Ong claims that writing is the most influential technology there has ever been, and understanding orality allows for better understanding of the impact of writing on consciousness and society. Because written words can be detached entirely from their authors, writing can exist autonomously or “context-free” in a way that traditionally spoken words cannot. Written words cannot be refuted directly as spoken words can; unless physically destroyed, they remain in existence even when entirely disproved.

The same arguments that are made against computers in the late 20th century were once made against printing by early modern scholars and against writing by Plato and his contemporaries in ancient Greece. The main arguments against all these technologies are that they are impersonal and unresponsive, that they make people rely on them despite being of questionable value, and that they weaken minds by removing the necessary exercise of memorization. Ironically, by the time objections are made against these technologies, the technologies themselves have already influenced society and cognition to such an extent that even their critics use said technologies to record, publish, and distribute their opinions. According to Ong, Plato and his contemporaries in particular would have been unable to construct their arguments against writing without having internalized the technology of writing in order to think such analytic and abstract thoughts.