Literacy in the Coalition States

[Incriptus]

If other people DO see reasons to believe that... I cannot fathom what those reasons are.

Sadly there are a few instances where the book states things like that way

Like the quote above (Page 100 WB11) "The computer can also "read" for the soldier (85% of all grunts are illiterate). This is done either by reading the letters composing the word (Assuming the character knows the alphabet; 70% don't)

So if one scans through the 1000's of pages of Rifts Text and Stat blocks you can find instances that either spell it out, or use phrases such as complete illiterates or completely illiterate which undermine the vernacular that allows for Illiterates, Complete Illiterates, Functional Illiterates, Partial Literates, ect.

I don't support that particual strain of thinking but they're not insane

[Killer Cyborg]

If other people DO see reasons to believe that... I cannot fathom what those reasons are.

Sadly there are a few instances where the book states things like that way

Like the quote above (Page 100 WB11) "The computer can also "read" for the soldier (85% of all grunts are illiterate). This is done either by reading the letters composing the word (Assuming the character knows the alphabet; 70% don't)

So if one scans through the 1000's of pages of Rifts Text and Stat blocks you can find instances that either spell it out, or use phrases such as complete illiterates or completely illiterate which undermine the vernacular that allows for Illiterates, Complete Illiterates, Functional Illiterates, Partial Literates, ect.

I don't support that particual strain of thinking but they're not insane

What that passage tells us is:
1. That "illiterate" does NOT mean "does not know the alphabet."
2. Many CS Grunts are illiterate, and most of the CS Grunts also do not know the alphabet.

The first actively tells us that illiteracy is now 100%, and the second only tells us that a segment of the population that has been traditionally illiterate throughout human history is still illiterate as a rule.
A lack of the CS teaching their cannon fodder the alphabet doesn't remark on the level of literacy that they are against.

[eliakon]

If other people DO see reasons to believe that... I cannot fathom what those reasons are.

Sadly there are a few instances where the book states things like that way

Like the quote above (Page 100 WB11) "The computer can also "read" for the soldier (85% of all grunts are illiterate). This is done either by reading the letters composing the word (Assuming the character knows the alphabet; 70% don't)

So if one scans through the 1000's of pages of Rifts Text and Stat blocks you can find instances that either spell it out, or use phrases such as complete illiterates or completely illiterate which undermine the vernacular that allows for Illiterates, Complete Illiterates, Functional Illiterates, Partial Literates, ect.

I don't support that particual strain of thinking but they're not insane

They are not insane, but they are taking the farthest extreme (Complete Illiteracy) and saying that some how that 70% of an 85% is not the extreme but the minimum baseline. That the problem here. This argument cherry picks pretty badly. Even the WB11 quote says that 30% of the Illiterate soldiers do know the alphabet. This pretty much conclusively proves that knowing the alphabet well enough to spell words into a computer is NOT literacy. Because they are still described as Illiterate.

[Pepsi Jedi]

so we are back to 30% of the illiterate don't know the alphabet. And have to rely on others.
If I may put this in some Real World Terms here.....
When I was in the military when in Iraq I had to work with troops from other nations. Many times we did not share a language, we did not even always share an ALPHABET. But that didn't stop us from doing stuff. We had picture cards we pantomimed, we used drawings....we made do. We preferred to use translators but that wasn't always an option.
This sounds like what the 70% of the 85% do...they get by and let the others do the heavy lifting (or the computers)....
They have been enslaved by the CS by invisible chains and they don't even realize it.

No.. we're not back to 30% of illiterate. We're at 30% that know their letters.

To quote the book:
"(85% of all grunts are illiterate). This is done either by reading the letters composing the word (assuming the character knows the alphabet; 70% don't) "

So that could be read as a flat 70% don't know their alphabet, (which is how I think it's meant) or the some what confusing 70% of 85%. Either way it's far more tham 30% of total troops.

no we are back to what I said
85% of the grunts are illiterate
Of the illiterate 30% don't even know their letters

That's not how it reads. lol.
85% are illiterate.
70% don't know the alphabet.

That means only 30% 'Does" know the alphabet.

[Pepsi Jedi]

and things like radio don't need numbers technically. if there are only a couple channels you want the grunts using, you just simplify the interface to have just those, and use symbols.
"hey, what channel are we supposed ot be one again?"
"green triangle, like the LT said."
"ah, i had it on red square"

Again, if you turn all words and numbers into symbols, then the society would need "Literacy CS symbol language"

Its not turning all words and numbers into symbols. Its turning a tiny handful of things into symbols. Unless your claiming that everyone in our worlds Western societies has the Literacy: Common Symbols skill because we all understand all the various symbols and signs. And that every peasant and person in the middle ages had Literacy since they knew what the various signs and symbols of their time (like that 3 balls was a pawn shop) meant.
In which case we have just defined away the entire concept of Illiteracy as being not possible......

lol "Most" of the people in westeron society can read. You're tripping over default states. If you replace all words with symbols you've created a new language. Stop signs aren't just octogons in red rimmed in white. They have 'STOP' on them. The other symbols come along with words. Till yes, you learn them as part of your language. Reconizing your home team on the TV by the mascot is one thing. Totally replacing words (Which are just symbols) with other symbols is inventing a new language.

[Pepsi Jedi]

It's kind of ironic, due to this discussion I've spent some time looking into what is considered literacy ... and I think I've found that nobody knows. There seem to be as much disagreement on the definition among academia as there is on these very boards.

I guess it comes down to the game master's interpretation.

A Game Master can interpret the setting in such a way that he thinks that the setting makes sense, or he can interpret the setting in such a way that he thinks the setting does not make sense.
It always boggles me a bit when people deliberately choose the second option, then complain about the result.

In the real world,
-If a person can read their own name, and a handful of other words, they are not considered to be literate.
-If a person can recognize universal symbols (such as traffic signs, restroom signs, disabled parking, and don't-stick-these-scissors-in-the-electric-outlet type warnings), but cannot read a book, then they are not considered to be literate.
-If a person can recognize numbers, but cannot read a book, they are not considered to be literate.

But for some reason, when it comes to Rifts, suddenly people start using the word "Literate" in ways that nobody ever does in the real world. They go with overly-literal views to the extreme where it has been argued in the past that if you can read or write anything, then you're literate--that the moment a person draws their first letter 'A', that they transform from an illiterate into a literate person. OR they go with bizarrely metaphorical views, claiming that the ability to transform any visual icons into meaning is not only a kind of literacy, but that it is a kind of literacy that the writers had in mind when they describe the population as being "illiterate."

For me, I tend to take the words in the books to mean the same things that they mean in the real world, unless I have a specific reason not to.

In the real world, "literacy" means that you can read and write well enough to make it through a book.
The CS doesn't want people reading books.
I don't see any reason to believe that the CS is discouraging any level of literacy other than the kind that would allow a person to read the books that the CS doesn't want them to read.

If other people DO see reasons to believe that... I cannot fathom what those reasons are.

The problem lies, not in the players, but that the book itself lays out the illiteracy as being that ... well. Stupid.

As you point out, being able to sign your name doesn't make you literate. But the writers, I.E. Kevin, has stated numbers. 85% of the grunts are illiterate, and 70% do not even know the alphabet.

It's not the players being over literal, it's the book coming right out and saying 7 out of 10 grunts cannot discern one letter from another. (Even though they're painted all over their tanks and armor and what not)

It's part of why some (Like my self) Think it's so utterly silly. That a society of that nature needs at least 'functional literacy' to even start to function.
Can you get by in mud huts and clay pots with out literacy? Sure. Once you pass middle ages tech, it doesn't work as well. once you get up to laser guns and giant mecha, it's absurd.

[eliakon]

and things like radio don't need numbers technically. if there are only a couple channels you want the grunts using, you just simplify the interface to have just those, and use symbols.
"hey, what channel are we supposed ot be one again?"
"green triangle, like the LT said."
"ah, i had it on red square"

Again, if you turn all words and numbers into symbols, then the society would need "Literacy CS symbol language"

Its not turning all words and numbers into symbols. Its turning a tiny handful of things into symbols. Unless your claiming that everyone in our worlds Western societies has the Literacy: Common Symbols skill because we all understand all the various symbols and signs. And that every peasant and person in the middle ages had Literacy since they knew what the various signs and symbols of their time (like that 3 balls was a pawn shop) meant.
In which case we have just defined away the entire concept of Illiteracy as being not possible......

lol "Most" of the people in westeron society can read. You're tripping over default states. If you replace all words with symbols you've created a new language. Stop signs aren't just octogons in red rimmed in white. They have 'STOP' on them. The other symbols come along with words. Till yes, you learn them as part of your language. Reconizing your home team on the TV by the mascot is one thing. Totally replacing words (Which are just symbols) with other symbols is inventing a new language.

