>• I have never met a person I admired who did not read more books than I did.

I think Schopenhauer has good words of advice on this topic (and the irony of reading this advice in a book is not lost on me; emphasis mine):

>Hence, in regard to reading, it is a very important thing to be able to refrain. Skill in doing so consists in not taking into one's hands any book merely because at the time it happens to be extensively read; such as political or religious pamphlets, novels, poetry, and the like, which make a noise, and may even attain to several editions in the first and last year of their existence. Consider, rather, that the man who writes for fools is always sure of a large audience; be careful to limit your time for reading, and devote it exclusively to the works of those great minds of all times and countries, who o'ertop the rest of humanity, those whom the voice of fame points to as such. These alone really educate and instruct. You can never read bad literature too little, nor good literature too much. Bad books are intellectual poison; they destroy the mind. Because people always read what is new instead of the best of all ages, writers remain in the narrow circle of the ideas which happen to prevail in their time; and so the period sinks deeper and deeper into its own mire.

Chinese: 读万卷书，行万里路 - It is better to walk 10,000 miles than to read 10,000 scrolls.

In Kannada, 'desha sutti nodu, kosha odii kali" - Roam the world AND read the books - clubs both of them

But he didn’t say you shouldn’t read, only that you shouldn’t waste your time on the latest popular writing.

There are two verses in the Bible that are contradictory like that. "Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him" is one, the other is "Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes." The two verses are right next to each other (Proverbs 26:4-5), so the juxtaposition must have been intentional. My guess is that putting them together was intended to imply that some problems have no good answer.

"Advice like these are not laws. They are like hats. If one doesn’t fit, try another."

I preferred this one:

Un bon mot ne prouve rien.

Also available in English: a witty saying proves nothing.

Re: books. Surprisingly I met such a person recently. She does not read books at all these days, and haven't been in a while (except textbooks in academia years). Got PhD in physics, and doing well for herself.

I shall seek out this teacher, whose name I assume rhymes with "Boing".

Reading books seems to be put on a pedestal here and in other places online. I don’t read many I prefer doing and online video courses

In your defense, I'd say reading is put on a pedestal by our culture. Most would consider reading a book a more useful time investment than watching television, but I think it depends greatly on what book (trashy novel) and what television show (documentary).

As a reader (LOL) I find it to be a strong negative signal when someone identifies prominently as a reader, puts that in their Twitter bio, wears T-shirts or caries tote bags with reading-related slogans, et c. For some reason it usually turns out that they almost exclusively read young adult, trashy genre fiction, thrillers, romance novels, that kind of thing. Which is fine! I read garbage sometimes too! It's fun! But people who watch reality TV, 24-hour news, and Lifetime movies, don't wear shirts with... hold on, let me find some of these reader t-shirts with an image search:

"Obsessive TV-Watching Disorder" or "TV watchers gonna TV watch" or "Eat Sleep TV-Watch" or "Never underestimate the power of a girl with a TV"

Not sure why things are that way, but I'd go out of my way not to broadcast a "reader" identity, for this reason.

Thanks! I am talking more about courses online that are specifically designed to educate.

I think most books are 90% of business/self help is filled with stuff to make them a saleable book. Fluff. No one will pay $10-$50 for a 3 page PDF. But I prefer the 3 page PDF. Ironically often information in that format is free!

Seeing a psychologist > self help book. Making money on a side hussle > reading 0 to 1. Doing a course on freecodecamp > buying a coding textbook. Etc.

Books can be great but there has to be a big reason to commit to reading 300 pages. History books I will accept for example.

Many self-help books start as articles then are expanded into book-length pieces with fluff. You’re correct, but I suspect you got the downvotes because you said “books” without qualification. As you note, self-help != history.

If I’m interpreting correctly, you’re asserting that doing things is better than reading about them, which I agree with. But I can buy a coding book and do all the exercises, sample problems, and create projects for myself based on the material and potentially get more from it than someone doing a course. Especially if they aren’t terribly engaged.

Or to put it another way: “You wasted $150,000 on an education you coulda got for $1.50 in late fees at the public library.”

Business/self help is likely not the bulk of books being sold.

Probably airport fiction right?

Uh... you probably want to complete that paragraph with a "and still I have achieved XYZ in life", otherwise you're just an anonymous commenter :-\

I can complete the paragraph with anything from "average person" to "nobel prize" and statistically and logically there is no conclusion you can draw from it.