9 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2023
    1. Llewelyn, J. E. “Zettel. By Ludwig Wittgenstein. Edited by G. E. M. Anscombe and G. H. von Wright. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. (Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1967. Pp. v + ve + 124 + 124e. Price 37s 6d).” The Philosophical Quarterly 18, no. 71 (April 1968): 176. https://doi.org/10.2307/2217524.

  2. Mar 2023
    1. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Zettel. Edited by Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret Anscombe and Georg Henrik von Wright,. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Second California Paperback Printing. 1967. Reprint, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press, 2007.

      annotation target: urn:x-pdf:15f4a1e48274f28b55eb6f8411c1ff1c

  3. Nov 2022
    1. it became clear that Fermat's Last Theorem could be proven as a corollary of a limited form of the modularity theorem (unproven at the time and then known as the "Taniyama–Shimura–Weil conjecture"). The modularity theorem involved elliptic curves, which was also Wiles's own specialist area.[15][16]

      Elliptical curves are also use in Ed25519 which are purportedly more robust to side channel attacks. Could there been some useful insight from Wiles and the modularity theorem?

    1. Socrates is turned into a systematic set of psycho-technologies that you internalise into your metacognition. So, what became crucial for Plato, as we saw, was argumentation. But for Antisthenes the actual confrontation with Socrates was more important. Both Plato and Antisthenes are interested in the transformation that Socrates is affording.Plato sees this happening through argumentation. Antesthenes sees it as happening through confrontation because... And you can see how they're both right, because in Socratic elenchus, Socrates comes up and he argues with you. But of course he's also confronting you. We talked about how he was sort of slamming the Axial revolution into your face! So, Antesthenes has a follower, Diogenes, and Diogenes epitomizes this: This confrontation. And by looking at the kinds of confrontation we can start to see what the followers of Antesthenes are doing. So Diogenes basically does something analogous to provocative performance art. He gets in your face in a way that tries to provoke you to realizations. Those kinds of insights that will challenge you. He tries to basically create aporia in you, that shocked experience that you had when confronting Socrates that challenges you to radically transform your life. But instead of using argumentation and discussion, as Socrates did and Plato picked up on, they were really trying to hone in on how to try to be as provocative as possible.

      John Vervaeke on Socrates becoming set of psychotechnologies to internalize and augment metacognition. Agues agumentation become central for Plato, whereas confrontation itself become central for Antisthenes. They're disagree about how the cause of the transformation through the Socratic approach

      Unclear is stoics take up Plato's mantle of argumentation orientation, but they at least seem distinct from the Cynics (Antisthenes & teach Diogenes

      Aporia is moment of shock from experience that you're radically transformed. Could be from Diogenes' provocative performance art or through discourse a la Plato & Socrates

      Nietzche may have favored Cynics approach over stoic/Socratic. Possible parallel in left-hand path and right-hand path. Quick & risky vs. slow & steady

    1. The Moderate Brain Arousal model(MBA; Sikstro ̈m & So ̈derlund, 2007) suggests that dopamine levels modulate how much noise isrequired for optimal cognitive performance.

      Model for explaining why the mechanism of stochastic resonance may be different for those with ADHD

  4. Apr 2022
    1. Some passages practically scream to be put into the Zettelkasten so I’ll indulge them. Sometimes I’ll have dozens of things I wrote on cards without identifiers or places in the Zettelkasten yet, and I’ll spend 30–60 minutes putting them in and finding places for them. In case I haven’t said it enough, this regular review process is the most important key to making all of this work.

      The linking of one zettel to another can be a lot of work, but it is also the thing which improves the creativity and serendipity of the enterprise.

    1. Wittgenstein from his ‘Zettel’, a box containing over 700 textfragments (or ‘scraps’) and other loose pages (Krapp, 2006: 362).

      Ludwig Wittgenstein had a box, which he apparently called his 'Zettel' in which he kept over 700 text fragments or scraps and other loose pages.

      Double check this reference for a translation error from German as Zettel is the 'slip' and kasten is the 'box', 'crate', or 'container'.

  5. Mar 2022
    1. As someone from a tech background, this can be unintuitive, but it’s okay to repeat yourself! If you have two notes that are related, X and Y, it’s okay to write about how Y is related to X in X, and how X is related to Y in Y. Imagine trying to follow the DRY (Don’t Repeat Yourself) principle here: you’ll end up “refactoring” the X and Y notes by linking them to a note Z that talks about how X and Y are related. Then you can’t read either X or Y without going to read Z!

      Zettels should be Atomic

  6. Aug 2021
    1. Yeo, “Notebooks as Memory Aids” (II, G), locates Locke’s views at a crucialjuncture in the status of memory, when commonplace books were seen assites for ordering information and not as prompts for recalling it.

      Interesting datum along the timeline of commonplacebooks and memory. Worth logging and following.

      Note the difference in the ideas of ordering information versus being able to recall it. How does this step in the evolution figure for the concept of the zettelkasten?