Prompt: It has been said, "Not everything that is learned is contained in books." Compare and contrast knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained from books. In your opinion, which source is more important? Why? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience

Undoubtedly, source of knowledge cannot be limited to the books only. Man learns from every single thing if it wishes to. Some people prefer to read books to get knowledge while others believe that it is acquired by experience. I have a mixed opinion about this and believe that both ways are important in gaining knowledge to benefit ourselves. Ċ The role of books can be understood when we see its significance in our research. Work of previous scientists is passed to the next generation in this way. Complex Mathematical formulas and Physics laws which are outcomes of someone's past experiences are the exquisite examples of this preserved knowledge in books. Furthermore, it is less time consuming for getting the results. However, theoretical knowledge is incomplete without its practical implication. For example, one can read good books on driving a car and gain knowledge but it will not learn it until give it a practical go. Ċ On the other hand, experience plays its own role in learning. It is well-known that lessons learned from experience are not easily forgotten. They live with us in our entire life. For instance, a child is told several times that not to play with fire but most of the time it does not listen and when it hurts itself by trying to catch it, it learns that playing with fire is harmful .The only issue in learning with experience is the time it takes. Moreover, it requires a lot of one's patience as well. Ċ In conclusion, I believe that both are important and to get full benefits of knowledge one must have to acquire it from books and experience.