Reading more than one source on a topic | Reading

- [Narrator] Hello readers, today I wanna talk to you about why we read more than one text on one topic. And to show you why I shall use a subject that is very near and dear to my heart, animals that can kill you. This is not a joke. I legitimately wrote a book about this a few years ago, and to research this book about the world's deadliest animals, I read a lot of other books and sources. So I wanna use this experience to show you why it's important to read more than one source on a subject. Okay, so why do it? Why not say all right, I read one text about the Pacific Blue-ringed octopus. Why do I need to read two or three or 20? There are a couple reasons. Let's start with the first, expert knowledge. If you wanna know all about octopuses, you can't just look at a single piece of writing say, "Bam, got it, know all I need to know "I am the knower of octopus facts." No, you can't do it. If you want to become an expert, you need to be able to say well, this book says the Pacific octopus toxin can stop your heart. But this one says that you can tell whether or not an octopus is frightened by its color. Reason number two to read multiple sources, helping to determine or know what's true. Sometimes people get things wrong. It helps to read more than one text to make sure you're getting as many perspectives or ideas as you can. Sometimes information from an old book might be outdated or information from a new book hasn't yet been proven to be true. Reading different texts can help you decide what you think about a topic, or even whether or not something is true. We can answer questions like, what is the deadliest animal? Or how do we even define deadliest? Reason number three, to read multiple texts on the same topic, supporting an argument. The more information you can get about a topic, the more support you can give to your own opinions or arguments. I think that this animal is the most dangerous because I've read a bunch of different works about dangerous animals and I can support it with evidence, you would say. If I were to say that bears are more dangerous than I don't really know what I drew, I thought I was trying to draw a sheep but I think it's a hedgehog. If I were to try to argue that bears are more dangerous than hedgehogs, I would use multiple sources to provide evidence for those claims. Bears are taller, bears are heavier, bears have sharper teeth, bears are stronger. Hedgehogs or sheep are cuter and cuddlier sorry to bears. It's important to recognize that different books have different arguments in them. Every book has a different angle, right? Sometimes it's obvious like a book with the title, "Deadly animals and how to hunt them" versus a book called "Deadly animals and how to protect their habitats." People have opinions and people make books. So, that means that books can have opinions too. Are these animals cool or terrifying? Should they be hunted or protected? Reading one text on a subject doesn't give you the full story. It's important to be able to read more than one text, compare them and then decide what you think from that. It helps to have a purpose in mind too as you read. Oh, and to answer your unspoken question, the deadliest animals on earth are definitely human beings but in a close second place is hippos. Those guys will bite you in half. So you know, watch out for hippos. You can learn anything. David out.