6 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2022
    1. But then life went on and nothing really happened.

      https://www.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/zl2hwh/is_the_concept_of_personal_knowledge_management/

      This essay seems to be more about shiny object syndrome. The writer doesn't seem to realize any problems they've created. Way too much digging into tools and processes. Note the switching and trying out dozens of applications. (Dear god, why??!!) Also looks like a lot of collecting digitally for no clear goal. As a result of this sort of process it appears that many of the usual affordances were completely blocked, unrealized, and thus useless.

      No clear goal in mind for anything other than a nebulous being "better".

      One goal was to "retain what I read", but nothing was actively used toward this stated goal. Notes can help a little, but one would need mnemonic methods and possibly spaced repetition neither of which was mentioned.

      A list of specific building blocks within the methods and expected outcomes would have helped this person (and likely others), but to my knowledge this doesn't exist as a thing yet though bits and pieces are obviously floating around.<br /> TK: building blocks of note taking

      Evidence here for what we'll call the "perfect system fallacy", an illness which often goes hand in hand with "shiny object syndrome".

      Too many systems bound together will create so much immediate complexity that there isn't any chance for future complexity or emergence as the proximal system is doomed to failure. One should instead strive for immediate and excessive simplicity which might then build with time, use, and practice into something more rich and complex. This idea seems to be either completely missed or lost in the online literature and especially the blogosphere and social media.


      people had come up with solutions Sadly, despite thousands of variations on some patterns, people don't seem to be able to settle on either "one solution" or their "own solution" and in trying to do everything all at once they become lost, set adrift, and lose focus on any particular thing they've got as their own goal.

      In this particular instance, "retaining what they read" was totally ignored. Worse, they didn't seem to ever review over their notes of what they read.


      I was pondering about different note types, fleeting, permanent, different organisational systems, hierarchical, non-hierarchical, you know the deal.

      Why worry about all the types of notes?! This is the problem with these multi-various definitions and types. They end up confusing people without giving them clear cut use cases and methods by which to use them. They get lost in definitional overload and aren't connecting the names with actual use cases and affordances.


      I often felt lost about what to takes notes on and what not to take notes on.

      Why? Most sources seem to have reasonable guidance on this. Make notes on things that interest you, things which surprise you.

      They seem to have gotten lost in all the other moving pieces. Perhaps advice on this should come first, again in the middle, and a third time at the end of these processes.

      I'm curious how deeply they read sources and which sources they read to come to these conclusions? Did they read a lot of one page blog posts with summarizations or did they read book length works by Ahrens, Forte, Allosso, Scheper, et al? Or did they read all of these and watch lots of crazy videos as well. Doing it "all" will likely lead into the shiny object syndrome as well.

      This seems to outline a list of specifically what not to do and how not to approach these systems and "popular" blog posts that are an inch deep and a mile wide rather than some which have more depth.

      Worst of all, I spent so much time taking notes and figuring out a personal knowledge management system that I neglected the things I actually wanted to learn about. And even though I kind of always knew this, I kept falling into the same trap.

      Definitely a symptom of shiny object syndrome!

  2. Aug 2022
  3. Nov 2021
    1. Nobody is perfect; nobody is pure; and once people set out to interpret ambiguous incidents in a particular way, it’s not hard to find new evidence.

      Wouldn't it be better for us to focus our efforts and energies on people who are doing bigger mass scale harms on society?

      Surely the ability to protect some of these small harms undergird ability to build up protection for much larger harms.

      Why are we prosecuting these smaller harms rather than the larger (especially financial and) institutional harms?

      It is easier to focus on the small and specific rather than broad and unspecific. (Is there a name for this as a cognitive bias? There should be, if not. Perhaps related to the base rate fallacy or base rate neglect (a form of extension neglect), which is "the tendency to ignore general information and focus on information only pertaining to the specific case, even when the general information is more important." (via Wikipedia)

      Could the Jesuits' descent into the particular as a method help out here?

  4. Nov 2015
    1. Each individuality in your family is the One infinite Individuality infinitely individualized and unfolding Itself in absolutely healthy, constructive and integrating ways. This is the Fact. Even when one member or another of your family vehemently claims his ability to act on his own, you can rest assured that the eternal Facts which contradict such a belief, contradict it in such a way as to turn it to the advantage of the individuality indulging in the belief. Thus, it illustrates experientially why the belief is invalid and a waste of time. Every single event, whether constituted of Reality or what seems to be a belief about Reality, cannot get outside the realm of serving the One and Only thing going on. This is why “the very circumstance, which our suffering sense deems wrathful and afflictive, Love can make an angel entertained unawares.“2 Paul, it is imperative that both you and Susan begin to really get this sense that Being is totally positive and totally constructive. Not even a false belief can escape the design or intent of Being to fulfill Itself, and thus serve to enlighten the one indulging in such a belief.

      Being is unfolding itself Perfectly even within the realm of ego belief**.

      Not even a false belief can escape the design or intent of Being to fulfill Itself.

    2. You give the weight to the Law of Perfection by beginning with the perfect concept. You seem to diminish your awareness of that Perfection unfolding when you begin with a finite concept of what is going on. You cannot actually change the Fact, but you can seem to blind yourself to It. If All is Infinite Mind, then All is Infinite Mind! One must live his experience of the infinitude of his Being as though that were the Fact. Not because that will help make it so, but because that is what is so! And such thinking is, therefore, in line with what is already true.

      Limited finite concepts serve as blinders to the awareness of Perfection.

      One must live his experience of the infinitude of his Being as though that were the Fact because it is Fact. Such thinking is in line with what is true.