That's the point of these symbols though.....they work regardless of if you can read or not.
I can play that iPod no matter if its English or French or Arabic....because the symbols are the same. That stop sign is a red octagon meaning stop which even my kids knew when they were still working on ABCs.
And we are NOT talking about "totally replacing words with other symbols" we are talking about "a small number of commonly used things have symbols labeling them so that you can tell what they are with out having to read words" Stuff exactly like "Red octagon means stop" and "Blue square with a man or a woman by a door means restrooms" or even
"Okay privates this is your field radio. See these little buttons? There are seven pre-set frequencies that you can use. Green, Blue, Black, Orange, Red, Yellow, and Brown. Your officers will pick if they are Green, Blue, or Yellow. Red is always the channel for theater medical evacuation and fire support. Black will be your divisional level command nets. Brown is what you will use for communicating with civilian forces. Do you maggots understand me?"

[glitterboy2098]

bingo. this is one of the reasons there are internationally standardized hazard signs using purely graphical symbols.

even people who can't read will understand that a yellow triangle with a picture of a droplet falling on a hand with a chunk cut out of it means to be careful, something inside could hurt you.

or that one with a bunch of nasty looking spikes on it means "stay away, dangerous"

[mercedogre]

how many illiterate people do we have now a days? everyone dependent on spell checker and you-tube instruction vids to do anything, things only going to get worse

[Killer Cyborg]

so we are back to 30% of the illiterate don't know the alphabet. And have to rely on others.
If I may put this in some Real World Terms here.....
When I was in the military when in Iraq I had to work with troops from other nations. Many times we did not share a language, we did not even always share an ALPHABET. But that didn't stop us from doing stuff. We had picture cards we pantomimed, we used drawings....we made do. We preferred to use translators but that wasn't always an option.
This sounds like what the 70% of the 85% do...they get by and let the others do the heavy lifting (or the computers)....
They have been enslaved by the CS by invisible chains and they don't even realize it.

No.. we're not back to 30% of illiterate. We're at 30% that know their letters.

To quote the book:
"(85% of all grunts are illiterate). This is done either by reading the letters composing the word (assuming the character knows the alphabet; 70% don't) "

So that could be read as a flat 70% don't know their alphabet, (which is how I think it's meant) or the some what confusing 70% of 85%. Either way it's far more tham 30% of total troops.

no we are back to what I said
85% of the grunts are illiterate
Of the illiterate 30% don't even know their letters

That's not how it reads. lol.
85% are illiterate.
70% don't know the alphabet.

That means only 30% 'Does" know the alphabet.

Going with that, that means that 15% are illiterate, but DO know the alphabet.
Which shows that a person can know the alphabet without being literate.
Which shows that "literate" seems to means the same thing in Rifts as in the real world--it means full literacy.

[Killer Cyborg]

and things like radio don't need numbers technically. if there are only a couple channels you want the grunts using, you just simplify the interface to have just those, and use symbols.
"hey, what channel are we supposed ot be one again?"
"green triangle, like the LT said."
"ah, i had it on red square"

Again, if you turn all words and numbers into symbols, then the society would need "Literacy CS symbol language"

Its not turning all words and numbers into symbols. Its turning a tiny handful of things into symbols. Unless your claiming that everyone in our worlds Western societies has the Literacy: Common Symbols skill because we all understand all the various symbols and signs. And that every peasant and person in the middle ages had Literacy since they knew what the various signs and symbols of their time (like that 3 balls was a pawn shop) meant.
In which case we have just defined away the entire concept of Illiteracy as being not possible......

lol "Most" of the people in westeron society can read. You're tripping over default states. If you replace all words with symbols you've created a new language. Stop signs aren't just octogons in red rimmed in white. They have 'STOP' on them. The other symbols come along with words. Till yes, you learn them as part of your language. Reconizing your home team on the TV by the mascot is one thing. Totally replacing words (Which are just symbols) with other symbols is inventing a new language.

By that logic, somebody in today's world that could recognize the meaning of road signs--but who could NOT read the words on the signs--would be literate.

But they're not literate, because that's not what the word means.

[Killer Cyborg]

And Pepsi, if you think that literacy is necessary for firing a gun or for piloting a vehicle, you're just plain wrong... To the point that I literally have NO idea how you could even come to that conclusion.

[Chronicler]

I would imagine that the CS isn't really pure illiterate, more like a functional illiterate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy

Plus again symbolism other than the alphabet that we know of today could be used by the CS. In essence it is their own unique written language (or in this case drawn/designed). Given a basic symbol system to operate tech can grant a user to use other forms of communication and archiving by using video recorders, voice recorders, and possibly text to speech when higher ups that can read and write relay commands.

Ether that or just throw out the whole illiteracy thing and just have it so information is really tight and restricted from the populace.

[Pepsi Jedi]

so we are back to 30% of the illiterate don't know the alphabet. And have to rely on others.
If I may put this in some Real World Terms here.....
When I was in the military when in Iraq I had to work with troops from other nations. Many times we did not share a language, we did not even always share an ALPHABET. But that didn't stop us from doing stuff. We had picture cards we pantomimed, we used drawings....we made do. We preferred to use translators but that wasn't always an option.
This sounds like what the 70% of the 85% do...they get by and let the others do the heavy lifting (or the computers)....
They have been enslaved by the CS by invisible chains and they don't even realize it.

No.. we're not back to 30% of illiterate. We're at 30% that know their letters.

To quote the book:
"(85% of all grunts are illiterate). This is done either by reading the letters composing the word (assuming the character knows the alphabet; 70% don't) "

So that could be read as a flat 70% don't know their alphabet, (which is how I think it's meant) or the some what confusing 70% of 85%. Either way it's far more tham 30% of total troops.

no we are back to what I said
85% of the grunts are illiterate
Of the illiterate 30% don't even know their letters

That's not how it reads. lol.
85% are illiterate.
70% don't know the alphabet.

That means only 30% 'Does" know the alphabet.

Going with that, that means that 15% are illiterate, but DO know the alphabet.
Which shows that a person can know the alphabet without being literate.
Which shows that "literate" seems to means the same thing in Rifts as in the real world--it means full literacy.

It means that 70% still don't know the alphabet. You have to read the entire section. 85% are illiterate. 70% can't even tell an A from a Q.

That doesn't change the 70% number that don't know the alphabet that kevin has stipulated. It just means that 15% that can't read might recognize letters. It doesn't mean that they can suddenly read.

[Pepsi Jedi]

and things like radio don't need numbers technically. if there are only a couple channels you want the grunts using, you just simplify the interface to have just those, and use symbols.
"hey, what channel are we supposed ot be one again?"
"green triangle, like the LT said."
"ah, i had it on red square"

Again, if you turn all words and numbers into symbols, then the society would need "Literacy CS symbol language"

Its not turning all words and numbers into symbols. Its turning a tiny handful of things into symbols. Unless your claiming that everyone in our worlds Western societies has the Literacy: Common Symbols skill because we all understand all the various symbols and signs. And that every peasant and person in the middle ages had Literacy since they knew what the various signs and symbols of their time (like that 3 balls was a pawn shop) meant.
In which case we have just defined away the entire concept of Illiteracy as being not possible......

lol "Most" of the people in westeron society can read. You're tripping over default states. If you replace all words with symbols you've created a new language. Stop signs aren't just octogons in red rimmed in white. They have 'STOP' on them. The other symbols come along with words. Till yes, you learn them as part of your language. Reconizing your home team on the TV by the mascot is one thing. Totally replacing words (Which are just symbols) with other symbols is inventing a new language.

By that logic, somebody in today's world that could recognize the meaning of road signs--but who could NOT read the words on the signs--would be literate.

But they're not literate, because that's not what the word means.

No, because there's only a small number of road signs that can be understood by shape. (And they have the words on them anyway). What are there? 10 20 at most? If that.

You're talking about replacing an entire society's reading with symbols. Words are nothing but symbols (Letters) in different orders to mean different things. Replacing words with symbols on a society wide system is creating a new language.

We're not talking about a red octagon meaning stop and a yellow triangle meaning hazard. We're not talking about 10 or 20 symbols. You're talking about trying to have a society that produces laser rifles and hover tanks, function on an entire language of symbols because they can't read. That's just another language. It's silly.

[guardiandashi]

I always felt that it was more like this

That's not how it reads. lol.
85% are illiterate.
70% don't know the alphabet.

That means only 30% 'Does" know the alphabet.

85% are illiterate
either 70% of the total are both illiterate AND don't know the alphabet.

or if its 70% of the 85% then it turns out that 59.5% are both illiterate, and don't know the alphabet which is still effectively 60%

[Pepsi Jedi]

And Pepsi, if you think that literacy is necessary for firing a gun or for piloting a vehicle, you're just plain wrong... To the point that I literally have NO idea how you could even come to that conclusion.

Firing a gun or piloting a vehicle? Depends on the vehicle, but no. Not to 'fire' a gun.

To build a gun. To design a gun. Yes. To modify and often maintain a gun. yes. People are so used to reading they don't understand how often we use it and how much you need it once you pass a certain level of society.

It's not that you need to read to know how to pull a trigger, KC. It's that you wouldn't have a trigger or a gun at all with out the ability to read, to have conceptualized and built the thing to start with.

