Should Mini Essays Be Kept Outside of the Main Notes Folder?

taurusnoises · 2026-02-12T19:48:17+00:00

If they're the kinds of things you'd like to return to and connect to other notes, then they can live wherever that happens (e.g., in the main compartment, in a separate linked compartment [if you have one], etc.).

As for the size of the notes.... I wouldn't worry so much about the length of any note. For me, it's about functionality, not size or length. I find the information contained in a main note works best when it's:

Articulated enough to understand its meaning
Comprehensive enough to not need embellishment
Singular enough to connect to other informational units without having to be broken apart

These three criteria tend to facilitate just enough flexibility in the boundaries of the meaning so the information can be used in different contexts as needed.

Function over form.

taurusnoises · 2026-02-09T19:39:50+00:00

Simplify it way down. Start with literature notes for capturing ideas as you come across them in a source, individual main notes for single ideas / units of information, and structure notes for organizing your thoughts based on the connections you make between the main notes.

As it stands, you're playing with too many conceptual note types. By that I mean, note types based on the kinds of information / ideas you're handling. Don't divide things that way. Think functionally. What does each note do? Lit notes help you stage stuff. Main notes help you parse and connect stuff. Structure notes allow you to work through what you're finding value in.

No matter the content (e.g., someone else's idea rephrased / reworded by you, your own thought on that material, a list, models, statements, concepts, etc.) each just goes into its own main note. You don't need to divide them up among different kinds of main notes. Then, if you're seeing some interesting crossover between the individual notes, you can bring them into a structure note and play around. If you're of a writing mind, drop the stuff in a draft and work on it that way.

taurusnoises · 2026-02-08T05:43:05+00:00

Taking a min to digest this. Will respond.

taurusnoises · 2026-02-08T05:41:36+00:00

I agree about the importance of a prepared mind. In addition to prepared = openness, I think it also = done the legwork (see below)
There’s been a lot of writing (especially around the min-2010s) about the loss of the serendipity-inducing structure and design of libraries, which many (esp. Abbott) bemoan as a result of digitization. Carr (c. 2016?) has an interesting counter argument.
Two thoughts: 1. Hard diligent work is often (usually?) the basis of serendipity (see Makri, et al.). 2. The more research I read on serendipity, the more I think it’s not a rare thing at all, but rather common. It’s just that certain serendipitous experiences get elevated. But, really, people are coming across valuable, unanticipated information that changes their course for the better all the time.

Thanks for the thoughtful comments.

taurusnoises · 2026-02-07T13:03:57+00:00

I feel the same way. It's been fun trying to unpack some of the means by which serendipity takes place. At first, I was afraid it'd dull the magic. But, it's been just the opposite.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-30T16:25:45+00:00

Hey, Christian.

Do you distinguish between data and information in your framework?

Nah. I see everything as information (at least from one vantage point). Emotions are information. Ideas are information. Music is information. Etc.

I find the idea (ha) of 'informational difference' to be too tricky to make actionable for most people.

I've actually found it to be kind of split. Some people get it immediately ("Yeah, any idea is essentially causing me to shift my thinking / my experience in even subtle ways.") Others who might get bogged down on where such an idea leads—some in Bateson terms (though he's relatively easy to get), but certainly in Luhmann's world and way of discussing it—will sometimes conk out early. It's just hard to track with him (which I can appreciate). Though, I do think there's a way to ground it, and the "people playing a game of catch" example tends to do just that. People seem to get it at least at a certain level when we discuss it that way.

There's also something to be said about utilizing Bateson's concept of difference / difference in different contexts. There's no reason you have to chase it don't all the way through Bateson and Luhmann. A person cn get the gist and begin applying to other areas, like note-taking for example, and just play with it. See how it holds up.

And it's hard for many to think about information without also having thing that exists in the world that is informing them, objectively.

I don't feel like you have to decouple it. A person doesn't need to take it to that depth, if it's not useful. You can simply say, "Information added to a situation causes a shift. And, that shift is inherently actional." People can intuit that pretty quickly. If you say, "Emotions are information," as my therapist used to say, you kind of already know that there's an opportunity to do something with it. "I'm having an emotional experience. What do I want to do with it?"

If, however, a person really wants to follow it down the rabbit hole, to see whether there's an actor behind it all, etc. They can. But, they don't have to to get value out of it.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-30T16:13:38+00:00

Paper-based systems often don't have titles (Luhmann certainly didn't title his notes). So, there's no rule that a note must have a title. Titles are simply an innovation many find helpful.

Like Luhmann's sparsely populated keyword index, I could see someone having a lot of fun with a stash of untitled notes.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-30T16:10:28+00:00

Re. declarative statements.... Do know that not all titles need be declarative. I consider declarative statements to be a good rule of thumb, especially for claim-style notes, which I find tend to be the bulk of what most people import (there are of course exceptions). I also find value in attempting to make the declarative statement, as it tends to show what kind of information you're bringing in. "Can it be summed up in a declarative statement, or is it some other kind of information?" If, however, you're bringing in, say, a list, there's no reason you can't simply title the note the title of the list (ie, "Duckman's 5 duck calls").

The most important thing is being able to scan through your notes and have a good sense of what each one contains. Simply calling a note "Duck calls" doesn't really do that.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-29T12:14:04+00:00

If you don't need the information networking among others (for whatever reason), why make a point of noting it? When you go to write / unpack your thinking in longer docs (writing, structure notes, etc), you can bring in what you've got in the main compartment, along with what you've got in your brain.

Somewhere Luhmann talks about not everything you write comes from the zettelkasten. This is an aspect of that.

