Would you Rather Follow a Man who has Read 1 book 50 times, or...

Touche Emeraldisle :)))

Very good point, emeraldisle! =) *looks up* Wow, you have a whole fan club starting here, don't you?

You raise some good points as always emeradisle. I was a little too general. Assume that you follow this man, that he will be your guide in life, or to life. I'm in total agreement that what is contained in the books are very important. One has more to draw from, the other guy is certain in what little he knows.

For a blond I ain't so bad :))))

*giggles* I'm never going to live that down, am I?

Wow, well said!

Wow, very well said! I haven't changed my mind on my own answer, but this was a very good response! Just lovely!

Very good point indeed. :))

I presented similar idea in first paragraph of my response but you presented it better and much more eloquently.

This isn't as easy a question to answer (for me at least) as it may appear to be. The guy who has read one book has very thourough knowlege of a limited or (maybe not so limited) field of study. After reading it 50 times, you'd think he could probably recite it. Now the other guy as been exposed to a lot more information. He's read 50 books after all, but how could he possible retain all of the knowlege in each book, especially after just one sitting. The other aspects are just what are the books in question? And how and in what way are you going to follow the one that you choose? Let's assume, you're going drop everything and just "follow this guy." As in he will lead you through life. The books that are read now become very important. To be honest, I'm not even sure how I would answer this.

I have to disagree just a bit Filmbuff, I do think people retain a great deal of information in one reading. I know I do. I may not retain dates or specific scientific terms but the general knowledge is there. Whos to say the man reading 50 books has not re read that 50. When you think about it the number 50 for a reader is a low end number to begin with. I myself have read thousands. I probably read my first 50 in the 3rd and 4th grade.

That's a good point Angelwhispers. My only counter is that often there is a huge difference between general and specific knowlege often in making things work. Leave out a step here nor there and it becomes a pointless endevour.

Hmmm, I can see Sarahruthbeth's point. Some people without the benefit of an education, are natural-born leaders. And yes, it is their charisma, vision, and their commitment to that vision that make them so. And so, if we look a little deeper into Sarahruthbeth's post, I think it's possible to extract a slightly deeper question: Would you choose to follow a natural-born leader, or a developed, 'groomed' leader? If you had to choose one, not a third candidate who had natural leadership skills, plus the benefit of education and grooming. Would it be the natural leader or the groomed? History is ripe with examples of uneducated, natural-born leaders. They may have had great wisdom from real life experience (and a keen mind), but not have been able to read & write. Two thousand years ago, most leaders (good and bad) had perhaps only read one book in their entire lives. Perhaps this is the question that Filmbuff's Granddad was really leading little Filmbuff to answer. Some of history's greatest leaders achieved greatness from their efforts on the battleground. So, if we return to Filmbuff's original question, and throw this into the mix: What if we were under threat of seige by Ghengis Khan? What if the two men vying for leadership represented one man who had read "The Art of War" 50 times, and the other had read 50 different books, but not "The Art of War"? Who would we choose to lead us in battle against Ghengis Khan?

I can relate to your point sarahruthbeth22 in terms of uneducated leader who can't even read and write. In fact I know one person in present time also, who is basically illiterate but do listen to news. I have seen Army Generals, Politicians, Educators and Social workers to come to him for advice. He does all his stuff himself. Lives a very simple life and in fact he predicted many political and warfare events ahead of time just by his analytical prowess (not by magic, lol). Interesting, isn't it?

Are you sure about that sarahruthbeth? Granted some are better leaders than others-- that is a given. But doesn't having knowlege, or a thirst for knowlege make one a *better* leader? Interesting view.

Really knowing that one book makes him knowlegable and a critic of that one particular book. Is that the kind of knowledge we all strive for? Or even the kind of reading the layman goes for? The other might not know the 50 books as well. But really, do we need a story teller to tell us what a book is before reading it or do we want to read a book based on 'in a nutshell'? - Lyn

Those are some very good points.

Good points camar_lyn, thanks for postings. You're right the person who has only read 1 book is kind've boring, but he really knows that one book. The other one has more to draw from, but probably does not know it as well.

Which books are read do seem to play an important point. Thanks for posting m&m.

Hello Hcromer, Excellent point about the subject matter being of consequence. I will share this one point though: Many people write their dissertation or Phd. thesis on one supposition or theory from a single text. They may not even cover all aspects of a single supposition from one text in their thousand page dissertation.

I can think of a few a reasons to read book over and over again. Often a person won't catch everything in one read. Or the material inside is very thought-provoking or detailed that it requires much though to fully understand the words that were read. This kind've echoes ladyluna's post about a phd thesis. The bible and a book on philosphy would be very good examples of something you would probably want to read more than to understand it better, as would a technical manual. For the record, I agree with you and would follow the one in most cases and all things being equal who has read 50 different books.

dfn12968...very good point.. the 1 book man could very well be obsessive-compulsive.

That seems to be the general consensus. He has been exposed to more, but how much does he really know? The other fellow should have a much deeper understanding the knowlege in the one book. Thanks for commenting.

You bring up an excellent point about people who life experience which there are not enough books to fully contain, let alone read in a life time. Thanks for posting!

I agree with you about the books being very important. Based on the information on your post, let me pose this question to you: Would you rather follow a man who has read the bible 50 times, or a man who has read 50 intellectual books, and why do you make that choice?