13 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2022
    1. 3. Regesten.Da wir gesehen haben, wieviel auf tibersichtliche Ordnungbei der Zusammenstellung des Materials ankommt, muff manauf die praktische Einrichtung seiner Materialiensammlung vonAnfang an bewufte Sorgfalt verwenden. Selbstverstindlichlassen sich keine, im einzelnen durchweg gtiltigen Regeln auf-stellen; aber wir kinnen uns doch tiber einige allgemeine Ge-sichtspunkte verstindigen. Nicht genug zu warnen ist vor einemregel- und ordnungslosen Anhiufen und Durcheinanderschreibender Materialien; denn die zueinander gehérigen Daten zusammen--gufinden erfordert dann ein stets erneutes Durchsehen des ganzenMaterials; auch ist es dann kaum miglich, neu hinzukommendeDaten an der gehirigen Stelle einzureihen. Bei irgend gréferenArbeiten muff man seine Aufzeichnungen auf einzelne loseBlatter machen, die leicht umzuordnen und denen ohne Unm-stinde Blatter mit neuen Daten einzuftigen sind. Macht mansachliche Kategorieen, so sind die zu einer Kategorie gehérigenBlatter in Umschligen oder besser noch in K&sten getrennt zuhalten; innerhalb derselben kann man chronologisch oder sach-lich alphabetisch nach gewissen Schlagwiértern ordnen.
      1. Regesten Da wir gesehen haben, wieviel auf tibersichtliche Ordnung bei der Zusammenstellung des Materials ankommt, muß man auf die praktische Einrichtung seiner Materialiensammlung von Anfang an bewußte Sorgfalt verwenden. Selbstverständlich lassen sich keine, im einzelnen durchweg gültigen Regeln aufstellen; aber wir können uns doch über einige allgemeine Gesichtspunkte verständigen. Nicht genug zu warnen ist vor einem regel- und ordnungslosen Anhäufen und Durcheinanderschreiben der Materialien; denn die zueinander gehörigen Daten zusammenzufinden erfordert dann ein stets erneutes Durchsehen des ganzen Materials; auch ist es dann kaum möglich, neu hinzukommende Daten an der gehörigen Stelle einzureihen. Bei irgend größeren Arbeiten muß man seine Aufzeichnungen auf einzelne lose Blätter machen, die leicht umzuordnen und denen ohne Umstände Blätter mit neuen Daten einzufügen sind. Macht man sachliche Kategorieen, so sind die zu einer Kategorie gehörigen Blätter in Umschlägen oder besser noch in Kästen getrennt zu halten; innerhalb derselben kann man chronologisch oder sachlich alphabetisch nach gewissen Schlagwörtern ordnen.

      Google translation:

      1. Regesture Since we have seen how much importance is placed on clear order in the gathering of material, conscious care must be exercised in the practical organization of one's collection of materials from the outset. It goes without saying that no rules that are consistently valid in detail can be set up; but we can still agree on some general points of view. There is not enough warning against a disorderly accumulation and jumble of materials; because to find the data that belong together then requires a constant re-examination of the entire material; it is also then hardly possible to line up newly added data at the appropriate place. In any large work one must make one's notes on separate loose sheets, which can easily be rearranged, and sheets of new data easily inserted. If you make factual categories, the sheets belonging to a category should be kept separate in covers or, better yet, in boxes; Within these, you can sort them chronologically or alphabetically according to certain keywords.

      In a pre-digital era, Ernst Bernheim warns against "a disorderly accumulation and jumble of materials" (machine translation from German) as it means that one must read through and re-examine all their collected materials to find or make sense of them again.

      In digital contexts, things are vaguely better as the result of better search through a corpus, but it's still better practice to have things with some additional level of order to prevent the creation of a "scrap heap".

      link to: - https://hyp.is/i9dwzIXrEeymFhtQxUbEYQ

      In 1889, Bernheim suggests making one's notes on separate loose sheets of paper so that they may be easily rearranged and new notes inserted. He suggested assigning notes to categories and keeping them separated, preferably in boxes. Then one might sort them in a variety of different ways, specifically highlighting both chronological and alphabetical order based on keywords.

      (This quote is from the 1903 edition, but presumably is similar or the same in 1889, but double check this before publishing.)

      Link this to the earlier section in which he suggested a variety of note orders for historical methods as well as for the potential creation of insight into one's work.

  2. May 2022
    1. Don't worry, Niklas Luhmann never 'got' the whole evergreen vs. fleeting notes thing either. They're Ahrensian inventions. They're not Zettelkasten concepts, they're Ahrenskasten concepts.

      Ahrens uses the phrase permanent notes and never uses the words evergreen notes. Evergreen notes stems from Andy Matuschak's reading of Ahrens, likely with a side reference to the idea of evergreen articles which is a closely related commonplace idea in journalism.

      The difference between the permanent(evergreen) and fleeting comes from where one chooses to put the actual work into their system. One can collect thousands of fleeting notes in their system, but it's more likely that it will eventually collapse on itself and do the author no good. Better is to put as much work in up front to get to a good permanent note that is reusable in potentially many contexts.

      Much of this stems back at least as far as Vincentius Placcius in De Arte Excerpendi: Of Scholarly Book Organization (1689) where he offers a contemporary set of instructions on excerpting knowledge from books as well as a history of the subject of note taking. In the book, he warns specifically against the practice exhibited by Joachim Jungius (1585-1657) who left behind approximately 150,000 slips (or scraps) of paper (zettels). Because there was no index to it or links between the notes Jungius' collection was ostensibly useless following his death. His scraps were literally a "scrap heap".

  3. Apr 2022
    1. A cluster of his stu-dents—Martin Fogel, Michael Kirsten, and Vincent Placcius, all based in Ham-

      burg—spread his legacy by publishing manuals on note-taking and leaving abundant notes of their own.

