My evidence is only anectdotal, but I read a lot of fiction and that has helped bring about an ability to “read” people, situations, gestures, etc. My wife reads only non-fiction and constantly says that people, and their motivations, are a complete mystery to her. I can’t help thinking that there’s some correlation there. I am far more open-minded on a lot of things because I realize that people are what they are, and all of us, despite many similarities, are different in some ways. My wife seems to think that everybody is like her (or even better), and is constantly amazed (and dismayed) to find out that they’re not.
I never said that I get stuck every couple of sentences. I said that sometimes a passage will make me think or get the imagination going, so I’ll sit back for a second and reflect upon it. Either I misstated it, or you misread it.
I was reading archaeology textbooks. I liked dinosaurs when I was a kid. I don’t remember how much I understood, but I gather it was a decent bit. I’d ask if there was a word that I didn’t understand or a concept that I didn’t grasp. If I had the Internet 28 years ago, I’d probably have looked it up myself.
While I certainly learn things by reading, I learn a lot more by doing. I learn a lot when I work on my car, for example. I value my knowledge gained from “hands-on” work more so than my knowledge gained from reading books.
Sorry, did you miss my post? I mentioned several practical advantages derived from reading, particularly in compared to “reading magazines, reading stuff on the Internet, watching TV, watching movies, playing sports, playing videogames, whatever”. Others have as well. It’s not just that reading is my favourite pass-time-- it’s not, there are others I enjoy more now-- but reading IMO is great for the reasons I mentioned, and I can come up with more if that would help.
Reading is silent and you can do it by yourself, two things that I think are a blessing. If other people are reading, they are not making noise nor seeking to interact with me.
Why yes, I am a curmudgeon. I don’t really care if reading is better for you, if you are reading it is better for me. 
Have you ever read a paper written by a college student who never reads for pleasure? It is painful. Limited vocabulary, no grasp of capitalization or punctuation, constant usage errors like “in a since” or “for all intensive purposes.” I don’t think there’s any way to learn how to use written language effectively other than constant exposure to good, or at least adequate, writing.
I think the advantage in having good reading skills is the depth of knowledge available. If you really want to understand a topic printed material is going to play a role at some point. Even a visual medium like film relies heavily on written criticism and analysis. So learning to read well really opens the door to a richer understanding of most topics. Reading for entertainment is the first step in learning to read anything and take information away from the process. This is possibly the most useful skill I picked up in college.
Here is my own example that involves video games, film, television and writing. In the nineties I really enjoyed the close combat WWII series of video games. I developed an interest in the history of the war. I indulged in the hitler channel and many movies but my knowledge on the topic was still very limited. It wasn’t until I picked up some books like “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” that I really started to get a grip on the big picture. That kind of information just isn’t available on film or video. This was all done in the name of recreation. Now I certainly don’t go this far with every passing fancy but I know I have the skills to do so if I choose. I think someone without reading skills would be limited even if they had the desire to learn more.
This is interesting to me because I am the opposite. I do not have the confidence to tackle a project without studying it first. I recently had a pretty minor plumbing problem and I spent a good day and a half looking up all the details before I picked up any tools. In the end I was probably wasting my time. The actual repair involved all kinds of little problems and changes that my reading hadn’t prepared me for. I did learn a few things from the process of making the repair but it’s not a type of learning that comes easily to me. I would love to be more skilled in this kind of problem solving.
This summarizes what I think. I feel like, when you’re watching TV, you’re basically having information (sometimes misinformation) poured into your brain, whereas when you’re reading, you have to work to get it. Alternatively, it seems like when you read, you’re better able to discern sensible information from incorrect information.
Googling reading vs. tv, I found a few articles on which was better for your brain - TV (includes movies) or reading. Most of the articles I read implied or explicitly stated that reading was better for you because it increased vocabulary, improved general knowledge, was less likely to lead to misinformation and protected cognition from aging.
Here are a few cites:
http://enews.aginginstride.org/pub.48/issue.687/
http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=947
Interestingly, the second implies that some television may not be bad for your brain, but it does alter the way you’re using it and too much could be bad for you because the part of your brain responsible for reasoning and logical thought stops being as active. Alternatively, when you read, apparently that area of your brain is more active.
The information I’ve read also indicates that television seems to be worse for kids than it is for adults because it decreases their attention span, means that kids are more likely to be obese and more aggressive.
Reading is unquestionably better at some things than all of those activities you mentioned (and not nearly so good at others).
To be practical, if you want to go to college you had better be a fast, accurate reader who can quickly absorb large chunks of written information. I don’t think many people acquire that skill late in life. A movie or video game is poor college prep for a liberal arts major.
I don’t think anyone meant that books help people follow the rules of their own native *spoken *language. People obviously do not learn how to speak by reading books, but there are very different standards for everyday speech and professional/academic writing. Reading books can help people become familiar with formal, written language even if they’ve long since mastered vernacular speech. As Fretful Porpentine mentioned, there are reasonably well-educated adults who speak fluently but are terrible writers.
