Word Processors: Stupid and Inefficient

Abstract

The word processor is a stupid and grossly inefficient tool for preparing text for communication with others. That is the claim I shall defend below. It will probably strike you as bizarre at first sight. If I am against word processors, what do I propose: that we write in longhand, or use a mechanical typewriter? No. While there are things to be said in favor of these modes of text preparation I take it for granted that most readers of this essay will do most of their writing using a computer, as I do. My claim is that there are much better ways of preparing text, using a computer, than the word processor.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Word extension: A key to early word learning and domain-specificity.Sandra R. Waxman - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1121-1122.
Approaches to word order: reports on text linguistics.Nils Erik Enkvist & Viljo Kohonen (eds.) - 1982 - Åbo: Distribution, Tidningsbokhandeln.
Stupid is as stupid does. [REVIEW]Nicholas Fearn - 2004 - The Philosophers' Magazine 27 (27):58-58.
How fast does a child learn a word?Michael Maratsos - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1111-1112.
On keeping word order straight.Alan Kennedy - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (4):490-491.
The phenomenology of space in writing online.Catherine Adams Max van Manen - 2009 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 41 (1):10-21.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-12-22

Downloads
26 (#577,276)

6 months
1 (#1,459,555)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references