The author maintains that one need not be literate to achieve success in life. Do you agree with his view?
This is a question from the book published by 'pearsons education',for 8 standard students(literature)...would you please help me with this?
Like so many Manichean questions, this one depends on the broad or narrow definition of the phrase “success in life.” If “success” is defined as getting your soul to heaven, or being a nice person, or sustaining your physical body, or something as abstract as that, then of course literariness in one path but by far not the only one. There are many persons in many cultures whose liveliness does not depend on communication by means of the written word—goatherds, sailors, etc. On the other extreme, simply knowing “literature” (Moby Dick, The Inferno, Shakespeare’s plays and sonnets) is no guarantee at all of “success in life,” however pleasant and thought-provoking it may be to be able to “read” these works. But if the question refers to the ability to communicate and comprehend in the “civilized” world, to transact “business” or to belong to a technological society, then a literacy is essential. If you consider even such Luddite-like communities as the Amish, however, you will see that a minimum of “literacy” does them just fine—they read the Bible, road signs, basic written directions, etc. without ever “missing” the clutter of the modern, noisy, literate world. Academically, the question of whether “literature curricula” can be justifies as leading toward a “successful life”, the question borders on philosophy—does “success” include a sensitivity to the moods and emotions that literature evokes, or is it only measured in wealth and physical possessions?