>Reading and experience train your model of the world.
This sounds convincing but then an argument against reading fiction follows since fiction trains your model of the world with fake data.
This sounds convincing but then an argument against reading fiction follows since fiction trains your model of the world with fake data.
I would argue that certain types of fiction may actually be beneficiary such as To Kill a Mockingbird or Catcher in the Rye (vs something like 50 Shades of Gray). Those sorts of fictional settings allow the writer to present the experiences and specific feelings/situations to readers. Even though, say Lord of the Rings, isn't exactly relevant to our present day world, the morals and spiritual emotions involved reflect humanity (what makes a human?)
I guess your comment has some parallels in art: why should we draw abstract things when we can recreate what we see? Isn't recreating what we see more important/better art than something that would never end up existing?
While it's not a perfect analogy, I believe reading and looking at the creative arts ultimately benefits your model of the world through bettering your model of humanity.
The scientific method depends on the generation of testable hypotheses.
How do we generate hypotheses?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statisti...