|Taken at the Center for Civil & Human Rights in Atlanta: One Week Before MLK Day|
In chapter 6, he speaks of a low-information diet. He makes some very valid points, one of which was retention. When most of us read the entire book, or the entire article in a news source versus the headline and some highlights, we can't regurgitate or retain much of anything past the headline and highlights anyway. So why bother? I agree with that to some extent.
In chapter 7, he talks about how he never accepted anything less than an A in college and his technique for doing so. It involved taking whatever paper that had a grade lower than an A to the professor/instructor/grader with hours worth of questions for two purposes.
- To get every last detail about how papers were graded, down to the grader's pet peeves and prejudices.
- To instill a standard that this would happen every time the grader assigned something lower than an A.
Back to the low information diet. I did this for a while, ignoring the news. Letting the news come to me was refreshing. If something was important for me to know, I waited for someone else to tell me.
I noticed that I cannot be a good citizen, nor can I make the contributions that are part of my philosophy without informing myself of the current events. Granted, I use the spirit of his idea, and keep my reading of current events to a bare minimum, but I want to be up to speed. I want to be able to discuss them with people, and not just get the word from them. I want to be the progress I want to see in the world. In order to do that, I need to keep informed.
Contribution to society may not be part of your philosophy, and perhaps this isn't as important to you. If that is the case, a low information diet is just fine for you. Indeed, it is blissful. Ignorance is bliss.
But I despise ignorance. So, a low information diet doesn't work for me.