In my first reading of Rhys Southan’s “Is Art a Waste of Time?” I was mostly focused on comprehending the information he was presenting to me. I was not very focused on his opinion or what I thought of altruism. My main focus was to learn about what altruism is and ask questions. My second reading helped me better understand the ideas and morals of Effective Altruism. I noticed more contradictions in their logic and in Southan’s writing. For example, at one point in the essay, Southan is telling the reader how the EA doesn’t believe has any use and won’t do any good. “Like Hilton, most of them seemed doubtful that art had much power to alter the world for the better.” This seems to be the main argument throughout the essay. However, there was one altruist that claimed that he “would really love to have some artists” be part of the EA. He wanted them to use their skills to attract more people to the cause. This seems hypocritical to me because they believe that art is not a good use of time but also want to use artists for the benefit of the organization. Overall, I definitely looked at this piece through a more critical lens than the first time I read it.
Decoding the text helped me better understand the text by allowing me to understand words that I didn’t know. I looked up a few words using the Miriam Webster Dictionary and it helped me comprehend what Southan was writing about. Looking up words I didn’t know was the extent to which decoding the text helped me further understand the essay. Despite being more critical of the piece the second time, I got much more out of it.
It makes sense that rereading a dense text empowers you to be more critical, as you are more familiar with the material.
Keep up the good work!