Reading Too Much Syndrome

Could it be possible? Is it even conceivable? Is it heretical? Is it possible that there could be a point when a person has learned too much information? This is a theory that has begun to cross my mind over the last 3 months. As I have reviewed previous blog posts, revisited Evernote bookmarks and reorganized my book collection I have come to an enlightening conclusion: I forget a lot.

I consider myself a pretty voracious reader. Certainly I go in cycles. I will go a month or two where I get a few hot books and it propels me to read more and more and I might finish 5-10 books in a matter of a few weeks. At some point, I usually cool off and go a couple weeks where nothing really piques my interest. But overall, after reviewing my book collection (app. 150 books), I'd say I've done quite a bit of reading since I reached the age of enlightenment (personally, 20). But what have I gained? Surely, a lot. I consider myself well read, well versed, and generally well rounded. I'm a good Jeopardy player, a respected businessman, and when I put effort into it, "quite an interesting conversationalist"(it certainly doesn't come naturally).

But have I gone too far? Well, possibly. While its quite conceivable to reason that subconsciously, all of the information that I have attained has made me the self-conceived "well rounded" person. It is also quite conceivable that I have dumbed down the most important lessons with mediocre lessons. Over the last few weeks, I've come to the realization on three separate occasions that I was teaching myself something for a second time. I quite literally had forgotten the information. Call it old age, call it ignorance, call it ADD but I had absolutely forgotten that I had previously learned something (and important things at that)!

Furthermore, the last couple of days I've had time to reflect on what I am most passionate about and what I want to do after this chapter of my life is complete. I've found myself reinvigorated with the equities market. The first thing I noticed was the noise. Predictions high, predictions low, massive volumes...blah, blah, blah. I found myself deeply annoyed. So I went back to my most trusted advisor, Charlie Munger. Charlie coined a term a number of years ago, "sit on your ass investing", that he applies to his investment strategy. A "sit on your ass investing" strategy is quite literally not a strategy, he just sits on his ass until good opportunities present themselves to be a strategy.

Now let me relate that strategy to reading. We are taught, and it is generally a sound principle, that the more we read, the more we will know. Well, yes in theory, but that fails to take into account that the more you learn, the more you could possibly forget. Back to "the noise" that comes from "Squawk Box" everyday (it's amazing that people actually listen to a show with that name). They fill the air with nonsense. They put thoughts in investors minds that clog reasonable thinking, causing them to make actions against sound market principles. Is that what my reading is doing? Do I read and read and read, clogging my head with "new" mediocre ideas and cloud-out the best, time-tested commandments that I should be living by?

For me, it's back to the basics. Across many different disciplines there is some acknowledgement that humans are only capable of focusing on a small number of thoughts, goals, or processes at one time. Charlie has four, clearly defined investment filters (Do we understand the business?, Does the business have a durable competitive advantage?, Does it have good management?, Is there a margin of safety?). Rather than clouding my head with more and more ideas, I need to go back and master the most basic of ideas and spend more time sitting on my ass.