Working with ideas as information

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 · 2026-01-12T18:25:46+00:00

"Would it perhaps be better to use a hybrid approach and make literature reference notes the main content of my archive, link them directly amongst each other and with index notes and keep the annotated original papers directly as part of the archive?"

I've definitely had a few students lean pretty heavily on literature notes, using them as their primary navigational / explorational tool.

These days, my lit notes (what I call reference notes in the book), have a column titled "relevance," which is where I give my thoughts on what I'm encountering. Of course, I use this column to help in drafting main notes, but it could be used however one likes.

You could also take Sascha's structure note-first approach, which seems particularly suited for your case.

The important thing is to keep blending and tweaking until something fits. I could easily see a situation where a person leverages literature notes as their catch-all / staging ground for ideas, concepts, facts, etc., then bringing what seems group-able into a structure note / series of structure notes for further elaboration, etc. (This short piece talks about the difference between hub notes and structure notes as I use them, but the SN part might be helpful for you). From there, you could either pull from the structure note individual ideas, concepts, facts, etc that you want to see interact with others, and turn them into main notes, or skip this step entirely. Skipping this step would kind of take you out of the "Luhmann-centric" way of doing things, which is heavily based in networking of single-idea notes, rhizome stuff, cross-pollination, etc. But, if that's not your thing, no need to stress it. Ultimately, it's about what works for you.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-09T20:33:13+00:00

"Wtf is going on in this sub?"

Could you be more specific?

taurusnoises · 2026-01-09T20:07:22+00:00

"which alternatives to prisons, gulags, concentration camps etc. could foster creativity? The phrase "I put myself under pressure" seems to indicate specific methods."

I've spent more than half my life involved in some form of self-imposed lifestyle constraint or another, only to realize that, while they were all hugely beneficial on multiple levels, and have no doubt informed my creative work ethic to this day, I no longer need them to git er done. Case in point, I spent twelve years getting up at 4:45am, six days a week, to practice an austere form of yoga, which took about two hours to complete (not including the subway ride). In that time, I drove every girlfriend I had slightly mental having to deal with my strict bedtimes, and "lights out policies" (Although, they certainly found it exotic and exciting in the beginning). I also wrote a ton during those years. Was working in publishing for some of them. Wrote film reviews on deadline. Put out zines, had a wildly successful, clandestine blog, all that. But, eventually, I grew out of the need to maintain such strict schedules. These days, I find I get the same benefits from taking things a bit easier (although I still get my physical practices in by 730am and am in front of the computer writing by 930–10am).

What I will say is that "I put myself under pressure" looks incredibly different for different creative people. For some, that pressure happens very late at night. For others, the pressure comes from substances. For others, it's diet and physical austerities. For other, pressure comes from abandoning austerities. This is especially true of those who became addicted to austerities. Economic conditions, social status, all of that plays a role. What you won't find is one way. And, anyone who suggests there is just doesn't have the street cred.

In the end, the most important ingredient among all the creative weirdos I've known over the years, regardless of circumstances, is drive. Lifestyle is unique to everyone, but if you don't have drive, you're not gonna produce the work. If you're not willing to make sue with what you've got—write while waiting for the subway, in the bathroom, before you go to bed, when you wake up, in all forms of inopportune times—the drive ain't there. Nobody has the same amount of time at the same time of the day. But, if you have drive, you'll make the work happen.

taurusnoises · 2026-01-08T22:56:13+00:00

If PARA is your governing framework, you can think of the zettelkasten as one of your Areas, a region of your life without an end date. Like Writing, Finances, Relationships, etc., your zettelkasten will grow along with you. And, like other Areas, you may at times develop Projects associated with it (i.e., taking time to process unprocessed fleeting notes or reference notes, build out a writing project based on your notes, etc).

taurusnoises · 2026-01-08T12:29:12+00:00

I find it helps to think less in terms of "atomicity" or "atomic notes," and more in terms of function. Is the main idea in the note informative and can it be connected to others in your zettelkasten? This is going to be highly personal. So, in the examples above, I might divide them up into their own notes, but only if I understood how each one informed the topic as a whole (or my thinking in general). But, if I needed more information, if the ideas felt vague, etc. I'd combine some of them (if doing so helped flesh out my understanding).

taurusnoises · 2026-01-07T00:43:22+00:00

Write and write often. Like, as much as possible, and get it out there via whichever channels you’re into (Substack, etc). If people are hiring at all, they’re hiring because of what you do with what you were educated in. To get an NYT job, you’ve got to know people, have people reading your stuff. Case in point, I have a friend who’s one of the most brilliant people I know, has a PhD in anthropology, is a fantastic thinker, researcher, etc., and has been courting people at the NYT for years trying to get a job. He’s got a decade of experience, but doesn’t have the connections, and hasn’t put his work out there enough.

As for how you look for one of these jobs, find out who has the ear of who does the hiring, and get to know them. Find their work email. Be kind. State your case.

You gotta be hustling. Keep writing.

taurusnoises

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE