I enjoyed your comment. It's an intelligent perspective on the core debate of Carnegie's work. Perhaps the reason the book is so divisive is that it's a tool that works differently for different readers. There are those who require precise, literal instructions to achieve a good outcome, and the book provides that. But there are others who don't need to be so literal. They connect with the underlying philosophy. It reminds me of gastronomy. Some cooks follow a recipe step-by-step. Others seek to understand the "why" behind the flavor. They don't want a rigid set of rules; they want a "map of possibilities" that allows them to create. Thank you for a comment that truly makes one think.
Perhaps the reason the book is so divisive is that it's a tool that works differently for different readers. There are those who require precise, literal instructions to achieve a good outcome, and the book provides that. But there are others who don't need to be so literal. They connect with the underlying philosophy.
It reminds me of gastronomy. Some cooks follow a recipe step-by-step. Others seek to understand the "why" behind the flavor. They don't want a rigid set of rules; they want a "map of possibilities" that allows them to create.
Thank you for a comment that truly makes one think.