posted on May, 10 2009 @ 04:25 PM
I stopped by this thread a few minutes ago and couldn't really think of anything specific although I agree that a jack-of-all-trades would be quite
But as I wandered off into other threads the thought kept coming back to me that someone who is a teacher, someone with general knowledge would be
advantageous. But a teacher of what? I stayed away from the college level because that train of thought would be too specific, too compartmentalized
and limited to only a detailed examination of a singular topic.
But then I had an idea that prompted me to come back here. Librarian.
Even in a post-apocalyptic world, surely some things would survive. There would still be some structures left. Maybe architects had the right idea,
unknowingly, to build all of our greatest libraries out of marble and stone. Sure they look pretty but they have the structural capabilities to escape
anything but a direct hit or massive flood.
And who would know where to find and glean that information that would be crucial to survival? Library science is loosely based on the ability to tie
together seemingly unrelated subjects and combine them into a recognizable form of understanding. From abstract art to Zen Buddhism. From agriculture
to Zarathustra. From apples to zebras.
Even if our librarian didn't have access to books they would have that general knowledge of many diverse subjects that would come from their exposure
to the multitude of books that passed through their hands on a daily basis.
Books don't just organize and stack themselves. Someone would have to generally know what that book was about so it can be grouped with other like
subject matter, of which you would also have to know what they contained.
Even if our librarian didn't have all the information of a given subject they should at least have that seed of knowledge that others could then
Just a thought along a different path of understanding.
[edit on 10-5-2009 by zlots331]