Did you understand that you were unlikely to find much about dinosaurs in an archaeology textbook?
The first one appears to be entirely speculation or assertion without any proof or research.
The second one seems to be based on a study or studies of some sort but i cant seem to find any links to them. And it makes some claims that i find very hard to swallow such as “Researchers have said that watching television is similar to staring at a blank wall for several hours.” That sounds rather over the top to me, and a lot like someone who may have an agenda or prejudice. Though i am, admittedly, overly skeptical of most brain wave/activity studies as i don’t feel we know enough about how the brain works to interpret them as concretely as the studies, or rather the media’s summaries of the studies, generally seem to.
I would think it depends on which specific activity you compare it to as well as what you are reading.
I am quite confidant that most video games i’ve played require far more concentration and thought then most books i’ve read. But like most things you get out of it what you put into it. Someone who is analyzing and questioning every aspect of a game they play but only reads casually absorbing the plot and enjoying the dialogue and then moves on without much examination or speculation is going to be expending much more cognitive energy, assuming i understand what you mean by that, then a person who does the opposite. And both are certainly possible.
And following the plot of many movies or tv shows certainly required more thought and effort than the Christopher Pike books that were the first things i read of my own volition. But that didn’t stop most of the adults in my life from getting all excited that i was reading. Which was doubly odd considering my favourite video games at the time were jrpgs which often contained more reading than a lengthy novella.
Well i’ve never been to college or university but i can’t imagine many, some certainly but not many, people getting out of high school unable to read quickly or accurately enough to manage. Even if they never read as a hobby. There’s enough practise waiting for you throughout your everyday life. From the labels on products to chatting on the internet to whatever textbooks and novels their elementary and high schools have been able to coax them to read up to that point.
I can’t imagine many people get through elementary without learning that. I am, however, used to software that does that for me. 
And reading a lot certainly doesn’t make one a good writer. I’m living proof of that. I’m sure it expands your vocabulary but any communicative hobby will do that.
I think you might be surprised. Reading soup labels and being assigned a Charles Dickens novel to read over an extended period of time ( that you then go buy the cliff notes for because you found it boring ), does not a good college student make. Not usually, anyway. The wailing of freshman and sophmore students in particular in the face of large reading lists of sometimes difficult material seems to me a pretty common refrain. Unless I went to a school full of particularly dense students, anyway ( which is possible - it was just a state school 
).
I’d wager if you aren’t the sort to have read for pleasure pre-college, you’re usually going to find the load somewhat intimidating, depending on your field. I can personally think of an exception to that, but I consider him one that proves the rule ( and when he got the reading bug, he got it full force and did start reading for pleasure ).
What Ivy said, doubled.
I agree that research is always good. But given the choice between reading a novel and accomplishing a physical task (fixing my car, building a device, working on the house, etc.) I will always choose the latter. Because I drive POS vehicles that always need worked on, I haven’t read a novel in decades.
Well, it’s not like you could jump right into reading Proust. Be grateful, in fact, that your adults didn’t turn up their noses at ol’ Pike and insist on you reading Treasure Island when you were 7. (IMO, anyway.) Kids learn to read well through repetition–doing it over and over again with easy, high-interest books that they know are going to do pretty much the same thing as the last one did–and then moving up to something meatier with more complexity. Some people never get out of that early stage, but just about anyone can if they want to. And it’s a stage you have to go through, just like toddling before walking before running. For most people, it takes a while to get good at really reading fluently and well, and reading utter tripe is a step on the way that helps you to get good at it.
Personally, I wouldn’t consider JRPGs to be quite the same thing as sitting down and concentrating on a book for an hour. They’re fine, but it’s not quite the same thing.
Yeah, you’d be surprised then. Sustained, concentrated reading of a complex text–comprehension, understanding of subtext, etc.–it takes practice. Chatting on the net, reading labels and signs (let me just say from experience that very few people actually do read signs, btw), plodding through 10 pages of a textbook–all are absolutely not the same thing. The way you get good at reading a Dickens novel is not to read a lot of Internet message boards; it’s to read a lot of books that are similar to Dickens novels, only shorter and/or easier, and then work your way up as you get older.
Aye, but if you don’t particularly enjoy reading Dickens novels, what’s so great about practicing the skills to do so?
I’m able to gain great enjoyment from, say, JRPGs, in a way which my parents cannot, because I’ve spent many of my formative years honing the various prerequisite skills through practice. But I don’t think my parents’ lives are any worse off for having devoted their time to other pursuits more to their tastes.
That wasn’t the question though. The question was whether any average non-voluntary-reader would be able to manage a college-level reading load. A basic Dickens novel is a pretty good example of a text that would appear in a basic college English course that a lot of students would take (say, David Copperfield–not even Our Mutual Friend or anything hard). A chemistry major might need to read heavy-duty scientific information instead, but while that is a slightly different skill set, it isn’t any easier. Ideally, of course, a student ought to be able to deal with both heavy-duty non-fiction and literature of a reasonable complexity.