It is interesting to think about how much we rely on our imagination to create a picture in our mind that helps us to understand and feel the material we are reading. It makes sense that we would be confused if our picture couldn't be created in our minds because of factors like incoherent sentences. Makes an author think about constructing sentences in good flow so that the reader can stay engage and build on their "mental representation" of the reading.

The author really breaks down the concept of reading as interpreting symbols and this adds perspective to the task of reading. Since this process is "automatic" the reader doesn't necessarily think about this when reading.

Interesting to think about reading as unnatural to be read silently. Difficult to define the effects of the idea of reading in your head when we haven't lived in a world where this wasn't normal.

This seems like an intelligent idea at first thought, but when you add the reality that higher social class is much more likely to have higher education and "intellectually demanding" jobs, this idea would promote power to the few in a higher social class and ultimately divide the country as a whole. There must be a way to more adequately judge a person's ability to make an informed vote.

Is it really possible to keep a human mind pure of these distractions? Is the inherent pleasure of naughtiness something that can be avoided?

I agree that many people are annoyed with the ignorance of others opinions within a democracy. This also seems like a view against democracy as a whole, and I feel that conclusion is not something I agree with.