[[concept]] are my access points (purple). For example, right now I'm writing a note about John Grinder's model and added an access point for [[breathing]] which brought up my old note on reduction of fear. Along with it, it brought up other notes about oxytocin and dopamine.
Here's how my capture workflow looks like... I cite things from #note/capture into my #note/observation note as a block embed. At the same time, I create access points that connect me to old notes, in context of personal interpretation on what I've cited...
Example of my "Project" note. It's essentially like a MOC or workbench note which I use to track chronological change over time. When access points connect new ideas to this note, I update this project note
I probably can do better on metadata for future Dataview queries, but I like my stuff minimalistic. I only track date created and date updated. I use the "update time on edited" plugin.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I made a video about a year ago showing how i used this on obsidian using its local graph view - so please kindly don't parrot the 'graph view is useless' meme (I have so much to say about that).
While bridging it over to Tana, I've done a lot of iteration and modifications so far. Here are my changes and thoughts about it along the way:
Case against large systems: Is having a large PKM system or graph that good? It might be a sign of poor filtration of information and "pkm hygiene"
The argument about large systems is that you get to have returns from previous efforts, with the expectation of compounding and building on previous knowledge
The issue with larger systems: Strained organisation, poorer search, cumulation of maintenance tasks and reviews, constantly shifting contexts and it becomes very noisy. With so much noise, information becomes useless when unfocused, and more effort is placed in maintenance
To think out of the box, you first need to destroy the box
Just like Plato's cave - you don't know what it's like outside of the box until you get out of it. The concept of the cave being everything you knew has to shatter completely.
The first way to see something this integrated and invisible, just like water to fish, is to watch for the "glitches" and notice inconsistencies in your ideas about reality.
(1/10) In Jan, I posted how it would be amazing to have a tool that synergizes bidirectional linking and an attribute system. In June, it was like X'mas came early when I was invited to test the alpha version. Here's how Tana blew my mind🧵
(2/10) Since then, it's been tough to hold the silence on this incredible tool that I've had the fortune of testing. I mean, just look at the team working on this. If this doesn't inspire confidence in what this product is and will become, I don't know what will.
(3/10) While communicating about bugs and features, I found them to be forward-thinkers, community-driven, and very open-minded. The UI and UX are very well thought-out.
To start with, most "modern Zettelkastens" already aren't the original implementations, neither do they carry similar principles. Zettelkasten-inspired, yes. Original zettelkasten, unfortunately not really.
An example of this is the ongoing debate of analog vs digital zettelkasten. An analog's advantage is slower, deliberate processing with constrained space. This increases recall and utilises the advantage of pen-paper flexibility - the ability to just scribble, draw, etc.