Sold a Story - Podcast<br /> by [[Emily Hanford]] of APM<br /> accessed on 2026-10-08T09:20:23

Video playlist on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ajIPRy_yc0&list=PLAqpiCUiqiUM

Assumptions like this always are based on the implicit bias that either the students share a somewhat similar social background with the professors or that the school system works well enough to establish the same reading skill in most people.

How to Study. 16mm, Instructional film. Coronet Instructional Films, 1946. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRK70kyaWOI.

"If you do one or two positive contributions a day, it adds up." - Ryan Holiday

Perhaps this is the essence of both Zettelkasten and Commonplace books; Marginal Gains.

Exponentional Increase over time. Upon first glance, it seems linear (1+1 = 2)... However, the formula is different because, at least in Zettelkasten, a new note means N new possible connections as this new note can virtually be connected to all other notes. In a Zettelkasten this is explicit, in a commonplace book connections are implicit.

Perhaps I need to argue more with the authors and the content, as Adler & van Doren also recommend.

This might be a limitation in (the way I do) Zettelkasten. Because I am not writing in the margins and not engage in "tearing up" the book, I am less inclined to argue against/with the work.

Maybe I need to do this more using bib-card. Further thought on implementation necessary...

Perhaps a different reason is that I like to get through most books quickly rather than slowly. Sometimes I do the arguing afterward, within my ZK.

I need to reflect on this at some point (in the near future) and optimize my processes.

Learning and Intellectualism can both be found in the act of comparison, or more broadly, analysis. One must do this perpetually when reading to dissect and gain most (long-term) (syntopical) value out of it.

In other words, Luhmann is urging to engage in pattern recognition.

True intellectual work using the Zettelkasten demands pattern recognition when reading. Domain specific knowledge + pattern recognition = efficient reading; for it allows to distinguish signal from noise, value from trash.

Is this a criticism by Luhmann on the conventional notion of syntopical reading in Adlerian terms? Probably without knowing Adler's work.

Because science/truth work (knowledge) is constantly in revision, conventional syntopical reading on a topic of science is without necessary value?

Perhaps unless stored and expanded upon in a ZK?

Further thought is required to disseminate this paragraph.

Unrelated to the song itself. It is interesting that different people interpret the song's meaning differently. Likely due to individual differences in perspective, history, culture, etc.

Makes me reflect. Is knowledge/wisdom contained solely in content and words? Or is knowledge/wisdom rather contained in the RELATIONSHIP, the INTERACTION, between past experience, previous knowledge (identity) and substance?

Currently I am inclined to go for the latter.

This is basically critical thinking. Which is also my goal for (optimal) education: To build a society of people who think for themselves, critical thinkers; those who do not take everything for granted. The skeptics.

See also Nassim Nicolas Taleb's advice to focus on what you DON'T know rather than what you DO know.

Related to syntopical reading/learning as well. (and Charlie Munger's advice). You want to build a complete picture with a broad understanding and nuanced before formulating an opinion.

Remove bias from your judgement (especially when it comes to people or civilizations) and instead base it on logic and deep understanding.

This also relates to (national, but even local) media... How do you know that what the media portrays about something or someone is correct? Don't take it for granted, especially if it is important, and do your own research. Validity of source is important; media is often opinionized and can contain a lot of misinformation.

See also Simone Weil's thoughts on media, especially where she says misinformation spread must be stopped. It is a vital need for the soul to be presented with (factual) truth.

The complexity of the topic is determined by the content of the discussion the topic is about.

To me, it seems that Adler et al., are arguing that a topic should be stated as a phrase with varying degrees of complexity, determined by ?

Some examples of topics that are formulated and used in the original syntopicon.

A topic should never be suggestive, for it would not be a topic in that way.

A topic is a place where minds meet for discussion.

For an intellectual, the library is not there to simply collect books, but rather to serve as a tool for research.

Is Syntopical Reading not the same as meta-analytic research? In what ways does it differ? In what ways is it the same?

( ~1:40) Syntopical Reading is about making one's own mind up.

(1:20.00-1:40.00) What he describes is the following: Most of his notes originate from the digital using hypothes.is, where he reads material online and can annotate, highlight, and tag to help future him find the material by tag or bulk digital search. He calls his hypothes.is a commonplace book that is somewhat pre-organized.

Aldrich continues by explaining that in his commonplace hypothes.is his notes are not interlinked in a Luhmannian Zettelkasten sense, but he "sucks the data" right into Obsidian where he plays around with the content and does some of that interlinking and massage it.

Then, the best of the best material, or that which he is most interested in working with, writing about, etc., converted into a more Luhmannesque type Zettelkasten where it is much more densely interlinked. He emphasizes that his Luhmann zettelkasten is mostly consisting of his own thoughts and is very well-developed, to the point where he can "take a string of 20 cards and ostensibly it's its own essay and then publish it as a blog post or article."

(1:21:20-1:39:40) Chris Aldrich describes his hypothes.is to Zettelkasten workflow. Prevents Collector's Fallacy, still allows to collect a lot. Open Bucket vs. Closed Bucket. Aldrich mentions he uses a common place book using hypothes.is which is where all his interesting highlights and annotations go to, unfiltered, but adequately tagged. This allows him to easily find his material whenever necessary in the future. These are digital. Then the best of the best material that he's interested in and works with (in a project or writing sense?) will go into his Zettelkasten and become fully fledged. This allows to maintain a high gold to mud (signal to noise) ratio for the Zettelkasten. In addition, Aldrich mentions that his ZK is more of his own thoughts and reflections whilst the commonplace book is more of other people's thoughts.

https://kimberlyhirsh.com/2019/04/01/dissertating-in-the.html

A description of some of Kimiberly Hirsh's workflow in keeping a public research notebook (or commonplace book).

I'd be curious to know what type of readership and response she's gotten from this work in the past. For some it'll bet it's possibly too niche for a lot of direct feedback, but some pieces may be more interesting than others.

Did it help her organize her thoughts and reuse the material later on?

Younes, G. A., Ayoubi, C., Ballester, O., Cristelli, G., de Rassenfosse, G., Foray, D., Gaule, P., Pellegrino, G., van den Heuvel, M., Webster, B., & Zhou, L. (2020). COVID-19_Insights from Innovation Economists [Preprint]. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/b5zae

Younes, G. A., Ayoubi, C., Ballester, O., Cristelli, G., de Rassenfosse, G., Foray, D., Gaule, P., van den Heuvel, M., Webster, B., & Zhou, L. (2020). COVID-19: Insights from Innovation Economists (with French executive summary) [Preprint]. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/65pgr