Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten

<< < (27/244) > >>

Dormouse:
I'm just going to start this.  I can feel myself going through paralysis-by-analysis.  I promised myself to move on when that happens.-superboyac (November 07, 2019, 11:56 AM)
--- End quote ---

I'm sure that's the right thing to do. Learn enough to know where and how to start and then go. Revise as necessary. your best way is unlikely to be exactly the same as anyone else's.

kfitting:
Yep... just dive in.

One thought per note is one of those things that I strive for, but rarely achieve. When you create a note, you rarely know what specific thing you are writing about. That comes in time and as you re-analyze a topic you'll start to see where different facets come in. Also, the archive should reflect your mind: topics you care about will be detailed and have one thought per note. Topics you dont care about will be generic and more nebulous. PHD's have specific knowledge... why do we think we can achieve such specificity for every one of our notes?

My number one rule?

Refactor, refactor, refactor.

Dormouse:
One thought per note is one of those things that I strive for, but rarely achieve. When you create a note, you rarely know what specific thing you are writing about. That comes in time and as you re-analyze a topic you'll start to see where different facets come in. Also, the archive should reflect your mind: topics you care about will be detailed and have one thought per note. Topics you dont care about will be generic and more nebulous. PHD's have specific knowledge... why do we think we can achieve such specificity for every one of our notes?-kfitting (November 08, 2019, 04:59 AM)
--- End quote ---

I don't see the problem with achieving one thought to a note. It's up to you what constitutes a thought.
The big disadvantage of generic and nebulous comes with linking. Very many notes can link to a generic note, but only a very small % will be ones you want to follow whatever you're trying to do.
I don't see any difference between a PhD or a minor new difference either. The quality of the thought might vary. The specificity might vary. Knowledge should vary. But shouldn't be a problem with having one thought.

There could be a photo of a sheep in a field.
A very small child might think nice furry animal.
A slightly older child might think Shaun!
A butcher might think ready soon.
A farmer might think selenium deficiency? (mostly noticing the lush grass).
A thought is a single focus for what was in the mind. More foci simply means extra notes.
There's no reason to push yourself to have all the thoughts you might possibly have unless doing that is your purpose.
Revisiting the note or topic and adding new notes with new thoughts when there's a reason to is sufficient.

tomos:
I'm not sure I fully understand 'refactoring' in this context -- I see it defined as changing/improving code without changing its external behavior.

Dormouse:
I'm not sure I fully understand 'refactoring' in this context -- I see it defined as changing/improving code without changing its external behavior.-tomos (November 08, 2019, 04:28 PM)
--- End quote ---
I didn't appreciate the specificity of the coding reference. Simply used the same word assuming a mathematical origin as in factor again. I've reworded my reference to it. Thanks.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page