A Reflection on the Debate Between Paper Books and Screen Reading : Focusing on the History of Letters and Reading

This study examines the history of letters and reading to highlight that reading proficiency is more critical than the medium through which reading occurs. While some argue that paper books are superior to screens in terms of reading ability and effectiveness, such claims are supported only by limited and partial evidence. Instead, the perceived superiority of paper book reading might be a myth shaped by the authenticity traditionally associated with it. An exploration of the history of letters and reading reveals that letters systems have evolved toward greater abstraction and efficiency. From pictographs to ideograms and phonograms, letters systems have developed to enable easier and more abundant information production. Similarly, reading practices have evolved toward increased portability and replicability. the history of letters and reading demonstrates a consistent trend toward the more efficient production and utilization of information and knowledge. The advent of digital media and screen reading is merely a continuation of this historical trajectory. Consequently, paper books and screen reading should not be viewed as opposing forms of reading but as complementary modes suited to different contexts and purposes. The debate over the superiority of paper books versus screen reading has become increasingly irrelevant; instead, the focus should shift to cultivating diverse reading skills and attitudes that align with varying situations and objectives.