Does every gun buyer need to know how? no. of course not., Still the society does on a macro level. You can't have the divide that are fictionally represented in Rifts. You can't have 15% of people doing all the things that require reading and 85% that dont'. You can't run a modern farm with out being able to read. Could a guy get out with a ox and a plow with out it? sure, but not modern farms. Surely not the ones in the CS with genetically engineered cows and modern machinery.

In part it's a bit... cute that people are so used to reading that they can't honestly comprehend that it's like not to be able to read. It's not exactly a 'failing', but it's interesting to see that, due to being able to read, they don't comprehend what it's like not to be able to. How severly limiting it is. They've just been reading pretty much as long as they can remember. They start in kindergarden and few people have 'many' firm memories before kindergarden. They have glimpses. Maybe a pet, or something of that nature but very little is firmly remembered before that general age. So in their minds they've always been reading at least in part, so they can't remember what it's like not to.

Can humans exist with out reading? Sure. People did it for 1000s of years.

Can a society build laser rifles, hovor tanks, flying power armor, and nuclear power plants the size of hockey pucks with out reading? lol No.

[Pepsi Jedi]

I would imagine that the CS isn't really pure illiterate, more like a functional illiterate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy

Plus again symbolism other than the alphabet that we know of today could be used by the CS. In essence it is their own unique written language (or in this case drawn/designed). Given a basic symbol system to operate tech can grant a user to use other forms of communication and archiving by using video recorders, voice recorders, and possibly text to speech when higher ups that can read and write relay commands.

Ether that or just throw out the whole illiteracy thing and just have it so information is really tight and restricted from the populace.

Yep. Pretty much.

[Chronicler]

I would imagine that the CS isn't really pure illiterate, more like a functional illiterate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy

Plus again symbolism other than the alphabet that we know of today could be used by the CS. In essence it is their own unique written language (or in this case drawn/designed). Given a basic symbol system to operate tech can grant a user to use other forms of communication and archiving by using video recorders, voice recorders, and possibly text to speech when higher ups that can read and write relay commands.

Ether that or just throw out the whole illiteracy thing and just have it so information is really tight and restricted from the populace.

Yep. Pretty much.

Though thinking about it more it is impressive that the CS exists as is even with functional illiteracy. If going by the 85% "illiteracy" of the population you still have 15% that do, and I imagine the "noble" class to be just 1% (not going political with that statement). So 14% is left which could be made up of both High ranked personnel and scientists, thus them gaining new designs for weapons and other things.

This also makes me question how much the CS's scientific community is devoted to blowing sh*t up? What about other essential things? But that's getting off topic.

[eliakon]

Again, if you turn all words and numbers into symbols, then the society would need "Literacy CS symbol language"

Its not turning all words and numbers into symbols. Its turning a tiny handful of things into symbols. Unless your claiming that everyone in our worlds Western societies has the Literacy: Common Symbols skill because we all understand all the various symbols and signs. And that every peasant and person in the middle ages had Literacy since they knew what the various signs and symbols of their time (like that 3 balls was a pawn shop) meant.
In which case we have just defined away the entire concept of Illiteracy as being not possible......

lol "Most" of the people in westeron society can read. You're tripping over default states. If you replace all words with symbols you've created a new language. Stop signs aren't just octogons in red rimmed in white. They have 'STOP' on them. The other symbols come along with words. Till yes, you learn them as part of your language. Reconizing your home team on the TV by the mascot is one thing. Totally replacing words (Which are just symbols) with other symbols is inventing a new language.

By that logic, somebody in today's world that could recognize the meaning of road signs--but who could NOT read the words on the signs--would be literate.

But they're not literate, because that's not what the word means.

No, because there's only a small number of road signs that can be understood by shape. (And they have the words on them anyway). What are there? 10 20 at most? If that.

You're talking about replacing an entire society's reading with symbols. Words are nothing but symbols (Letters) in different orders to mean different things. Replacing words with symbols on a society wide system is creating a new language.

We're not talking about a red octagon meaning stop and a yellow triangle meaning hazard. We're not talking about 10 or 20 symbols. You're talking about trying to have a society that produces laser rifles and hover tanks, function on an entire language of symbols because they can't read. That's just another language. It's silly.

SO WHAT?
The 'produces laser rifes and hover tanks' is a strawman....because the people that produce those laser rifles and hover tanks CAN READ BY THE BOOK. So that's not relivent.
What is relevant is if the bottom tier CONSUMERS can get by just using handful of basic symbols and pictures (not 'replacing an entire societies reading with symbols' but a small set of a couple dozen symbols that does what is needed.
THAT is possible. There is quite literally NOTHING about using a laser rifle that requires you to be able to read. MAKE it sure, but that's the educated techs job.
There is no reason to need to read to fly a suit of power armor either if that suit computer is able to talk to you and tell you every thing you need. You might need to learn a couple job specific symbols for it.....but guess what that "Pilot Robots and Power Armor skill" is for......
Your trying to make our claim (that there are a small number of symbols) a straw man (that the entire languages has been replaced by some imaginary mythical pictorial language) and then when you can destroy that (which is easy since that idea is silly) you are pretending that you have dealt with the actual issue....that societies can function with out reading. I would like to point out that many of the combat troops of groups like the Taliban, or ISIS can not read.....but that does not seem to stop them from fighting effectively. Myself and others have pointed out that small children can use things like iPods or Video Games with out being able to read.....all because they can combine rote memory with a basic grasp of symbols and representational pictures to 'get by' with out knowing anything about the actual language.

[SummerRider]

I've been reading this thread and I'll offer this into the mix. It got long, sorry.

I think one of the main arguments that is going back and fourth seems to be that a "high tech" society can't get by with the majority of people not being able to read. Vs the theme of (those who can read are the ones in power). I would argue that yes that can happen. Instead of going "people have gotten by for 1000 of years without being able to read just fine" argument. Let's just look at our society today. (granted this will be flavored by the American viewpoint).

Looking at two aspects of our society (immigrant workers, and the automobile). (If you don't like the thought of 'immigrant workers' lets use 'tourists' in their place.) In either case assume you have a group of people that can't READ the predominate language of the nation that they are in. They can still get by in most aspects of the nation. Granted most likely they are following the direction of someone who is their 'translator'/'tourist guide'. I would argue in the case of the 'immigrant worker' that you could train them to do most 'blue collar' jobs. You just have to teach them by hand/direct experience how to do the job. You can even have them 'helping' someone in the technical world do a job.

--Real life experience I have personally witnessed.
I had an 'issue with my furnace', so I called the repair guy. He arrived with a 'immigrant worker' that for all my observations, I would say could not read English. He could speak it just fine. The boss had the knowledge of what to do and how to fix it, the worker was the one who did the work. The 'boss' had injured his shoulder and couldn't use his arm, hence why he had a 'worker' with him. The boss told the worker what to do and the worker did what he was told. The worker didn't have to read anything, and yet together they were able to repair the furnace.
-- end of Real life experiance.

The 2nd aspect I would look at would be our automobiles, although my furnace example can also apply. I would say that todays automobiles are at a tech level that was produced by people that are literate. Now even given the fact that the vast majority of our society is literate, I would argue that most of us do not have the technical knowledge to repair our vehicles. We can perform maintenance on them, but we still rely on 'mechanics' to fix them. Granted it means you can easily be tricked into paying to have your 'blinker fluid' replaced b/c you don't know any better.

So using those two aspects we can extrapolate them onto the CS 'illiterate' citizens. The 'bosses' or the 'mechanics' are the ones that do have the ability to read. They are the one that are building the laser rifles, hover tanks, flying power armor, and nuclear power plants, or even nuclear batteries. The rest of the people just use them, and don't actually have the ability to read. The worker doesn't need to know that the warning light says 'low battery'. They just need to know that when the light flashes, they go get a battery out of their supply and replace the one in the device that they are using. Hopefully the designers were smart and made it so that the battery only fits in one way.

Going back to the tourist example. I don't need to be able to read the signs to be able to find a hotel or a place to eat. One can make guesses based on the shapes of the building, or just by asking people where things are.

I would imagine that the CS probably has some form of 'siri' that is the personal computer. (Siri, where is the food court located?) (Siri, can you schedule an appointment with the doc?).

Another example I would use would be modern computer games. The 'smart' designers are the ones that make the UI without the need to actually read anything. For one it then saves on translation into other languages. The UI is made up of symbols that are easy to interpret what they mean. I think someone in this thread mentioned how their 3 year old child is able to navigate and play games on their smart phone, and they can't read.

Going to our modern society and driving. You can easily drive, without being able to read. You could even do it, if you can't read numbers. Your 'boss'/'trainer' would just need to coach you when you are learning. Train you where to put the key, how to turn on the vehicle. Teach you that to move forward you go 'three down' on the movement selector. To go in reverse you go 'one down'. Whenever you are done moving or are going to switch from forward to reverse you put the movement selector back into the top position. To teach people how fast to go, you just train them to match the speed of those around you. Or you put a mark/sticker on the needle that moves as you go faster to a position, and go, keep the needle in this area most of the time. If you have any issues or questions, just press the 'help' button and call roadside assistance will speak to you and tell you what to do. I think this would be how the CS military works. Most of the solders don't need to be able to read. They are trained in procedures and coached how to do the basic stuff.