      Vincentius Placcius, Martin Fogel, and Michael Kirsten were all students of Joachim Jungius in Hamburg and spread Jungius' legacy of note taking by leaving collections of their own notes as well as publishing manuals on the practice.

    2. oachim Jungius (1584–1657),professor of mathematics, medicine, logic, and natural philosophy at variousGerman universities, amassed one of the largest collections of notes of his day,estimated at 150,000 pages, of which 45,000 are extant.51

      Meinel (1995), 166, 168.

      Joachim Jungius had a collection of notes estimated at 150,000 pages of which 45,000 are extant.

    3. The auction catalog describing the library of MichaelKirsten listed his manuscripts under some forty headings, including indexes andsummaries of books, lists of queries, and “arguments or material for writing.” Thepreface observed that “there was no field in which Kirsten had not read, takennotes, and written commentaries” and suggested, evidently to no avail, that a sonor a friend with abundant leisure should publish them.52

      Michael Kristen was a student of Joachim Jungius and left a significant number of notes.

    4. and argue that notes were oftenvalued not only by those who took them but by others who hoped to put themto use.

      One example of this that I've already found is the practice of Joachim Jungius who's survivors had trouble figuring out what to do with his extensive note collection. It apparently resulted in the publication of De Arte Excerpendi: Of Scholarly Book Organization by Vincentius Placcius.

      link to : - https://hypothes.is/a/dBE8wFO0EeybR8_urfbYOw - https://hypothes.is/a/SyenKlO2Eeys0esqwOgjUw

  4. Feb 2022
    1. Just collecting unprocessedfleeting notes inevitably leads to chaos.

      Collecting fleeting notes and not processing them into something more useful and permanent will eventually end in abject failure.

      An example can be seen in the note taking of Joachim Jungius in 1657. He compiled approximately 150,000 slips (also known as scraps) with excerpts and ideas without any sort of order, arrangement, index or reference system. Following his death his students and heirs could make nothing of the massive "scrap heap". As a result, Vincent Placcius in De Arte Excerpendi (1689) specifically warns against this practice (p. 72).

      (cross reference from : https://hypothes.is/a/SyenKlO2Eeys0esqwOgjUw)

  5. Jan 2022
    1. ike Jungius, Boyle made use of loose folio sheets that he called memorials or adversaria; yet he did not worry too much about a system of self-referential relationships that enabled intentional knowl-edge retrieval. When he realized that he was no longer able to get his bearings in an ocean of paper slips, he looked for a way out, testing several devices, such as colored strings or labels made of letters and numeral codes. Unfortunately, it was too late. As Richard Yeo clearly noted, ‘this failure to develop an effective indexing system resulted from years of trusting in memory in tandem with notes’.69

      69 Yeo, ‘Loose Notes’, 336

      Robert Boyle kept loose sheets of notes, which he called memorials or adversaria. He didn't have a system of organization for them and tried out variations of colored strings, labels made of letters, and numerical codes. Ultimately his scrap heap failed him for lack of any order and his trust in memory to hold them together failed.

      I love the idea of calling one's notes adversaria. The idea calls one to compare one note to another as if they were combatants in a fight (for truth).

      Are working with one's ideas able to fit into the idea of adversarial interoperability?

    2. Well studied personal experiences, such as those of Joachim Jungius, Robert Boyle, and Secondo Lancellotti,59 represent outstanding exam-ples

      I want to take a look at these systems.

  6. Dec 2021
    1. De Arte Excerpendi: Of Scholarly Book Organization by Vincen-tius Placcius. It offers an overview of contemporary procedures, instruc-tions on regular excerpting, and an extensive history of the subject. Placcius expressly warns against a loose form of indexing as pursued by Jungius. 38
      1. Placcius 1689, p. 72.

      Vincentius Placcius in De Arte Excerpendi: Of Scholarly Book Organization (1689) offers a contemporary set of instructions on excerpting knowledge as well as a history of the subject.

      In the book, he warns specifically against the loose form of indexing exhibited by Joachim Jungius. (p72)

    2. In 1657, the fi rst practitioner of nonhierarchical indexing, Joachim Jungius (born 1585), dies in Hamburg after compiling approximately 150,000 slips of papers with accumulated knowledge, bound and sorted according to the most minute details and building blocks and without registers or indexes, let alone reference systems. 3
      1. On Jungius and his technique, see Meinel 1995.

      Joachim Jungius (1585-1657) compiled approximately 150,000 slips of paper with accumulated knowledge sorted and bound but without indices. Markus Krajewski considers him the "first practitioner of nonhierarchical indexing."

  7. Aug 2021
    1. By the way, Luhmann's system is said to have had 35.000 cards. Jules Verne had 25.000. The sixteenth-century thinker Joachim Jungius is said to have had 150.000, and how many Leibniz had, we do not know, though we do know that he had one of the most ingenious piece of furniture for keeping his copious notes.

      Circa late 2011, he's positing Luhmann had 35,000 cards and not 90,000.

      Jules Verne used index cards. Joachim Jungius is said to have had 150,000 cards.

  8. May 2021
    1. Ulisse Aldrovandi, the great Bolognese natural philosopher and collector of specimens (such as the large lizards that adorn his university library museum), wrote four hundred volumes of manuscript notes. Joachim Jungius, a German professor of mathematics, medicine, logic, and natural philosophy, was famous for having produced an estimated 150,000 pages of notes. But as Blair makes clear, the vast collections of scientific notes were not simply the mad scratchings of obsessive pedants. Commonplace notes comprised the data for internationally successful scientific works, such as Jean Bodin’s Universae naturae theatrum.

      Examples of significant collections of notes.