Reading also requires an active interpretation of language, structure, grammar, and more.. You're applying what you're reading in your head, which essentially means keeping your imagination active.. and engaging in abstract reasoning >

If you’re reading crime thrillers or romance novels then yes.
But if you’re reading non-fiction and classic fiction (Dostoevsky for example) then you’re completely wrong.
Who is more likely to succeed in life, the person who spends his time playing video games or the person who spends his time reading things which help him learn?
After finishing a video game, you have nothing but a false sense of achievement.
After finishing a book you have knowledge which can be turned into wisdom if applied.