Reread pages 82-85. Which is Faber's most convincing argument about the value of books? Which is his least convincing argument? Why?

Because of how much they show of the reality of life, books are dangerous, Faber says. He argues that most people would rather experience rootlessness than really think about life.

Second, books require leisure to digest: in other words, they can be difficult, and they take time, but these are attributes, not negatives. Because they require time, books can provoke thought and yield new ideas.

Finally, Faber says, books matter if people have the freedom to act on the ideas in them: just reading a book is not the end

Hope this helps :)