So I don't think it's that hard to picture a society where most of the people are not able to read. I think our current 'today' society could still function for the most part. Especially for those people who do not work in the technical field. The real question is really how long would it (one generation or two) for most of the people to go from being able to read to most of the people going to not being able to read. Especially if everything is provided for you. I think there is a decent example of this in RUE towards the front where the section is titled "Erin Tam, friend or enemy". In it the CS are at a town meeting where the town people are petitioning to join the CS. There is one town member who can read and is saying it's important, and you have the CS officials, going, we will tell you what you need to know. We will keep you safe, don't you want to be safe. And the majority of the townsfold agreed and voted to join the CS.

[Killer Cyborg]

I would imagine that the CS isn't really pure illiterate, more like a functional illiterate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy

Plus again symbolism other than the alphabet that we know of today could be used by the CS. In essence it is their own unique written language (or in this case drawn/designed). Given a basic symbol system to operate tech can grant a user to use other forms of communication and archiving by using video recorders, voice recorders, and possibly text to speech when higher ups that can read and write relay commands.

Ether that or just throw out the whole illiteracy thing and just have it so information is really tight and restricted from the populace.

Yep. Pretty much.

Though thinking about it more it is impressive that the CS exists as is even with functional illiteracy. If going by the 85% "illiteracy" of the population you still have 15% that do, and I imagine the "noble" class to be just 1% (not going political with that statement). So 14% is left which could be made up of both High ranked personnel and scientists, thus them gaining new designs for weapons and other things.

This also makes me question how much the CS's scientific community is devoted to blowing sh*t up? What about other essential things? But that's getting off topic.

"85% of the population" isn't illiterate.
"85% of CS Grunts" are illiterate.

[Killer Cyborg]

Going with that, that means that 15% are illiterate, but DO know the alphabet.
Which shows that a person can know the alphabet without being literate.
Which shows that "literate" seems to means the same thing in Rifts as in the real world--it means full literacy.

It means that 70% still don't know the alphabet. You have to read the entire section. 85% are illiterate. 70% can't even tell an A from a Q.

Which means that 15% DO know the alphabet, but are still considered illiterate.
Which means that you can know the alphabet and still be illiterate
Which I just said.

That doesn't change the 70% number that don't know the alphabet that kevin has stipulated. It just means that 15% that can't read might recognize letters. It doesn't mean that they can suddenly read.

It doesn't mean that they CANNOT read a limited number of words.
Again, in the really-real world, a person who can read a dozen or two dozen words is not considered to be literate.
There is no reason to believe that the game world is any different.

[Killer Cyborg]

By that logic, somebody in today's world that could recognize the meaning of road signs--but who could NOT read the words on the signs--would be literate.

But they're not literate, because that's not what the word means.

No, because there's only a small number of road signs that can be understood by shape. (And they have the words on them anyway). What are there? 10 20 at most? If that.

More than 500.
http://www.usa-traffic-signs.com/Test_s/50.htm

You're talking about replacing an entire society's reading with symbols.

Incorrect.
I'm talking about replacing nonessential reading with symbols.
As has already been pointed out, there are lots of literates in CS society.
Did you miss that fact, or are you ignoring it for some reason?

Words are nothing but symbols (Letters) in different orders to mean different things. Replacing words with symbols on a society wide system is creating a new language.

I get the logic; it's just wrong.
Understanding symbols is not the same as literacy.
See previous example with road signs.

[Incriptus]

Now to muddy stuff up a bit more ... what does "knowing the alphabet mean"

Soldier 1: "Commander, I've never seen this letter before, what is it"
Commander: "It's a 'Q' soldier, it doesn't come up very often"
Soldier 2: "That can't be right I've seen a 'Q' before, it looks like this 'Q' not like this 'q'"
Commander: "This is why reading is an obsolete communication method used by our enemies to deceive and plant seditious ideas"
Soldier 3: "I found another paper, this one is encrypted in some way"
Commander: "Cursive writting, most insideous, it should be returned to base for further examination"
Soldier 1: "I've seen people read that cursed writing and have it blow up in their face, fools and their writing"

Lets say Soldier 1 recognizes "A" "B" "C" "D", but sometimes gets confused with his "J" "Q" "X" & "Z" ... does he "know the alphabet"

[Killer Cyborg]

Now to muddy stuff up a bit more ... what does "knowing the alphabet mean"

Soldier 1: "Commander, I've never seen this letter before, what is it"
Commander: "It's a 'Q' soldier, it doesn't come up very often"
Soldier 2: "That can't be right I've seen a 'Q' before, it looks like this 'Q' not like this 'q'"
Commander: "This is why reading is an obsolete communication method used by our enemies to deceive and plant seditious ideas"
Soldier 3: "I found another paper, this one is encrypted in some way"
Commander: "Cursive writting, most insideous, it should be returned to base for further examination"
Soldier 1: "I've seen people read that cursed writing and have it blow up in their face, fools and their writing"

Lets say Soldier 1 recognizes "A" "B" "C" "D", but sometimes gets confused with his "J" "Q" "X" & "Z" ... does he "know the alphabet"

Indeed.
And if a person knows some of the letters, but not all of them, and he recognizes some words, but not all of them, then he would be an illiterate who doesn't know the alphabet... But that doesn't necessarily mean that he couldn't identify a Men's room sign if he needed one.

(Although it might get messy if he made a mistake in that one)

[Rallan]

how many illiterate people do we have now a days? everyone dependent on spell checker and you-tube instruction vids to do anything, things only going to get worse

I'd disagree there. The internet is an overwhelmingly text-based medium, and people born in the last twenty or thirty years are part of the first generation that grew up writing and reading and interacting through text all day long, even if they're not the sort of people who'd otherwise read or write as a hobby.Sure a lot of them use spellchecker as a crutch, but the millennials and the kids in whatever the hell the next generation's called are probably the most functionally literate generations in human history.

[Killer Cyborg]

how many illiterate people do we have now a days? everyone dependent on spell checker and you-tube instruction vids to do anything, things only going to get worse

I'd disagree there. The internet is an overwhelmingly text-based medium, and people born in the last twenty or thirty years are part of the first generation that grew up writing and reading and interacting through text all day long, even if they're not the sort of people who'd otherwise read or write as a hobby.Sure a lot of them use spellchecker as a crutch, but the millennials and the kids in whatever the hell the next generation's called are probably the most functionally literate generations in human history.

Agree on that point. Even with poor grammar, the sheer mass of it makes up for it.
(And if enough people use the same bad grammar, it becomes the new good grammar anyway)

BUT even right now, 14% of the US population are illiterate.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/0 ... 80355.html

In a post-apocalyptic futuristic world with less tweeting and such, in a society deliberately fostering illiteracy, I can easily see the numbers being much, much higher, more in the CS's range.

[Chronicler]

how many illiterate people do we have now a days? everyone dependent on spell checker and you-tube instruction vids to do anything, things only going to get worse

I'd disagree there. The internet is an overwhelmingly text-based medium, and people born in the last twenty or thirty years are part of the first generation that grew up writing and reading and interacting through text all day long, even if they're not the sort of people who'd otherwise read or write as a hobby.Sure a lot of them use spellchecker as a crutch, but the millennials and the kids in whatever the hell the next generation's called are probably the most functionally literate generations in human history.

I can attest to this as I am what we refer to as a "90's kid" And yes I use spellchecker, but that's because I have this weird thing with spelling (I read at near college level in elementary before my teachers told me to stop that. They didn't like me for making the other kids "look bad").

Also Killer Cyborg thanks for pointing that out. I blame mind fart on that one (it's been a long day).

[Library Ogre]

how many illiterate people do we have now a days? everyone dependent on spell checker and you-tube instruction vids to do anything, things only going to get worse

I'd disagree there. The internet is an overwhelmingly text-based medium, and people born in the last twenty or thirty years are part of the first generation that grew up writing and reading and interacting through text all day long, even if they're not the sort of people who'd otherwise read or write as a hobby.Sure a lot of them use spellchecker as a crutch, but the millennials and the kids in whatever the hell the next generation's called are probably the most functionally literate generations in human history.

And as Incriptus's story pointed out, you might be literate, but not be able to decipher the handwriting. There's lots of wails today about "How are kids going to understand cursive if we don't teach it in school", but even beyond that, I've had to take courses in reading German handwriting from the 19th century, and older scripts that are theoretically in the latin alphabet we all use.

[Pepsi Jedi]

I would imagine that the CS isn't really pure illiterate, more like a functional illiterate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy

Plus again symbolism other than the alphabet that we know of today could be used by the CS. In essence it is their own unique written language (or in this case drawn/designed). Given a basic symbol system to operate tech can grant a user to use other forms of communication and archiving by using video recorders, voice recorders, and possibly text to speech when higher ups that can read and write relay commands.

