On the fly-leaf of one of his books Tobias Mayer scribbled the following query: Is it better to know little, and that little clearly, or a great deal vaguely?
A man who has occupied himself thoughtfully and attentively in connection with but one specialized branch of study will certainly be able to judge no less soundly in matters outside this particular field, provided that the case is clearly put to him, and that it is one rather of judgment than of taste. But those who have a smattering of everything are never properly at home in any subject. Were it not for the fact that an all-round knowledge can nowadays be so easily picked up from books with no further exertion than a certain call upon the memory, something might be said for extent as against thoroughness of knowledge. As, however, the vagueness assumed in the question is sufficient proof how little the understanding has been employed in the matter, I should decide, on these grounds alone, for limited yet clear knowledge.
My opinion is—every remark that one ventures on one’s own authority, and which is not a matter of reckoning, should have some such opening as this—my opinion is that many a person could do better than he is doing, only that he has resigned himself to the idea that he lacks ability. Others who have done much original work probably possess no greater ability than he, but only more industry. To the philosopher, consequently, one can never sufficiently recommend the proverb’s advice—to “keep your spirits up, and look about you.”
