More notes on notes.

Something quick to ease back into writing. What better than a book about writing?

So, we bought this near the start of the month, something to read while on the plane to and from Vancoufur. We didn't end up finishing it on the flight, but we've dipped back into it throughout the month.

philosophical differences

We've spoken before about some of the different philosophies when it comes to linked notes and knowledge - ranging from the purely practical ("had meeting with John, discussed V, Y, and Z [1], I have a task to design new form of widget") to being laser focused on creative output to the exclusion of all else.

From a lot of introspection and trying different things, we know that our style is a (limited) "anything and everything" approach, from short term tasks [2], to "(friend) will blush a whole lot if you say these words to them", to dry technical reminders on how to do something in Unity or an ffmpeg preset we use frequently, to notes that meet our definition of evergreen notes.

A System for Writing is just as it describes itself. It is laser focused on the output as a goal, with that output being specifically non-fiction writing - as such, it primarily makes way for only ideas, the references used to generate them so they can be cited, the support structures needed to find them, and a space for them to be processed into Content with outlining, rewriting and refining.

For some sophonts, this isn't a bad approach - but for the vast majority that could benefit from the idea of linked knowledge, I feel like it's the wrong one?

For a solo video essayist, as an example - the writing of the script would still be served well by a system focused purely on ideas. But it would probably also be helpful to write down things like your preferred colour grading or effects settings, so that if your computer has to be replaced or someone else needs to edit on your behalf or if the app you're using just doesn't support remembering things [3], you do not lose that aspect.

For a fiction writer (whether solo or as part of something collaborative like a tabletop RPG), ideas alone can inform the narrative, but you also need a way to contain specific knowledge on the characters and settings. Notes on constructed languages from other sources can be informative [4], but they are also not your conlang.

Perhaps this is me putting too prescriptivist a read on things, but the FAQ at the back does explicitly draw a line between a "second brain" for the general storage of information, and the idea storing/generating Zettelkasten. Friends' birthdays are explicitly called out as something that should not be in a Zettelkasten system - but to me, a lot of ideas get generated thanks to friends, those friends end up connected to those ideas (and/or to the conversations where that idea was first suggested) - and if a note on a friend is to be complete, then if we know their birthday it should be on there.

card catalogue

In my review of Building a Second Brain, part of our issue was the top down structure imposed on notes. That structure is thankfully absent here, with an encouragement of the anarchy of ideas, which we vibe a lot with.

What we vibe less with is the structure of main/permanent notes.

# 2.2b3e Natural processes can appear impossible if not fully understood

According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.

source [Bee Movie]

previous [2.2b3 There can be a sense of wonder from not fully understanding a system]

see also [1.11c6 Fucking magnets, how do they work]

(A crude example, but the first few bits of the Bee Movie script have been our go to replacement for lorem ipsum for a while)

For a physical system based around a slip box or index cards, this is probably the best way of doing things. For academic writing, it can make sense to fully separate out sources in this manner.

But the majority of people and critters we know should probably start with digital linked notes instead. And to us, this format is less useful to replicate there.

And hey, I have a note on this already, so for this article I feel like it's appropriate to pull it in directly:

# Linked notes should feel like a wiki, except when they don't
[[2025-03-14]] 13:53
#thinking_about_thinking

Our time on the [[(redacted) Wiki]] was deeply influential to the way we think about information capture, and this is reflected in our preferences with note taking systems that also act like [[Wiki|Wikis]]; dense [[Links should be free flowing|free flowing]] links that are integrated into the text naturally where possible - with a sources section for links that do not fit that pattern.

However, unlike a wiki, there is no [[Standard of notoriety]] for [[Personal knowledge management]]; we can go as in depth into a topic as is needed, and this might change over time...

External links and sources can go at the end, but for us, in a digital system, it is significantly better to have the links integrated, and to use tags, timestamps, Obsidian's abilities to display backlinks and/or the local graph to show the train of thought rather than relying on an alphanumeric ID (or folgezettel). I can see how it can be useful for seeing the train of thought without opening the note, but it would also make things significantly less readable in this format without heavy note aliasing.

conclusions

I do actually like quite a lot of this book. The author is clearly well read on a variety of topics, and it got me thinking about a lot of things I don't often do so. While I disagree with even some of the example notes [5], there is a lot of useful advice - for example, to include on reference notes even the parts where the mind wanders and makes an unexpected connection. This is from my reference note on this book:

Read with a question of problem in mind is a good description of why we read - in this case, it's once again wanting to see another take on the different ways brains interpret this one system - also a reminder to [[Capture ideas you disagree with]].
At time of writing ([[2025-03-03]]), had just watched a video on [[Tailwind CSS]] (Is Tailwind really the right default?) where (video creator) mentioned he was a passionate hater before he started not just using it but loving it. Some ideas require chewing over to prove they aren't the right one.

My problem is that I don't fully know who I would recommend this to. I believe that a lot of people would benefit from linked knowledge that are not currently using it, but that this specific implementation is too constraining for most just starting out; there must be space for ideas to run loose, but for many, there must also be space for detailing e.g. a dog's trip to the vets and any observations from changes in medication, or a component of a regular task at work that you always seem to struggle with.
It would be possible to have two separate systems, but we've never been a fan of that approach where it isn't necessary - the mundanities and miscellany of everyday life can be equally inspiring to ideas and we like knowing where things came from. (Also that kind of constant context switching probably wouldn't be great)

Conversely, if you're already using a personal knowledge management solution and have already developed strong opinions or habits, this feels unlikely to change those, so you get to pick and choose advice that seems interesting and to connect own knowledge to the examples presented, but lose the benefits of a systemic approach.

So I guess the answer is, somewhat unsurprisingly, this is probably a solid recommendation for writers - but with the caveat that no one else - not the author of this book, not us, not whatever other things you might read in the PKM or Zettelkasten space - can tell you what is useful or resonant to you specifically; the constraints are artificial, and easily broken should you feel like the system needs to go beyond writing.

further reading

footnotes

  1. Due to the actions of a certain fuckhead, we are attempting to eliminate X as an example variable from our vocabulary. ↩︎

  2. Most long term tasks or ones where we need a reminder based on location still go in Apple's Reminders app. ↩︎

  3. Christopher Lawley's struggles with Final Cut Pro for the iPad helped inform this example, with having to copy and paste details from a note every time. ↩︎

  4. How does Tolkein's use of them compare to more contemporary ones like Simlish or Skyrim's dragon language? I don't know, and I'm not going to be the one to put in the amount of research this would take to write. ↩︎

  5. One of the example notes is about your home computer not being a server because it does not serve things to the public internet. But your home computer could serve any number of things around your local network; it can act as a general file server, a media streaming server, a local web server so you can check how a web page will look before you upload it to a public web server... ↩︎