Mar 082008
 

… and too little time to read it.

Much as I’ve only really dipped my toe in the vast blogging pool that exists, I’ve quite enjoyed it. But it has a downside. There’s too much out there to read and I want to read it. To be fair, some of it is utter guff and some of it is very challenging and educational (I hesitate to suggest where this blog might fit). But I simply don’t have the time to dig into each and every interesting article that flits across my feedreader. And then there’s the comments! They’re a major read in themselves.

But I have noticed one interesting thing about the sites I tend to visit (I’ve added a few to my blogroll on the right) – I rarely agree with them. This is, in part, a deliberate strategy. There’s no point in reading stuff that just agrees with you – it’s simply affirming what you already know and you don’t really gain anything. But reading stuff you don’t agree with is much more fun (maybe I’m just a masochist). It challenges you. It forces you to think about what you do believe. It makes you dig deeper. It also, I think, forces you to be discerning. There’s a lot of stuff out on the interweb that is unscholarly, biased, ill-informed, misleading and just downright rubbish. But you can tell a lot about the integrity of a site with the way it engages with its commenters. The poorer sites will simply bash away with the “you’re wrong!” hammer. The better ones will recognise and acknowledge different viewpoints and engage graciously in debate.

Maybe that’s just a long-winded way of saying that if I add new sites to my blogroll, don’t assume I agree with them, but I do ‘endorse’ them (for what that’s worth) as being worth reading.

  5 Responses to “Too much to read…”

  1. I’m like you. Too little time, too much to read. I also try to visit sites that I disagree with. I’ve found that using my mail to gather RSS feeds speeds up the process greatly. It does sometimes mean that I stick to what I know but it also makes the reading more manageable. And I find what you write very educational and thought provoking!

  2. I too wish I had more time. Time to flick through the sites at random or be more specific in my choice of topic depending on my mood at the time. I have managed to find some useful links but I’d agree that it’s not all good. I guess the blogs that actually engage me most are the ones that make me think. Like yours.

    Although I love to write I don’t find blogging easy and, without a focus, it seems like writing for writing’s sake which doesn’t have much appeal. When I do blog I tend to share things that have challenged or inspired me, moved me, made me angry, happy or sad. I’ve yet to decide what my blog is really for and I’ve long since given up trying to work out its purpose. Maybe I should simply let it evolve.

  3. If you want a blog to disagree with, there is always mine – http://resurrectiondebate.blogspot.com/

    You live in Edinburgh. I used to live there. I loved it.

  4. Steven,
    Thanks for stopping by. I shall have a skim through your blog and see what I can find to disagree with 😉
    Actually, on the subject of the resurrection, I’m currently reading N.T. Wright’s ‘Surprised by Hope’ which covers this very subject. Interesting read. I’ll post something on it soon.
    I don’t actually live in Edinburgh, though I used to. I study there.

  5. Don’t build your hopes up on Wright’s arguments being any good.

    He is audacious, but easily refuted.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)