One of the reasons that the only social media I use is Mastodon is that find that, on balance, it’s freer of polarizing expressions of opinion than Twitter (I refuse to call it by its current name), Facebook, Instagram, etc., etc., etc. (Probably because I’ve set-up very heavy filtering of polarizing points of view whether I agree with them or not.) But nevertheless, in ham radio circles on Mastodon, there is still the occasional strongly expressed opinion, including many I take issue with. One of those is this fallacy: The only legitimate way to copy CW (and/or) the only way to copy CW fast (and/or) the only logical progression in learning to copy… is to copy it in your head, instead of writing it down on paper. To be blunt, the next time I hear someone repeat some variation of this, I’m apt to lose my ability to bite my tongue.
I suppose if it’s your goal to copy CW at a mind-numbing speed, then sure, you’re probably unlikely to do that by writing it down on paper. But to suggest that head-copying is somehow a logical progression of skill, or that it’s the only viable way to do it, or that “true” CW operators do it that way, is flatly, bullshit.
This happens everywhere in interpersonal communication, but the fallacy here is seeing the world solely through your own lens, metaphorically speaking. Everyone’s brains work differently, and while ADHD might be the behavioral health diagnosis de jure, the truth is that many people ‒ including me ‒ have a diagnosed attention deficit, and have some level of difficulty with focus. I can barely stay focused enough on a face-to-face conversation with another person to truly succeed at having one; is it really reasonable to think that I, or many people like me, are going to have the focus required to have entire conversations using CW solely in our heads? I have enough trouble staying sufficiently focused to remember what I’m even trying to say while sending CW, which obviously doesn’t require paper.
My dad (also a ham) recalls that when I was at my CW peak in my teens, I was copying somewhere in the neighborhood of 35 to 40 WPM. He might well be exaggerating somewhat; I frankly can’t remember. But I do remember this: I have never copied CW solely in my head, apart from contest or (more recently) POTA contacts, where the exchanges are exceptionally brief and predictable, and I can immediately write or type it in a logbook or logging application.
I will agree that writing down CW while copying it adds another cognitive layer to the activity, and it’s one that requires time and effort that itself will likely inherently limit the speed at which you can manage it. But these days, when I’m typically copying 18 to 20 WPM, it’s still quite possible to write it down without impacting speed, and I’d point-out that copying at those speeds is the envy of many who are still struggling as beginners to manage 5 to 7 WPM. In short, I don’t think that I or anyone else copying on paper at those speeds (or better) have anything to be embarrassed about.
To repeat, everyone’s brains work differently, and contrary to what many people seem to believe, there is no singular “right” way to copy Morse code, nor is there any singular “right” path to learning it or developing speed or accuracy. If you can copy in your head, then copy in your head. If you can’t, then you haven’t “failed” in any way. The only “correct” or “right” way, path, route, practice, method, or anything else is simply to do it. The “how” is utterly irrelevant; pick something that works ‒ for you ‒ and go for it. And if you can’t ever manage to get past 10 WPM, or you can’t get past 13 WPM, or you can’t do it at all without a piece of paper and a pen? You’re still doing it, and that actually is the “right” way.