Ether that or just throw out the whole illiteracy thing and just have it so information is really tight and restricted from the populace.

Yep. Pretty much.

Though thinking about it more it is impressive that the CS exists as is even with functional illiteracy. If going by the 85% "illiteracy" of the population you still have 15% that do, and I imagine the "noble" class to be just 1% (not going political with that statement). So 14% is left which could be made up of both High ranked personnel and scientists, thus them gaining new designs for weapons and other things.

This also makes me question how much the CS's scientific community is devoted to blowing sh*t up? What about other essential things? But that's getting off topic.

I just tend to go the other way with it. Realize that the illiteracy rate of the CS was a neat idea that noone bothered to think past 'They'll use it to control information' and ignore it for the most part.

I give the CS functional literacy of about 5th grade for the general populace with the academic, scientific and military officer classes having higher. They control information the same way anyone does, by controlling the media and through propaganda. with the CS it'd be much easier as it's not like you're getting satellite information from around the world. All they have to do is control the TV and internet in their own cities.

[Pepsi Jedi]

By that logic, somebody in today's world that could recognize the meaning of road signs--but who could NOT read the words on the signs--would be literate.

But they're not literate, because that's not what the word means.

No, because there's only a small number of road signs that can be understood by shape. (And they have the words on them anyway). What are there? 10 20 at most? If that.

More than 500.
http://www.usa-traffic-signs.com/Test_s/50.htm

I didn't look at the entire list, but no I didn't count the 'No right turn' sign lol so there may be a bit more than 20. I'm betting noone's getting 500 of them though.

You're talking about replacing an entire society's reading with symbols.

Incorrect.
I'm talking about replacing nonessential reading with symbols.

So how many symbols? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000?

As has already been pointed out, there are lots of literates in CS society.

No. There's a FEW literates in CS society. Under no definition of 'lots' that I know of, does 15% count as 'lots'. It's less than 1 in 5. At best you can get to 'there's some literate in CS society" (As written)

Did you miss that fact, or are you ignoring it for some reason?

I don't ignore it. I laugh at it, and your attempt to say that 15% is 'lots'. (Well I do ignore it as being stupid in my own games, but not the way you mean here.)

Words are nothing but symbols (Letters) in different orders to mean different things. Replacing words with symbols on a society wide system is creating a new language.

I get the logic; it's just wrong

No. It's correct. What are words but letters in a set order. i.E. symbols in a line?

Understanding symbols is not the same as literacy.

Understanding letters (symbols) together to mean things (Words) are not using symbols?

I hate to do it, as it's getting literal but lets check it out shall we?

Merriam Webster defines
Literacy:
1) the ability to read and write

Read:
1) to look at and understand the meaning of letters, words, symbols, etc.

So by ... definition.. lol if you READ it... that is literacy. And it proves my point. Even the dictionary, which DEFINES WHAT WORDS MEAN, defines Literacy as the ability to read and write. and defines read as 'to look at and understand the meaning of letters, words, symbols, etc.' So while you might not generally think, understanding symbols is 'reading', that -is- how it's defined.

BOOM. *Drops mic*.

EDIT:

*picks up mic*

It also defines a letter as

Letter:
1) a symbol usually written or printed representing a speech sound and constituting a unit of an alphabet


So again. yes. Using a bunch of 'symbols' instead of 'words' is just using DIFFERENT Symbols for things (As reading is defined) and then yes, you are literate in "CS Symbol language".

[Killer Cyborg]

By that logic, somebody in today's world that could recognize the meaning of road signs--but who could NOT read the words on the signs--would be literate.

But they're not literate, because that's not what the word means.

No, because there's only a small number of road signs that can be understood by shape. (And they have the words on them anyway). What are there? 10 20 at most? If that.

More than 500.
http://www.usa-traffic-signs.com/Test_s/50.htm

I didn't look at the entire list, but no I didn't count the 'No right turn' sign lol so there may be a bit more than 20. I'm betting noone's getting 500 of them though.

Most people wouldn't need to.

You're talking about replacing an entire society's reading with symbols.

Incorrect.
I'm talking about replacing nonessential reading with symbols.

So how many symbols? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000?

Too many semantic variables to answer, and it doesn't matter anyway.

As has already been pointed out, there are lots of literates in CS society.

No. There's a FEW literates in CS society. Under no definition of 'lots' that I know of, does 15% count as 'lots'.

Are you confusing "CS Grunts" with "CS Society"....?

Did you miss that fact, or are you ignoring it for some reason?

I don't ignore it. I laugh at it, and your attempt to say that 15% is 'lots'. (Well I do ignore it as being stupid in my own games, but not the way you mean here.)

I don't say that 15% is "lots."
I'm saying that you're wrong about 15% of the overall population being literate.

viewtopic.php?p=2876257#p2876257
As Nekira pointed out:

It's also not quite as bad as you think.

According to RUE and CWC, All Coalition Technical officers (AKA, the guys who actually make and maintain all the technical gear) are literate as part of the OCC. Additionally, all EOD Specialists, RCSG Specialists, Military Specialists, and Fly Boy Pilots are all fully literate. All ISS Specters and Officers are Literate. In addition, Both CS Commandos and CS Special Forces get an explicit high bonus to literacy if taken as an OCC Related skill, indicating literacy training for them is provided as needed.

So all of the Technical and Officer corps appear to be literate to some degree. it's only the grunts and shock troopers (SAMAS pilots, cyborgs, juicers, Ect) that don't appear to have the option.

This provides a pretty good veiw as to how civilian life goes. the entire Technical and Political class are probablly literate--it's only banned to the masses.

Serious question here:
Do you understand that CS Grunts are NOT the entire population of the Coalition States?

Words are nothing but symbols (Letters) in different orders to mean different things. Replacing words with symbols on a society wide system is creating a new language.

I get the logic; it's just wrong

No. It's correct. What are words but letters in a set order. i.E. symbols in a line?

Letters are a specific kind of symbol, and it is that specific kind of symbol that is required for literacy.
A flag is a symbol, but recognizing flags isn't literacy, because flags aren't letters.

Understanding symbols is not the same as literacy.

Understanding letters (symbols) together to mean things (Words) are not using symbols?

No.
Understanding symbols is not the same as literacy.
All letters are symbols.
Not all symbols are letters.
Let me know where you're getting confused, and I can guide you through this.

I hate to do it, as it's getting literal but lets check it out shall we?

Merriam Webster defines
Literacy:
1) the ability to read and write

Read:
1) to look at and understand the meaning of letters, words, symbols, etc.

So by ... definition.. lol if you READ it... that is literacy. And it proves my point. Even the dictionary, which DEFINES WHAT WORDS MEAN, defines Literacy as the ability to read and write. and defines read as 'to look at and understand the meaning of letters, words, symbols, etc.' So while you might not generally think, understanding symbols is 'reading', that -is- how it's defined.

BOOM. *Drops mic*.

Drop the mic all you want... but in the really-real world, try convincing anybody with a brain in their head that recognizing a universal symbol means you're literate.

[eliakon]

Okay so what I am seeing here is that because 85% of the grunts in the CS can not read the entire alphabet. BUT that we are pretty sure that they can recognize a bathroom sign.....that there is no such thing as illiteracy at all as a fundamental concept. That since around the middle ages our planet has had near total levels of universal literacy at least in the western world because people could recognize some signs and symbols at that point and that, by definition it seems, means that they are literate

Am I the only one confused here?

[Library Ogre]

If I were to extrapolate a society that is mostly illiterate, but still possesses a high technology base, there's a few things I would see. First of all, you'd have a lot of what is today considered "assistive technology"; "Hover over the icon and the computer will tell you what the icon means". Once you become literate in the symbol-language of commonly used icons, you don't need the assistive technology as much, but it's still there. "What, literate?" I hear people rustling their dictionaries at me angrily. Yes, literate. As pointed out, there's all sorts of literacy; a symbol-based literacy, however, is an extremely limited one, and very prone to misinterpretation if you move outside of its accepted limits... everyone can recognize a stop sign. But have you tried to have an emoji conversation with someone? If you don't already have an established sub-dialect of emoji, then you're entering VERY uncertain territory when they text you "frog teacup"... or "gust-of-wind poop wedge-of-cheese smiley-face".

I'd also expect that there's a fair degree of Siri and Cortana's foul brood in use.

"How can I help you today?"
"I want to enlist in the Coalition Army."
"Let me connect you."

"I want to make cupcakes."
"Your pantry is missing these ingredients <picture displayed on screen>. It will cost 14 credits to purchase them. Would you like me to send an order to Prosek's Home Grocery?"
"Yes, please. Add milk, eggs, and honey."
"I've done it. The total is 23 credits. When the delivery gets here, I'll tell you what you need to do."

What does the CS's illiteracy MEAN? It is not going to mean only the things above; folks will still be able to read circuit diagrams and their limited languages, and solve math problems, and read music. But they will have little flexibility in written words. They may recognize some words due to repetition (I wouldn't be surprised if a Dog Boy could recognize the word "Wilks" for example, even out of context, on a piece of paper instead of on a rifle... though they might not if its in a significantly different font), but they won't have a lot of flexibility with written language. Even the ones who don't know the alphabet will have the same sorts of abilities... can recognize a word or two, but will, as Incriptus says, not be able to recognize all the letters, not know them outside of context, and not know them out of the official fonts.* They have trouble with messy handwriting, not simply because they don't know the words or the letters, but because they don't have enough knowledge of words and letters to fill in blanks where bad handwriting makes mistakes.

Keep in mind that the Coalition does keep a functionally literate class. That class is specifically the technologists and the upper levels. While they're in the minority, think about how little most folks actually need literacy in their daily life. You wake up. You turn on the TV, where someone talks the news, weather, and traffic at you. You get in your car (or on the bus) and head to work. If you drive, your drive might be aided by streetsigns the first few days (or your GPS, which will also talk to you), but you now know the route. If you don't drive, then the bus will tell you when to get off, if you don't already know. You sit down and do work things. Now, for a lot of folks, work involves reading, but I've worked factory jobs, fast food... heck, I probably could've taught my ESL class without writing, though it would be more difficult. You get home, you turn the TV back on. If you cook, you probably cook something you know how to make, or have a simple computer that can tell you what to do, with voice instructions and pictures.

And if you're a grunt? With your basic radio and your laser rifle? You know how to do basic checks, but anything really wrong has to be handled by a tech... that's why we have techs. Your radio frequencies may be limited to purple horseshoe, red balloon, yellow diamonds, and green shamrocks, or they may be able to handle combinations of those ("Hit combination yellow shamrock until 2100"). You drive using a functional GPS based on relay transmission (not truly GPS, of course, but you're 30 miles from transmitter A and 200 miles from transmitter B and so the GPS knows you're at point C) and land navigation.

Really, I don't have problems with the CS being illiterate; I think that you could rig it pretty well using today's technology to live your life without reading. You'd lose some nuance and be limited in options... but it would be doable, using assistive devices designed for the blind, modern simulated intelligences like Siri and Cortana, and the power of habit. You wouldn't get far, but no one expects the lowlies in the CS to get far. That's not the CS's narrative.

*As proof of their evil, all Coalition releases from the Ministry of Truth are in Comic Sans. Joseph thinks this is hilarious.

[Pepsi Jedi]

By that logic, somebody in today's world that could recognize the meaning of road signs--but who could NOT read the words on the signs--would be literate.

But they're not literate, because that's not what the word means.

No, because there's only a small number of road signs that can be understood by shape. (And they have the words on them anyway). What are there? 10 20 at most? If that.

More than 500.
http://www.usa-traffic-signs.com/Test_s/50.htm

I didn't look at the entire list, but no I didn't count the 'No right turn' sign lol so there may be a bit more than 20. I'm betting noone's getting 500 of them though.

Most people wouldn't need to.

Exactly, as you're not trying to replace the people's ability to read with something in it's spot. I.E. a total symbol based society.

You're talking about replacing an entire society's reading with symbols.

Incorrect.
I'm talking about replacing nonessential reading with symbols.

So how many symbols? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000?

Too many semantic variables to answer, and it doesn't matter anyway.

No, it totally matters. Could your average person learn 100 symbols? Sure. 1000? 10,000? When do you end up with the 'language' where every word is a symbol? There's a cut off point somewhere.

How many symbols do you need in your society to forgo reading, and yet, not have a language. There's got to be a cut off point somewhere. A hand wave doesn't do it.

As has already been pointed out, there are lots of literates in CS society.

No. There's a FEW literates in CS society. Under no definition of 'lots' that I know of, does 15% count as 'lots'.

Are you confusing "CS Grunts" with "CS Society"....?

I'm using it as it's the numbers we have in representation. As a large number of CS citizens either are in the military or where, then it's being used as a subset that represents the whole. yes.

When you find numbers on the CS society, pertaining to this topic, that differ from the numbers we have for the military, then we can use those.

Did you miss that fact, or are you ignoring it for some reason?

I don't ignore it. I laugh at it, and your attempt to say that 15% is 'lots'. (Well I do ignore it as being stupid in my own games, but not the way you mean here.)

I don't say that 15% is "lots."
I'm saying that you're wrong about 15% of the overall population being literate.

... yes you did.

there are lots of literates in CS society

Not trying to be nitpicky, but that's exactly what you said.

viewtopic.php?p=2876257#p2876257
As Nekira pointed out:

It's also not quite as bad as you think.

According to RUE and CWC, All Coalition Technical officers (AKA, the guys who actually make and maintain all the technical gear) are literate as part of the OCC. Additionally, all EOD Specialists, RCSG Specialists, Military Specialists, and Fly Boy Pilots are all fully literate. All ISS Specters and Officers are Literate. In addition, Both CS Commandos and CS Special Forces get an explicit high bonus to literacy if taken as an OCC Related skill, indicating literacy training for them is provided as needed.

So all of the Technical and Officer corps appear to be literate to some degree. it's only the grunts and shock troopers (SAMAS pilots, cyborgs, juicers, Ect) that don't appear to have the option.

This provides a pretty good veiw as to how civilian life goes. the entire Technical and Political class are probablly literate--it's only banned to the masses.

Yes. quite right. Now pause and look at the break down, as per officers and grunts in the military. You'll notice that the percentages of officers and special forces are very very low... 15% or lower, than that of the grunts that make up the vast majority of the military.

See how that works? Yes the officer corps, pilots, and special forces are... special. They're.. Officers, pilots and special forces. But they make up but a fraction of the overall military.

Serious question here:
Do you understand that CS Grunts are NOT the entire population of the Coalition States?

I do, but it's a dodge, as your point has been foiled. The CS military is what we have numbers on and is a huge part of the CS in and of itself, It's a representative cross section of CS life. From the dirt poor uneducated farmer that signs up to try and get into a megacity if he lives through his service contract, to the golden boy from the upper levels that was educated, went to college and is in the military because it's 'expected' and looks good on a resume when he gets out, and everything in between.

We don't have other number, on non military in this instance, so trying to say that the military for which we have numbers for isn't the entire population of the CS is just a way to try and say 'Dang. He's got me. so I'm going to try and make it about something that it's not.

Words are nothing but symbols (Letters) in different orders to mean different things. Replacing words with symbols on a society wide system is creating a new language.

I get the logic; it's just wrong

No. It's correct. What are words but letters in a set order. i.E. symbols in a line?

Letters are a specific kind of symbol, and it is that specific kind of symbol that is required for literacy.
A flag is a symbol, but recognizing flags isn't literacy, because flags aren't letters.

And yet, you're proven later to be wrong.

Also there's plenty of languages that use symbols that aren't letters. Look at the asian languages for one. Your simplistic and narrow view of linquistics is easily disproven by modern accepted languages. You don't even have to go sci fi to get them.

Understanding symbols is not the same as literacy.

Understanding letters (symbols) together to mean things (Words) are not using symbols?

No.
Understanding symbols is not the same as literacy.
All letters are symbols.
Not all symbols are letters.
Let me know where you're getting confused, and I can guide you through this.

And yet again when you start to lose a debate, you resort to insults.

I hate to do it, as it's getting literal but lets check it out shall we?

Merriam Webster defines
Literacy:
1) the ability to read and write

Read:
1) to look at and understand the meaning of letters, words, symbols, etc.

So by ... definition.. lol if you READ it... that is literacy. And it proves my point. Even the dictionary, which DEFINES WHAT WORDS MEAN, defines Literacy as the ability to read and write. and defines read as 'to look at and understand the meaning of letters, words, symbols, etc.' So while you might not generally think, understanding symbols is 'reading', that -is- how it's defined.

BOOM. *Drops mic*.

Drop the mic all you want... but in the really-real world, try convincing anybody with a brain in their head that recognizing a universal symbol means you're literate.

The mic was dropped because the actual Dictionary which... defines words and what they MEAN, agrees with me. You might not like it, but you're just quite simply incorrect and your view is narrow in this aspect. For example, as mentioned above, not every written language uses letters. There are many languages today that are symbol based. They're harder to learn but they exist.

The fact that they exist, helps to prove my point. if you take away the English and the alphabet, and replace it with symbols on a culture/country wide basis, you aren't dodging literacy. You're forming a new language made up of those symbols you've replaced the words with.

[glitterboy2098]

except that Logographic scripts use lots and lots of symbols to represent whole words, and can be strung together to record complex thoughts and concepts.

your not going to see people go about tring to explain the meaning of life using bathroom signs, a red cross, and a picture of an airplane.

but if you see the bathroom sign, you can tell with stick figure means the mens rooms. if you see the red cross you know there is a hospital or doctor near. and if you see the plane you "take this road to airport"

your assuming a degree of language substitution we're not claiming. the symbols we're suggesting are a form of logogram, technically more of an Ideogram, but they are ones independent of language, and NOT designed to replace the written word in all things, just to label specific things and places for convenience, or to impart a limited set of universal concepts.

[mercedogre]

HEY??? how do you put the multiple quote boxes in replies?

[flatline]

Trusting the computer to know what you really mean when you say something that is a homophone is less than wise.

People are less than wise.

Yup. I don't think anybody is saying that it's a good idea to trust the computer to do all of this for you. Only that it can be done and that it's a way to make sense of the setting assumptions of high technology and low literacy.

It's hardly a new thing for science-fiction to extrapolate trends to reach a future where high-technology has resulted in literacy dropping until no one could read anymore (Asimov had at least one where even being able to add 2+2 was impossible without calculators as people had become totally dependent on computers to do all math and it was a monumental breakthrough when someone reverses engineers basic mathematics from studying the results of his calculator).

I remember that one.
Good story.

Do you happen to remember the name of the story?

--flatline

[flatline]

Out of curiosity, what do CS "Commoners" even do? With so much of society's grunt work automated, it's not like they're doing the traditional work of "commoners" like we're used to thinking of it.

--flatline

[Nightmask]

Yup. I don't think anybody is saying that it's a good idea to trust the computer to do all of this for you. Only that it can be done and that it's a way to make sense of the setting assumptions of high technology and low literacy.

It's hardly a new thing for science-fiction to extrapolate trends to reach a future where high-technology has resulted in literacy dropping until no one could read anymore (Asimov had at least one where even being able to add 2+2 was impossible without calculators as people had become totally dependent on computers to do all math and it was a monumental breakthrough when someone reverses engineers basic mathematics from studying the results of his calculator).

I remember that one.
Good story.

Do you happen to remember the name of the story?

--flatline

The Feeling Of Power

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feeling_of_Power

[Library Ogre]

Out of curiosity, what do CS "Commoners" even do? With so much of society's grunt work automated, it's not like they're doing the traditional work of "commoners" like we're used to thinking of it.

--flatline

I imagine that there's still a lot of manufacturing and service industry jobs. While manufacturing CAN get automated, and in some cases has to be, there's a lot of the "stick the circuit board in the case" style work for lowlies to do; especially since the CS has something of a bias against AIs (not as bad as the one against mutants, but the stuff on skelebots indicates that they don't really trust complete automation). And service industry is always going to be big... someone to take your order, deliver your goods, and so on.

[Rallan]

HEY??? how do you put the multiple quote boxes in replies?

The miracle of ubb tags. If you want to put a paragraph you've written (or copypasted or whatever) in a quote box, just put a QUOTE tag in front of it and a /QUOTE tag at the end of it (both in square brackets of course). And if you want it to show the name of the person you're quoting, use QUOTE="NameGoesHere" instead of a plain QUOTE.

[Prysus]

Greetings and Salutations. I'm not a huge Rifts fan, and I don't really read most of the books except for segments for debates like this. So if I miss something, feel free to correct me with a book and page number.

I'm using it as it's the numbers we have in representation. As a large number of CS citizens either are in the military or where, then it's being used as a subset that represents the whole. yes.

CWC; page 44: "The enormous armed forces of Chi-Town represent approximately one-tenth of the total population of the Coalition States."

So you're "large number" that you're basing the whole on is 10%, even less than that since that 10% also includes every other type of soldier (including officers, etc.).

I laugh at it, and your attempt to say that 15% is 'lots'.

Let me just say, 10% is even less than 15%.

Yes. quite right. Now pause and look at the break down, as per officers and grunts in the military. You'll notice that the percentages of officers and special forces are very very low... 15% or lower, than that of the grunts that make up the vast majority of the military.

Do you have an actual book reference I can see for your numbers? I'm not doubting you, but I haven't found it yet. Some help would be nice. What I have found is ...

The Coalition Military makes up only 10% (approximate) of the population.
75% of that is enlisted, 20% "grown" mutants, and 5% other (CWC; page 44).
Of the 75%, "hundreds" are from the "lower and middle class," "many wilderness folks" (and aren't actually CS citizens), and "many of the poor and desperate join, because they have few other options that are attractive."

If your estimates are correct (with 85% being Grunts, meaning that only 15% of the CS military is composed of pilots of any kind, officers, psychics, commandos, etc.), then 85% of that (which is only 10% of the population, and only 75% of that are willing recruits, with an undetermined number less than that actual CS citizens) 70% are so illiterate they don't know their alphabet. So what we've managed to determine is a little less than 6% of the CS don't know their alphabet (if a full 85% of the entire military are Grunts), and "many" of those are not even CS-citizens yet (they're joining in the hopes of becoming one).

Also, while I can't find a reference (and as I said, Rifts isn't my strongest subject) isn't there a note somewhere about the CS doing a lot of military recruitment from the 'Burbs? And depending on how many non-CS citizens could be in the CS Grunts, doesn't that make the Grunts actually one of the worst representations of the average CS citizen?

See how that works? Yes the officer corps, pilots, and special forces are... special. They're.. Officers, pilots and special forces. But they make up but a fraction of the overall military.

The CS military is what we have numbers on and is a huge part of the CS in and of itself, It's a representative cross section of CS life. From the dirt poor uneducated farmer that signs up to try and get into a megacity if he lives through his service contract, to the golden boy from the upper levels that was educated, went to college and is in the military because it's 'expected' and looks good on a resume when he gets out, and everything in between.

Actually, the "golden boy from the upper levels that was educated" is (from what I can gather) far more likely to be a Commissioned Officer (CWC, page 48) using the equivalent of a West Point (especially if he's thinking it's "expected" of him). Also, if he's that educated, I'd consider it far more likely he'd end up in a Technical Officer or other specialized field that he can gain as the benefit of the education.

Note: Grunts are not the starting class for all military personnel. Otherwise, all CS soldiers would have the Grunt skills, which they do not. Grunts are just the generic training.



Also, some food for thought, going back to CWC; page 100, we have a system built into the armor that can read for the soldier if they know their alphabet. This only benefits 15% of all Grunts (15% are literate and 70% don't know the alphabet). Why include this is the CS does NOT expect anyone to know their alphabet? So it stands to reason (to me) that this system had to be built with the concept to benefit the average soldier, as if they expect them to know the alphabet. I somehow imagine an engineer somewhere going: "What do you mean 70% don't even know the alphabet?! How is that even possible?!"

There are a few possible reasons for this, one being that the engineer who designed it was extremely disconnected from the rest of the world (believe it or not, this is my personal pick). It's also quite possible that the average CS citizen does know their alphabet (and possibly more, even if below the official "literate" line), but the CS Grunts (as written in the book) are made up of a lot of poor and lower class, as well as "many" non-CS citizens (even more bottom of the barrel than expected). At the very least this might suggest that the CS did not intend for that level of illiteracy (though it may be what they ended up with).

I'll be interested in any additional references that can support or refute those numbers (though random numbers just thrown in without a book and page number hold little interest). Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[Killer Cyborg]

More than 500.
http://www.usa-traffic-signs.com/Test_s/50.htm

I didn't look at the entire list, but no I didn't count the 'No right turn' sign lol so there may be a bit more than 20. I'm betting noone's getting 500 of them though.

Most people wouldn't need to.

Exactly, as you're not trying to replace the people's ability to read with something in it's spot. I.E. a total symbol based society.

That doesn't have anything to do with the fact that recognizing road signs would--by the standard that you have presented--be considered literacy, which is what we're talking about here.

Could your average person learn 100 symbols? Sure. 1000? 10,000? When do you end up with the 'language' where every word is a symbol? There's a cut off point somewhere.

Again, numbers didn't factor anywhere into the standard that you presented, just the ability to understand and interpret symbols.

Are you confusing "CS Grunts" with "CS Society"....?

I'm using it as it's the numbers we have in representation. As a large number of CS citizens either are in the military or where, then it's being used as a subset that represents the whole. yes.

As has been pointed out, that "large number" is 10%.
So when the books tell us that 85% of Grunts are illiterate, that's telling us that of the 10% of the CS population that make up the military, an unknown percentage of them are Grunts, and 85% of those bottom-tier, unskilled soldiers are illiterate.
That's 85% of x% of 10% the overall population.
That is NOT a good number to use to judge the population as a whole.

I don't say that 15% is "lots."
I'm saying that you're wrong about

... yes you did.

there are lots of literates in CS society

Not trying to be nitpicky, but that's exactly what you said.

I said that "there are lots of literates in CS society."
I did not say that "15% of CS society is literate."
Do you understand the differences between those two statements?
Because "there are lots of literates in CS society" is NOT "exactly" "15% of the overall population being literate."

viewtopic.php?p=2876257#p2876257
As Nekira pointed out:

It's also not quite as bad as you think.

According to RUE and CWC, All Coalition Technical officers (AKA, the guys who actually make and maintain all the technical gear) are literate as part of the OCC. Additionally, all EOD Specialists, RCSG Specialists, Military Specialists, and Fly Boy Pilots are all fully literate. All ISS Specters and Officers are Literate. In addition, Both CS Commandos and CS Special Forces get an explicit high bonus to literacy if taken as an OCC Related skill, indicating literacy training for them is provided as needed.

So all of the Technical and Officer corps appear to be literate to some degree. it's only the grunts and shock troopers (SAMAS pilots, cyborgs, juicers, Ect) that don't appear to have the option.

This provides a pretty good veiw as to how civilian life goes. the entire Technical and Political class are probablly literate--it's only banned to the masses.

Yes. quite right. Now pause and look at the break down, as per officers and grunts in the military.

If you know of any specific breakdown that tells us what percent of the CS military each OCC makes up, I'd like to see it.
Meanwhile, yes, there are going to be more grunts than specialists and officers and such.
But that does not render the fact that all such officers and specialists are literate.
Right off the bat, it means that you 15% number isn't even accurate for the CS military, much less the society as a whole.
More importantly, it shows that the CS is perfectly willing and able to encourage (even demand) literacy for the segments of the population that actually need it.

You're picking the least literate segment of 10% of the CS population, and trying to use it to represent the entire population, and that just doesn't work.

Serious question here:
Do you understand that CS Grunts are NOT the entire population of the Coalition States?

I do

Then stop claiming that 15% of the CS population is literate. You, I, and everybody else here knows that claim is incorrect.

The CS military is what we have numbers on and is a huge part of the CS in and of itself,

Do you understand the difference between "The CS Military" and "CS Grunts?"

Letters are a specific kind of symbol, and it is that specific kind of symbol that is required for literacy.
A flag is a symbol, but recognizing flags isn't literacy, because flags aren't letters.

And yet, you're proven later to be wrong.

Also there's plenty of languages that use symbols that aren't letters. Look at the asian languages for one.

Fair enough.
I'll rephrase my claim:

Letters and logograms are specific kinds of symbols, and it is those specific kinds of symbols that are required for literacy.
A flag is a symbol, but recognizing flags isn't literacy, because flags aren't letters.

Understanding symbols is not the same as literacy.
All letters are symbols.
Not all symbols are letters.
Let me know where you're getting confused, and I can guide you through this.

And yet again when you start to lose a debate, you resort to insults.

I'm asking for information about where you're getting confused, and offering to help clarify.
You might find that insulting, but that does not make it an insult.
You indicated that "symbols" and "letters" were the same thing, instead of the latter being a subset of the former. That indication is simply untrue, for the reasons that I pointed out above.
If you understand my point about not all symbols being letters, then feel free to try to adjust your argument accordingly, so that your argument becomes accurate.
If you do not understand my point above, then let me know where you lose comprehension, and I will do my best to assist.
That's how conversations work--if you don't understand what is being said, then you ask for clarification. If you DO understand what is being said, then you either demonstrate that the claim is inaccurate (in this case, demonstrate that all symbols ARE indeed letters), or you agree to the accuracy of the claim and include that claim as part of your on side of the discussion.

Drop the mic all you want... but in the really-real world, try convincing anybody with a brain in their head that recognizing a universal symbol means you're literate.

The mic was dropped because the actual Dictionary which... defines words and what they MEAN, agrees with me

Incorrect.
The dictionary--which describes definitions of words as best as it can in a limited space--provides us with two definitions that you have used to come to an erroneous conclusion.
That is not the same as the Dictionary agreeing with you.

You used the two following definitions:
Literacy- the ability to read and write
Read- to look at and understand the meaning of letters, words, symbols, etc.

And used those definitions to conclude:
understanding symbols is 'reading'

Let us examine that conclusion, and its implications.

If understanding symbols is "reading," then...
-Any person who looks at any emoji and understands it is "reading," and therefore necessarily literate.
-Any person who watches the Weather Channel, and see a storm cloud on a map and understands what that means, is reading and is necessarily literate.
-Any person who looks at The Golden Arches, and understands that means there's a McDonalds there, is "reading" and therefore necessarily literate.
-Any person who can look at their own name, and understand it, is reading therefore necessarily literate.
-Any person who can look at the letter A and understand that it's the letter A is necessarily literate.
-Any person watching the movie Moby Dick, and understanding that The White Whale is symbolic of God, is reading and therefore necessarily literate.

Does any of the above fit with the way that the word "literate" is used in the real world?
When studies tell us that 14% of US Adults are Illiterate, do you believe that the studies are saying that 14% of adults in the US are unable to understand any symbols?

If reading is "understanding symbols," then who exactly is illiterate? And how?

[Killer Cyborg]

Looking at SB1 p. 27

A typical squad consists of four to eight soldiers. Usually two light infantry, two heavy infantry, one military specialist, one communications or technical officer.
That's 4 grunts, and 2 officer/specialist types, which would indicate a ratio of 2:1 grunts to officer/specialists.

[Tor]

On page 27 under the "Short Range" recon squad, I am seeing 4 light infantry grunts, 2 heavy infantry grunts, 1 specialist, 1 tech/comm officer. So that sounds more like 6 grunts and 2 officers for a 3:1 not 2:1.

Also mentions 2-4 dog pack can be subbed for 2 grunts, so you might even get 8 dog/grunt and 2 officers for a 4:1 ratio.

[Killer Cyborg]

On page 27 under the "Short Range" recon squad, I am seeing 4 light infantry grunts, 2 heavy infantry grunts, 1 specialist, 1 tech/comm officer. So that sounds more like 6 grunts and 2 officers for a 3:1 not 2:1.

Also mentions 2-4 dog pack can be subbed for 2 grunts, so you might even get 8 dog/grunt and 2 officers for a 4:1 ratio.

And a light mech recon squad has 2-3 SAMAS, a military specialist, and a tech officer (total of 4-5) for every 2-3 grunts.
Different squads have different makeups.
Various samples of different squads go on until page 30, but there's no need to examine them to determine an average. That's already been done.

Page 26 tells us flat-out,
(emphasis NOT added)
"A typical squad consists of four to eight soldiers. Usually two light infantry, two heavy infantry, one military specialist, one communications or other technical officer, and two special operatives, such a sdemolitions, espionage, technical, borgs, power armor or bots.

[Tor]

I guess short-range recon is atypical then, makes me wonder what the designation for this typical squad is. If it's an average of the different types including light mech then we should take into account that when you have a squad with fewer light infantry, there tends to be PA to compensate for that, which I think more than makes up for it, since a SAMAS has over twice (if new-style, exactly triple if old-style) the MDC of heavy (non borg/juicer) new DB armor.

Course the mass recruit of grunts in CWC leading up to SoT may alter the distribution in SB1.

[CombatMedic]

I think we ought to deal with the elephant in the room here instead of tiptoeing around it and trying to rationalise things.

The CS illiteracy thing is wildly, stupidly unrealistic. It's a flight of fancy. It's a hoary old two-fisted pulp SF cliche that's been dug up to help portray the CS as an evil empire.

It's a nation fielding technology way more advanced than what we've got in the real world, and it has the infrastructure to keep this tech running all the damn time, and it has to produce absolutely everything (including most of the raw materials) itself, which means that it also has a pretty sophisticated administration and economy. And there is just no way in hell that all of that is gonna function if the majority of the population are uneducated unskilled menial workers.

So how do you figure out how it works? You don't. Any attempt to explain it or rationalise it or tweak it so it works will just run into other problems with the setting, and addressing them will lead to others, until you realise it's wildly unrealistic cartoon-trope turtles all the way down. So just let it be. It's a stylistic choice in a heavily stylised setting, and it's never going to make sense any more than the inner workings of society in Judge Dredd or Mad Max make sense. You just roll with it and use it as the vivid backdrop for larger than life adventure, you don't try and smoosh it up until it's plausible enough to run a realistic story around.

As I see it:

Most menial jobs in Chi Town (the core city, not the Burbs) are handled by automated systems and robots.
The lower classes are not for the most part aren't workers who produce stuff (automation in the factories means comparatively fewer manufacturing jobs for unskilled workers-- technical class guys are another matter, but they are not illiterate lower order people) Some are employed in civilian service industries. Their prime purpose: fill the ranks of the Dead Boys. Men, and some women, fight.
Women have babies. Lots of little healthy human babies, many of whom will grow up to be grunts. Someone has to take care of the babies, but robot nursemaids don't work as well as an actual human being for that job.
Now go kill some demons and wizards for the destiny of Mankind and the glory of Emperor Prosek!


Iron Heart may have more humans working in industry, given it's basically 20th Century tech base. But those guys may be considered technician class citizens and allowed to read manuals and maybe comic books or something. Not every state has to be just like Chi-Town in social structure.

I think the CS economy blows chunks when it comes to providing a variety of high quality consumer goods. It's geared towards the military and heavy industry and run by bureaucrats . Think USSR. The Soviets beat us into space but Moscow's hospitals didn't even all have hot and cold running water by the 1980s. Cutting edge tech in some areas, grossly behind in many other respects.
And I'd say the low literacy levels do hamper the development of Chi-Town's economy. If Prosek hadn't done what he did, destroying the public library (or looting/moving it), closing schools, banning books for most people, and so on Chi-Town might be even better developed and stronger.


I think that actually does fit the way the CS is described in RMB.

Free Quebec is different, natch.


YMMV