Couldn't one argue that the ability to be quiet and alone is archaic and impractical with advances in technology? And what can make one more empathetic than experiencing others lives fully and truly (through multiple senses, namely vision and hearing) on websites such as youtube? Wasn't written language founded simply for the trade of ideas only because it was the only viable medium (in other words, would people 2000 years ago utilize writing or video and audio if given an option)?

Now we have the technology that can deliver ideas faster and with more comprehension. Watching a movie allows the viewer to digest multiple stimuli that we are biologically hardwired to understand, while literature serves to open up a blueprint that many, quite literally, cannot read or cannot interpret correctly.

As for stretching our brains, I concede that reading causes the imagination to fill in the blanks for the inexplicit communication form that is reading. But, at the same time, debates, talks, and lectures, paired with visual and audio aids, could and do today stretch the analytical and visualization skills of viewers.

What I'm saying is that writing was adopted as the way to transfer ideas because it was the only possibility at the time. Overtime, we have modified the means of production of writing, and of course the grammar, spelling, and more, but the actual process of information transfer, written language, hasn't been overhauled despite its known inefficiencies. Even after twelve years of schooling, many students struggle with communicating through text. If you were studying a language for twelve years and still couldn't communicate clearly, wouldn't you question it and propose a more viable alternative?

/randomrant