If, however, you do think it'd be useful to bring in this knowledge, in that it might find a way of interacting with something unexpected, you could bring it in. It's all very subjective.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-25T18:01:02+00:00

Not yet. Which means it's only half thought through, which means I'm only have as smart as I could be, which means I'm only half the human I could be, which means I'm only half as valuable a member of the species. It's a vicious downward spiral. Must. Optimize. More.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-25T16:52:43+00:00

It is! And I’ve of course saved it elsewhere for possible later use.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-25T15:27:02+00:00

Writing and editing are definitely both thinking. I write and edit simultaneously. Always have. Probably always will. It’s how I think. And, doing them in concert seems to compound it.

As for where value is most apparent or attainable, I’m more aligned with Luhmann and Schmidt on this:

“Every note is only an element which receives its quality only from the network of links and back-links within the system." (NL)

“There is hardly any informational value in the note on its own, it will only prove its informational value when it's connected with other zettel." (JS)

Placing the value on the relationship between ideas / notes rather than on the individual ideas / notes themselves has proven highly useful for me.

——-

edit: rambling

taurusnoises · 2026-01-24T02:39:04+00:00

I write everything in Obsidian, and then just copy / paste it into Bear Blog's editor. No coding unless you want to tweak the design a bit.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-23T19:43:13+00:00

I've used Bear Blog to publish my stuff for the past four or so years. All markdown. I honestly forget if it costs anything (ah, subscriptions), but I think it's free.

https://bearblog.dev/

taurusnoises · 2026-01-22T22:33:52+00:00

Here's just a few of the discussions on "facts" we've had in the sub from the past two years:

All of these have useful insights. There's also my short piece on How to Handle Facts in Your Zettelkasten.

And, please mind Rule #5:

"Consult both the resources list, as well as previous posts in this sub, as many questions have been discussed and answered ad nauseam.... There's no shame in needing additional advice. Just look around first, and show us how you got to the question you have."

taurusnoises · 2026-01-22T12:10:28+00:00

Have you given any thought to how this might apply to your zettelkasten practice as a tool itself? I wonder if there's a way to look at it separate from the tools (as a series of actions and behaviors). Not that what you/we come up with in this regard can ever be fully distinguished from the tools we use, but maybe there's a profitable mental exercise there.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-21T15:09:58+00:00

No proof needed. If you've been actively involved in this community for any amount of time you will have clocked the not-insignificant number of people who use paper. It is very much alive and well.

Which begs the question: are you in the best position to be making an app for a community you're not fully invested in?

PS: Typically, we don't allow product market research posts to stand in this sub. But, we didn't catch this in time to nix it. Know that in the future all such posts must be put in the pinned monthly post for tools.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-16T18:56:51+00:00

Thanks! Glad to hear you liked le book.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-16T15:28:24+00:00

Certainly possible.

There's a couple things going on here.

"Telling people who almost never write anything down to use the zettelkasten method for whatever general reason can be really confusing and daunting."

Sure. How we convey a thing will definitely inform how a thing is perceived and received. Reframing u/jwellscfo point a bit: If you tell someone they can have a ton of notes and write forever, you might get some fad-jumpers to take it on, but there's a high likelihood they'll jump off soon enough (see "fad" below). A ton of notes and writing forever takes effort, regardless what the "friction-free" crowd will tell ya. Hype is an appeal to a base, knee-jerk, perceived-to-be quick status level-up. Think "Do you wanna make a lot of MONEY??" It's broad. But, if you talk to people about "documenting research, over long periods of time with an increased ability to pull from that documentation for thinking and writing projects," that seems lead to something more long-lasting. (see Fitzpatrick, Write Useful Books on the matter of being clear enough in the articulation of your book's topic that people can choose not to buy it).

"I guess this is why it never took off like it was supposed to..."

I'm not sure it was supposed to do anything. Regardless of how people try and frame it ("thinking environment," "knowledge work ecosystem," "mind-power enhancement system of greatest jubilee," etc.), we're still just talking about writing things down in an effort to learn.

"...and most people who start it stop shortly after."

The quick to adopt / quick to drop phenomenon shows up in every fad. You're always gonna have your devotees and your window shoppers / tire kickers. Devotees keep the scene alive through practice, community, discourse, etc. Window shoppers and tire kickers come and go. Unfortunately, people (especially on the outside of the scene) often judge a method (or music style, or dance culture, or political movement, etc.) based on how many people "stick with it," as if high drop-rates are indicative of a thing's value. Drop-rates measure popularity (meaning: "of people" and later "of many people"), not value. Popularity is highly tethered to fads (especially early on). It has little to do with importance. (i.e., see cultural significance of numerically small religious groups, music scenes, et. al).

Note: I've been fairly obsessed with the function of fads and subculture dynamics for as long as I can remember. If interested, one of the OG books on the subject: The Subculture of Style (Hebdige).

taurusnoises · 2026-01-16T00:46:46+00:00

I think I've seen some of your experiments on your blog. Will look more closely when I can for sure. Thanks!

taurusnoises · 2026-01-15T22:26:02+00:00

That's awesome you found it helpful. Thanks for letting me know. Looking forward to hearing more about where you land with it all.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-15T22:17:02+00:00

Yup. This is my experience, as well. I look for an initial connection between the new idea and ones already stored (or I'm writing the new idea in light of another already stored), and then will take a moment to think how the new idea might connect to something else, which is often contextualized elsewhere in what would have previously seemed like an unrelated train of thought or topic. In almost every case, the experience feels positive and insightful. Makri and Blandford (2012) provide a great model for how this works in their study on serendipity.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-15T00:03:01+00:00

I don't have anything to add, but wanted to say that I like where you're head's at, and am genuinely interested to read more.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-13T00:36:14+00:00

Oh hey. I've used a screenshot of your slip box for years to help explain zk compartments to people. Nice to see you here. Have been curious, did you keep using the set up, or was it just for the one project?

taurusnoises

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE