... only if one has something to say. Is this now the case? The estimates will vary widely - depending on whether one considers the scribblings of the reader and the writer as a waste of time or not.
waste of time is when it is read as, but not perceived. Then it's like the leaf that falls from the tree ... the middle of a cascade of other papers - And has the misfortune to be discovered not specific.
If this sheet does not fall now, it would refuse categorically to fall ... so what? Then you might have a kind of revolution of the refusal to propagate under the leaves ... the catastrophic effects would result in the course of time, one can well imagine with a little imagination.
If now the writer or the reader is categorically refuse to read and think about it, then the consequences would be dramatic. A democracy without a thinker is impossible. It is a dictatorship. Free will is not violated ... but he simply does not exist any more.
"I think therefore I am," said a thinker once.
"I read, therefore I am", I say. Who is right? Both. Or not? Or is it? But ...
(This post under the label of lack of sleep, because I indeed just good sleep, it sounds, but like I had for a week a wink wink.)
