How to Turn Note-Writing into Deliberate Mind Training
Andy Matuschak published a note that I never saw seriously quoted and appreciated. This is a grave mistake that I will correct:
Note-writing can be a virtuosic skill
Most people don’t seem to take note-writing very seriously as a skill. For some, that’s because they see it as a simple utility (e.g. Most people use notes as a bucket for storage or scratch thoughts). For others, their indifference may arise because they notice that Note-writing practices are generally ineffective.
But some note-writing practices are vastly more effective than others. It’s possible to become much, much more skilled at writing notes, and that skill translates into valuable output: Evergreen note-writing as fundamental unit of knowledge work. Source
Let’s break this idea down.
Note-writing can be a virtuosic skill. We need to establish the following statements to support this claim:
- Note-writing is a practice in its own right.
- Note-writing satisfies the conditions to be viewed as a skill.
The first claim, note-writing as a practice in its own right, is true for my own knowledge work practice. Whenever my schedule allows, I dedicate deep work sessions to the sole act of taking notes. These note-writing days create a lot of value for me:
- They are heavy-duty mind training. I push the limits of my mind both in intensity and work capacity. After a couple of weeks, I think better.
- I create unique and valuable ideas. If you are a creative knowledge worker, one of your goals is to create good ideas. If I can schedule two mornings of writing notes (in my Zettelkasten, of course), I know that I will consistently create a couple of exciting ideas per session. These ideas are essential building blocks for solutions to problems I am working on, ideas for articles and books, or even new tools for knowledge work.
These sessions deliver serious results.
The first reason is that the written word is an awesome medium for your thinking. Luhmann writes that you have to write notes anyway if you want to think properly. Feynman goes even one step beyond and claims that writing and thinking are identical. Zinsser said that “writing is thinking on paper”, too.
The second reason is that my Zettelkasten sessions are fueled by books. That means that I typically process books during these sessions. I am not just capturing information. I am actively engaging with the source material by writing. I aim to write in a value-adding style. That means that capturing the idea from the book (or writing down an idea that the book inspired me to) is just the beginning. I then apply techniques like atomization and deliberate value-adding. One of the values is reliability. Whenever appropriate, I provide arguments and empirical evidence for why an idea is true. This is basically the so-called learning technique, elaborative interrogation. My note-writing style is infused with beneficial learning techniques.
Note-writing as a standalone practice is valuable because it trains your mind and helps you consistently generate ideas. This is valuable to anybody who has to think for a living and create knowledge.
The second claim, that note-writing satisfies the conditions to be viewed as a skill, rests on the assumption that note-writing has its own metric of success independent of yet interconnected to overall desired outcomes like writing books.
In athletics, this is standard knowledge: Let’s assume you’re a martial artist. Strength is measured independently of your martial arts. Your strength is measured in the weight that you lift. But your strength is only as useful as it is for winning fights.
The same has to be true for note-writing. Yes, note-taking serves a higher purpose, your equivalent of martial arts. But this higher purpose is not permission to become negligent with the specific practices that serve it. Quite the contrary. You should be extra diligent with each element of your knowledge work practice.
So, if we are now on the same page, taking note-writing seriously, we are left with a question: What does good note-writing look like? What are good notes?
Atomic note-taking answers this question. A good atomic note isolates and captures the full essence of an idea. With atomic note-taking, you train yourself to identify and capture the essence of an idea, and to connect it to other ideas.
In strength training, there is an inventory of movement patterns: Pushing, pulling, squatting, and hinging. You can break these down further by adding directions (e.g., horizontal/vertical pulling) or other characteristics (e.g., unilateral vs. bilateral lifting, meaning with one or both arms or legs). You can judge the quality of your movement execution by your knowledge of optimal strength transfer, injury risk, and the like.
In note-writing, there is no established inventory. This is where the knowledge building blocks come into play. They give you an inventory of types that you can aim for:
- Concepts define a specific part of the world. You draw a boundary and say, “This is X.”
- Arguments transfer the truth of a set of statements to another via a logical structure.
- Counter-arguments disrupt the transfer of truth provided by arguments.
- Models relate entities to each other and provide part-to-part relationships and part-to-whole relationships, often to map a part of reality or a fictional reality.
- Hypotheses and theories formulate statements on how reality actually is. The difference is that a hypothesis is an isolated statement, while a theory comes with an inventory of methods.
- Empirical observations are results of sensory probing on how reality actually is.
These are some of the skills that are associated with each knowledge building block:
- Concepts: Precisely point to a part of reality and design an ontology that makes sense.
- Arguments and Counter-arguments: Gain access to the reliability of statements and claims.
- Models: Create maps of reality that provide you with tools for observation and predictions.
- Hypotheses: Bridge the gap from the known to the unknown, transforming guesswork into structured research.
- Empirical Observations: Base your assumptions on reality.
Working with these building blocks is the equivalent of stabilizing your core, explosively extending your knees and hips (think jumping), and moving through a full range of motion.
Bringing Everything Together
Atomic note-taking is the practice of isolating and capturing the essence of ideas. Assuming ideas are types of knowledge building blocks lets you judge the quality of your practice. You have a desired outcome to measure your results against. That means you turn guesswork into deliberate practice, another gap Andy Matuschak points out.
Benjamin Franklin was famous for rewriting essays as an exercise to become a good writer. I never saw any critique of this exercise being a waste of time, because you will practice writing anyway if you write what you want to publish. Yet, writing notes receives this very criticism.
When did you ever specifically practice isolating an argument and analyzing it, so you know it inside out? The likely answer is “no”.
In analytical philosophy, this is almost everything there is. Arguments become known moves. If analytical philosophers enter a discussion, you’ll witness that they have specific openings that they play like chess players. They are the equivalent of high-performance mental athletes.
If you have to write notes anyway, it is only rational to transform this act into a training platform for basic actions of knowledge work.
Becoming a better note-taker is becoming a better thinker.
What’s the verdict then? Atomic note-taking is a method to produce good notes. However, the real benefit of this practice is the thinker’s transformation.
You have to take notes anyway. Turn it into mind training.
Christian’s Comment: If “adding value” sounds a bit intimidating, relax: I found fellow programmers understood much more easily how low a bar “adding value” can be when I told them about the effects of rewriting for my use cases, in my words, things they could look up in published documentation. It feels like busywork to them at first, but access in the local buffer (that is, the Zettelkasten) compared to web search is instant. And ‘in my own words’ usually means: brief. So I get to the gist much quicker. Then there’s room to note personal stories, caveats, anecdotes, sample code I recognize immediately and trust because I wrote it. It’s not like I’m reinventing “how to computer” or some high bar like that. It’s much simpler than that, and the payoff shows with the next access already when I don’t need to scan page after page of docs for the one thing I vaguely remember.