I have a strange hobby. I like to read reviews.
Why? Because I can learn a thing or two about human behaviour from them.
Here’s an example.
A 1-star review said:
“Antiquated methods. Don’t bother. This stuff may have worked in the 60s, but people are barraged with ads like never before. Following this will start you at the back of the line.”
All the 1-star reviewers said something similar – the methods taught were outdated.
A 5-star review says:
“This is not a book you are going to skim. You will find yourself reading a section or headline, reading the analysis and then going back to the headline and re-reading it. Don’t let the older publishing date fool you. Everything is still applicable today. Many modern books rehash what these older books first taught.”
All the 5-star reviewers also said something similar – the principles were still applicable in today’s contexts.
Two extreme reviews on the same book written more than 60 years ago. So who’s right and who’s wrong?
After reading, I’d give the book 5-star, too.
So, are the 1-star reviewers wrong? No, not exactly.
The 1-star ones are looking for a quick fix method – the “What”. Ergo, they’re not interested in theory and principles. – the “Why“. Therefore, they’re not wrong when they said the methods were antiquated.
I’m in the “Why” camp. Because to me, principles are timeless while methods aren’t.
What about you? Are you into a “What” or a ”Why” person?
