plz tell me answer of this photo
fast it is very important
Attachments:
Answers
Answered by
1
It boils down to four main reasons for generallyregarding books as the best source of knowledge.
Books are a permanent form of knowledge so that knowledge from past generations can be passed on to future generations: reading a book is really time travel.
Books, by their very nature, usually go through an editorial process. There would have been a series of people (literary agents, publishers, editors, etc) who have checked the material for factual accuracy, literary suitability, legal liability, etc, so that the end product can be considered for most practical purposes as reliable and authoritative. Online sources are not necessarily less reliable or less authoritative, but online information are subject to weaker third-party checking (and I'll leave it at that to our interpretation what 'weaker third-party checking' means).
For books and similar other printed material, there will also have been some sort of peer reviewprocess in addition to the editorial process. Very often, the material will have been assessed by authoritative persons in the same field to ensure the work in question do not detract from the general worth of knowledge in that field.
There is still a vast amount of knowledge in the form of printed matter that is still not put into digital form yet (say, for the Internet). The usual reasons are time, cost and manpower.
Not the best of answers, but I hope it answers the question in a narrow way for now.
Books are a permanent form of knowledge so that knowledge from past generations can be passed on to future generations: reading a book is really time travel.
Books, by their very nature, usually go through an editorial process. There would have been a series of people (literary agents, publishers, editors, etc) who have checked the material for factual accuracy, literary suitability, legal liability, etc, so that the end product can be considered for most practical purposes as reliable and authoritative. Online sources are not necessarily less reliable or less authoritative, but online information are subject to weaker third-party checking (and I'll leave it at that to our interpretation what 'weaker third-party checking' means).
For books and similar other printed material, there will also have been some sort of peer reviewprocess in addition to the editorial process. Very often, the material will have been assessed by authoritative persons in the same field to ensure the work in question do not detract from the general worth of knowledge in that field.
There is still a vast amount of knowledge in the form of printed matter that is still not put into digital form yet (say, for the Internet). The usual reasons are time, cost and manpower.
Not the best of answers, but I hope it answers the question in a narrow way for now.
Similar questions