15 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. The world today is often characterized by a fast-paced, reactive culture. The song encourages a more thoughtful, deliberate approach to life. Patience allows us to step back, reflect, and make informed decisions instead of impulsively reacting to situations.

      System 1 vs. System 2

      Counteract the dopamine-dependent short-attention-spanned culture of today. Stop. Take time to think. Reflect. Go away from the devices. Perform analog note-making. Slow down.

  2. Jun 2024
    1. (~0:45)

      Justin mentions that a better way to think about learning is in systems rather than techniques. This is true for virtually anything. Tips & Tricks don't get you anywhere, it is the systems which bring you massive improvements because they have components all working together to achieve one goal or a set of goals.

      Any good system has these components working together seamlessly, creating something emergent; worth more than the sum of its parts.

  3. May 2024
    1. (~6:30)

      I think the major point here is that Adler points out our minds, and thus our thinking, changes over time. Therefore, when a book is read at a later point in time, our notes are different.

      Perhaps his argument to "think again as to make the thought more current" is antithetical to Luhmann's Zettelkasten, which principles upon continuing previous lines of thought, even decades later.

      (future note, about half an hour later)... I think in the Zettelkasten the problem is dealt with adequately, since you actually can make new notes expressing why your thought changes... So in this sense it is even more expanded upon the point that Adler makes even though at first sight it seems the complete opposite.

    1. A slew of recent brain imaging research suggests handwriting's power stems from the relative complexity of the process and how it forces different brain systems to work together to reproduce the shapes of letters in our heads onto the page.

      Interesting. Needs more research on my part.

    2. In adults, taking notes by hand during a lecture, instead of typing, can lead to better conceptual understanding of material.

      This is because of the fact that one needs to think (process) before writing. One can't possibly write everything verbatim. Deep processing. Relational thinking.

    3. Why writing by hand beats typing for thinking and learning
  4. Aug 2023
    1. This method is interesting, I like the aesthetics of such commonplace books. However, in terms of functionality, it is nearly fully replaced with the Antinet Zettelkasten method. Perhaps I could use some of this to improve my journals though? In addition, this does inspire me to create progressive summarization pages of my ideas and concepts, contained in Sage Scientia, in Notion or Obsidian.

      A method such as this, or Zettelkasten, can help create theoretical expertship... It might not be the MOST EFFICIENT, but it is highly effective.

    1. The essence for this video is correct; active learning, progressive summarization, deep processing, relational analytical thinking, even evaluative.

      Yet, the implementation is severely lacking; marginalia, text writing, etc.

      Better would be the use of mindmaps or GRINDEmaps. I personally would combine it with the Antinet of course.

      I do like this guy's teaching style though 😂

  5. Jul 2023
    1. You can tell people just like I have you to focus their attention, choose a target. Imagine there's a spotlight shining just on it. Don't pay much attention to what's in your periphery almost as if you have like blinders on, right? So don't pay attention to those distractors. People can do that. We have them talk to us about like, well, what is it that you're focused on? What's catching your attention right now? Those are easy instructions to understand and it's easy to make your eyes do it. What's important though is that that's not what their eyes do naturally. When they're walking or when they're running, people do take a sort of wider perspective. They broaden their scope of attention relative to what these instructions are having them do. And when we taught people that narrowed style of attention, what we found is that they moved 23% faster in this course that we had set up. From the start line to the finish line, it was always exactly the same distance. And we were using our stop watches to see how fast did they move. They moved 23% faster and they said it hurt 17% less. Right? So exactly the same actual experience, but subjectively it was easier and they performed better. They increase the efficiency of this particular exercise.

      (24:58) In order to perform significantly better, you need to FOCUS your attention on a single thing only. Multitasking won't work, and thinking about different things at once also doesn't work. Set up your environment to foster this insane level of focus.

    1. The distinction between a priori and a posteriori knowledge thus broadly corresponds to the distinction between empirical and nonempirical knowledge.
    2. The terms “a priori” and “a posteriori” are used primarily to denote the foundations upon which a proposition is known. A given proposition is knowable a priori if it can be known independent of any experience other than the experience of learning the language in which the proposition is expressed, whereas a proposition that is knowable a posteriori is known on the basis of experience.
  6. Jun 2023
    1. When it comes to thinking, the Zettelkasten solves an important issue which is the problem of scope, which is impossible at the current moment in mindmapping software such as Concepts.

      Mainly, Zettelkasten allows you gain a birds-eye holistic view of a topic, branch, or line of thought, while allowing you to at the same time also gain a microscopic view of an "atomic" idea within that thought-stream, therefore creating virtually infinite zoom-in and zoom-out capability. This is very, very, beneficial to the process of deep thinking and intellectual work.

  7. Jun 2021
    1. The more pieces of information we can “access” and the faster we can extract their gist, the more productive we become as thinkers.

      But are Google's tools really making us more productive thinkers? One might argue that it's attempting to do all the work for us and take out the process of thought all together. We're just rats in a maze hitting a bar to get the food pellet.

      What if the end is a picture of us as the people on the space ship at the end of WALL-E? What if it's keeping us from thinking?

      What if it's making us more shallow thinkers rather than deep thinkers?

      Cross reference P.M. Forni.

  8. Sep 2020
    1. There’s a lot of value in slow thinking. You use the non-lizard side of your brain. You make more deliberate decisions. You prioritize design over instant gratification. You can “check” your gut instincts and validate your hypothesis before incurring mountains of technical debt.

      Slow thinking is vergelijkbaar met Deep Work.