argument top image

Are e-readers better than printed books?
Back to question

E-readers have a higher cost efficiency

Books are expensive period. However, with the emergence of e-readers, and by association, e-books, reading need not necessarily be a pocket emptying hobby anymore. A multitude of books is available at the click of a button at reduced prices, making the reader, the happiest on earth.

The Argument

The price of an e-reader offers great flexibility, customisation and storage. The single purchase can also last you for a long, long time due to the device's durability. Regular e-books are generally cheaper than printed books, and e-books can also be downloaded for free from the internet. The cost of buying books decreases, making an e-reader even more worth investing in. Comparatively, a printed book is meant to serve just one purpose - to be read. Overall, you save more money by investing in an e-reader. Moreover, if you choose to purchase a smartphone, tablet or laptop, the variety of uses of the device increases and more use can be obtained from them aside from reading books.

Counter arguments

More often than not, readers tend to gravitate towards the best-sellers put forward by top publishing houses, which are not cheap. These books are not offered at reduced prices, and thus the individual ends up spending not just for the books, but for the device itself. Moreover, e-readers function on electricity and their constant use require them to be charged more frequently, thus resulting in an increased electricity bill. Reading books on e-readers also puts a strain on the eyes, which in serious cases may cause discomfort to the individual, forcing him/her to visit the doctor. On the whole, e-readers prove to be more expensive than physical books.



[P1] Over time, e-readers are a much cheaper option than consistently purchasing physical books.

Rejecting the premises


This page was last edited on Saturday, 4 Jul 2020 at 17:39 UTC

Explore related arguments