>>12367360Books don't come from a vacuum. They're written by people, who all have their own viewpoints and their own idiosyncrasies. If you limit yourself to only one book, you're limited to the one personal viewpoint that the author has of the subject and you're stuck inheriting all the personal idiosyncrasies of the author. By reading multiple books you get multiple different explanations and viewpoints, sometimes entirely different proofs, and often broader coverage because while the core material is always the same, the extra non-essential topics can vary a lot from book to book. Not only is all this helpful, but it's enjoyable to read alternative ways of doing stuff you already know how to do and new applications of the core material.
The "autism" in preferring one book per subject seems to be the idea that there's some kind of linear scale of quality, that there's a "best" book for the subject and all the others are strictly inferior, but that's (usually) not the case, and never the case at lower levels where there are dozens or hundreds of different choices. Different books have different strengths and weaknesses. One is rarely strictly "better" than any other in every single way.
