"If you only read the books that everyone else is reading, you can only think what everyone else is thinking."(1) is a famous quote by Haruki Murakami that I have heard recently repeated. I wanted to ponder on this quote due its massive popularity. It presents two hypotheses: the first is the relationship between reading and thinking, and the second is distinction. This is what I seek to discuss next. Dear reader, before presenting these two hypotheses, we should first reach a preliminary agreement on the definition of thinking. According to Lisan al-Arab, thinking is the act of reasoning about something. In Al-Muʿjam Al-Wasīṭ, the following expressions were stated: "فَكَر في الأمر فَكراً: أعمل العقلَ فيه، ورتب بعض ما يعلم؛ ليصل به إلى مجهول (2) (Think well: use your brain and expand your knowledge to understand the unknown). This means acquiring a certain level of experience sufficient to reach a specific goal, such as understanding, deciding, planning, solving problems, or judging. From a scientific point of view, thinking is defined as the sum of mental movements and cognitive processes that the mind performs to shift between the known and the unknown and between the tangible and the intangible.
The above quote assumes that if you read the same books that everyone reads, you would (a) think just like them, and (b) discuss the same topics, suggest the same solutions, and ask the same questions. This deduction shows a clear and hasty generalization that entails judging someone or something, as defined by Yussef Bouhayek, then applying this judgement to a larger group without checking first if the same conditions apply, since this group's members might share different characteristics that are not necessarily related to the first judgment (3). The quote suggests that reading and thinking share a linear relationship, which means that point A will certainly lead to point B. This relationship reveals the error in the quote, because the latter clearly neglects the interactive role of the reader with the text. Humans are interactive in their nature. They interact with one another as they do with their environment and surroundings. This interaction and communication entail a relationship between the reader and the text, which means that the reader interacts with the text as much as the latter interacts with the reader and the resulting ideas are only generated by this interaction. Our interaction varies according to our previous points of view and opinions on the subject, which are shaped by our thoughts, experiences, and outlook on life. Dear reader, have you ever read a book for the second time and acquired a deeper understanding? Did you ponder on an idea that did not cross your mind the first time or understood it differently later on? If this happens at the personal level, imagine what it would be like for groups and communities.
This quote implies that we should seek distinction. It suggests that people's thoughts are general useless knowledge. The obvious question is: Are we really special? What makes us special? We cannot answer these questions without understanding ourselves. Philosophy believes that the highest goal in philosophical research is self-knowledge. Socrates defined man as “the species that gives a rational answer if asked a rational question. The answer is affected by a man's knowledge and background."
We are more similar than we think. Biologically, we are 99% alike, we have the same needs, we gradually move forward, and have the same rights. Alain de Botton says in his book "Status Anxiety", "We set our standards by comparing our status to that of a reference group." Therefore, we need a group of people to define who we are and what makes us special.
However, desperately searching for distinction is a manifestation of an inferiority complex. "According to psychology, experts believe that feeling inadequate is normal and may even be healthy in some cases, when it becomes an incentive and motivation for self-development and the desire to be unique. However, this feeling becomes pathological when the affected person becomes anxious, tense, or aggressive and would do anything to be noticed, even if it means losing his/her values through illegal and immoral approaches."
At the end of this article, I would like to conclude by saying that reading books in one field may limit the reader's access to other fields. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude the interactive role of the reader with topics and events, even if by a small percentage. This negates, dismisses, and disapproves the rule. Dear reader, it may seem as if my reasoning contradicts itself. In reality, this is a simple example that reveals the comprehensiveness and complementary of things, even when they seem separate or opposing.
In this article, I actively attempted to present a different point of view, use my reasoning that Allah Almighty bestowed upon us, and reduce the impact of illogical prevalent quotes. When we face thoughts that contradict our beliefs or customs, we tend to expand our knowledge because our minds are trying to analyze this new information. The brain tries to process the new and find similarities with the old. Therefore, finding, proving, or refuting arguments can stretch the thinking muscle. Diversity develops the creative side and logical thinking which is based on supporting evidence, arguments, and proofs. It encourages research, discovery, and exploration of new information and viewpoints, which contributes to problem-solving and making sound decisions in innovative and easy ways. Dear reader, as active individuals in society, this is our ultimate goal.
References:
