Atomicity question and advice needed

Phil

Sascha's introduction the ZK method, in particular his observations on linking notes, and Eva(@ethomasv)'s comment that a ZK should be a map not a maze, have both been rattling around in my brain. It dawned on me that I've been building a maze.

I have around 2300 notes in my ZK, and so, with these insights foremost in my mind, this past few weeks I've been updating the link contexts between existing notes and breaking longer notes into smaller more focused ones that make linkages easier to conceptualize.

My question, however, relates to atomicity. I need your advice.

Here's a note on solitude, [[201907181643]]----the value of solitude

I see three potential notes here: a short one on the conceptual value of solitude (para 1.); another on a definition of solitude (para.2); and a third on practical iterations/examples of 1 & 2.

How would you handle this? Create three notes or leave this 300-word original alone? Or some other combination? (And yes, there's too much direct quoted material here that I need to rephrase, although I do intend keeping some of the original material too).

Will

@Phil said:
Sascha's introduction the ZK method, in particular, his observations on linking notes, and Eva(@ethomasv)'s comment that a ZK should be a map, not a maze, have both been rattling around in my brain. It dawned on me that I've been building a maze.

The mouse's maze is the researcher's map.
(I love metaphors!)

How would you handle this? Create three notes or leave this 300-word original alone? Or some other combination? (And yes, there's too much direct quoted material here that I need to rephrase, although I do intend to keep some of the original material too).

I often wonder how granular/atomistic to make my notes. This is a particular quandary when processing a book using the Idea Index method. We may have several notes from different parts of the book indexed to the same idea and the intention, at least, initially to have one note per idea. My goal is to create an atomic idea note no matter how many book notes/highlights, words, or samples the author and me come up with.

I see all three paragraphs related to the "value of solitude" and see no reason to break them up. You will drive yourself crazy and become immobilized by indecision if you look at every note and try and make it super granular with some notion that smaller is better.

Sometimes a note is simple like an H₁ atom and sometimes it is a robust ES₉₉ atom.
(I love metaphors!)

When I have a larger atomic note, and I link into it, I sometimes find that the incoming link only refers to a particular part of the note. I place a "backing link" or a relative link inline, so I get right to the correct reference and am not wandering in some maze I've created for myself.

GeoEng51

@Phil I too think your example is already sufficiently "atomic". If you wanted to expand on the last paragraph, then you could break it off into a separate zettel.

Typo in the last sentence, by the way - should be "Regular doses of..."

Splattack

(This is my opinion and I wrote it with good intentions, please don't take it in any other way).

I think you write too much in your notes, at least that what I see in the sample you provided. The prose is very good and intelligent but starts deviating from being practical as a note. This to me looks like a well written essay in progress. Even the definition of the word note suggests brief, short record, small, not 300-word

In your sample;

• Paragraph 1. Writing is good and economical.
• Paragraph 2. I'd use some bullet points for example, rather than saying "solitude is about…says Newport, characterizing…", I'd just use the quote using > and then In another bullet point I'd write my observations so is easier to visually see the quote from my insight.

---

[Solitude is] what's happening in your brain, not the environment around you. (Newport 93) [1]

• This is characterizing Raymond Kethledge and Michael Erwin definition of solitude which highlights the mental and cognitive dimensions of solitude rather than solitude's conventional association with actual physical isolation.

According to this definition, solitude is a

Subjective state in which your mind is free from input from other minds. (Newport 93) [1]

When you're experiencing solitude you're free to "focus instead on your own thoughts and experiences" (Newport 94) [1]

---

To me what you have is already really well written and in this case I'd leave it like the 300-word original note. In the future I'd try to keep it with the same formal writing you have but more to the point and less.

(By the way, when I saw the topic on solitude I instantly thought of Cal Newport's take on it).

learning_ran

Table of Contents

1. Characteristics of solitude
2. Definition of solitude
3. Benifict of solitude

After seeing the picture you post, I immediately broke your notes into
three separate ideas as the content of Table of Content. If I want to
study more about characteristics of solitude, I would just start new
note from the 1st note; if I want to see differences between how people
define solitude, I will go from the 2nd note; if I want to write a
article about why we need solitude, I will extend the 3rd note.

Characteristics of solitude

Solitude is freedom from input from other people. When someone is experiencing
solitude, s/he is free to focus on his/her own thoughts and experience.

Definition of solitude

Cal Newport defines solitude as paying attention to what happens in
someone's brain, not the environment around the person.

Benifict of solitude

Experiencing solitude results new ideas, better self-awareness, and
closeness to other.

I can also write a demonstration about how I break ideas into atomic
notes just using this post as an example.

Adilel

This is thread is useful, thank you! Atomizing is pretty difficult to me sometimes. I see some of you study things like philosophy and such, which are always complex discourses, any further tips ? Sometimes I feel I am more on the 300 word type of note, like @Phil 's...

Will

@Adilel said:
This is thread is useful, thank you! Atomizing is pretty difficult to me sometimes. I see some of you study things like philosophy and such, which are always complex discourses, any further tips ? Sometimes I feel I am more on the 300 word type of note, like @Phil 's...

I'd suggest, as a further tip, write some short notes. Intersperse them with longer notes. See how they feel. Connect them into your archive. I think you'll see that it is not the length of the note that matters but its 'handiness' as the Swedes like to say. Is the note complete in the sense that it can stand alone and be recognizable in the future?

Here is my shortest note. 21 words. I challenge anyone to come up with a 'handy' note that is more concise.

Phil

Thanks all for the feedback. @Will, yes, the challenge with the kind of thinking I'm interested in is in navigating a path between granularity and generality. @Splattack, this is a constant struggle for me. Sometimes I think I want to future-proof not just the ideas themselves but also the writing too. But thanks for the kind words.

Like @Will, I too use what he calls a "backing link" to get right to the crucial part of a longer note. That's partly what I'm doing at the moment with my link context work: making sure the in-text links are clearly explained and identified so I can 'de-maze-ify' my ZK a little bit.

Taylor

I think the atomaticity of a note is going to depend on what you want to do with it. If you're using your Zettelkasten to write blog posts you're going to require a different level of precision than if you're writing academic papers. But you've said you find yourself dissatisfied with the atomiticity of this note, and I find the "it's different for everyone" sort of advice quite unhelpful. So I'll tell you how I'd break up that note. Though, fair warning: I am a philosophy PhD student so I perhaps agonize over precision and structure more than other writers.

I don't have a complete typology of note types, but I generally take a definition of a term and an argument for a particular conclusion to be sufficiently atomic. In your note you have a definition (of solitude) and a claim requiring an argument (that solitude is valuable in some way). Here's how I see it laid out in your note currently:

Your first paragraph and your second both contain definitions of solitude that Newport accepts and gets from Kethledge and Erwin. Your first paragraph also contains a value judgment about solitude by Odell (I think? It's unclear if you're paraphrasing him or just appending solitude to a distinct quote of his about inalienable rights). Your last paragraph contains a list of historical figures who have found solitude beneficial, and Newport's claim that it's necessary for human flourishing.

So I'd break this into two notes:

First, the definition of solitude. I'd title the note something like "solitude is absence from the influence of other minds." There I'd put in Newport's definition, note that he got it from Kethledge and Erwin and include a citation to them in case I wanted to look into it further, and perhaps note that it is distinct from simply being alone, which is the physical absence from other people. I'd do this because now I could possibly write notes objecting to this definition (e.g. are we really ever absent from inputs from other minds if we are using language, which is necessarily social? Maybe that's not a good objection, but objecting to the definition is now something you can do when it's given its own note)

Second, I'd write a note about the value of solitude. I'd try to give it a precise title in a full sentence. Maybe a title that's roughly equivalent Newport's claim that "solitude is necessary for human flourishing." Here I'd put in the argument that Newport gives for this claim, which I think could be expanded on in your note. You have the fact that Odell (maybe?) thinks solitude should be a basic human right (though your note doesn't contain any of his or Newport's reasons for why he thinks this), that it benefited Lincoln and MLK's careers (but doesn't explain what it was about solitude that helped them), and Woolf's claim that solitude is a form of women's liberation (but again doesn't get into Woolf's reasons for why this is so). There is a collection of benefits of solitude (new ideas, better self-awareness, and closeness with others) but no story of how we go from solitude to these results. So if this were my note, I would try to expand it in those areas and get more precise about the arguments. It's a popular non-fiction book, so Newport might not give a very fleshed out argument here beyond citing anecdotes (I did read Digital Minimalism a while ago, but only vaguely remember the section on solitude). In that case, I'd just add in questions and maybe a note to read Woolf's A Room of One's Own to expand it if I was inclined.

That level of detail of the second note might be overkill for you. Also, Woolf's argument seems somewhat distinct from the arguments to be made form Lincoln and MLK's lives, so if I did read A Room of One's Own I might expand that into its own note, like "Solitude is a form of women's liberation" and then link to it in "solitude is necessary for human flourishing" note as another argument for it. Whether you want to dive this deep depends on what your intended output is. In any case, I'd at least split up the definition of solitude from the argument for its value.

Will

@Taylor, I love this deep dive into your thinking about @Phil's solitude note. Your suggestions are spot on. Your explanation of your thinking inspires me to relook at Cal Newport's Digital Minimalism. I only took the briefest of note on this idea on my first reading, but I now see just how deeply this idea is woven in my archive.

I have many detailed notes on these books which come up in my search for solitude, but I only aspire to be as thoughtful as your thinking demonstrates.

May Sarton's Journal of a Solitude 7 notes
Werner Herzog's Of Walking in Ice 5 notes
Mary Oliver's Upstream 16 notes
Walter Isaacson's The Innovators 2 notes
John Van Dyke's The Desert 9 Notes
Erling Kagge's Silence in the age of noise 21 notes

And one measly note on Cal Newport's Digital Minimalism. At least it was about solitude.

You show a model of diving into material that can be applied to most, if not all; we're studying.

Thanks.

d503

I wrote a lengthier comment but I read @Taylor's and now I feel my comment is repetitive. I'd just like to share two things.

Since I made a thread on atomicity and titles, I have found that being really strict on the idea that I want to record on the note is absolutely key. @Splattack suggested in that thread to use keywords for a title. That suggestion is really useful because it is an anchor to the thought you want to capure (i.e. "the value of solitude is this particular thing Newport said"). When I title a note like this, the challenge to explain and contextualize the thought is more clear .

Also these keyword titles come last. I start working right away on the idea in full as the first paragraph from which I derive the keywords. Depending on the content, it seems to me that the note named value of solitude is more useful if it comprises several and distinct ideas on that topic. My title for the note you showed us would be UUID value solitude focus decision-making Newport.

The second thing is that this way of naming and filling notes is demanding for the text. I have found that it confronts me with the questions of what a text is really about and how it lives to its promises. This comes hand in hand with the "barbell method" for reading texts explained by Sascha and Christian.

Nick

Here is my note on note size

A common question people have regarding the zettelkasten and note taking in general is one of note length. A good way to think of this is through the concept usability of information. We structure information such that it can be used repeatedly. You can think of notes in the same way.

a - smallest unit of usability is the letter. As you see I repeatedly make use of the letter a in this sentence.

word - is the next largest unit

phrase - can be used in multiple contexts

sentence - can be used in multiple contexts but is a bit awkward because it isn’t as usable as a word or phrase but not as robust as a paragraph. A good example of a reusable sentence is a quote.

paragraph - is often seen as the smallest unit of thought as it is usually what is necessary to get an idea across, with sentences being the parts that support or explain the paragraph

section - can be thought of as multiple paragraphs.

Because one of the key ideas behind a zettelkasten is to remix ideas such that a note can contribute to multiple sequences of thought, an ideal note length is between a paragraph and a section. If you find yourself wanting to reference a sentence then it is fine to spin it off into its own note. But it’d be a waste of time to do so before that becomes necessary.

Simply put if a note becomes too long than it makes it more difficult to reference ideas within it in other notes. It also makes the note more difficult to deal with in the future as you might feel the need to read the entire note. If a note is too short than it also tends to be useless as it adds a sort of noise to the system. All the words in a sentence aren't there own particular note that you have to break up and string together because that'd be too cumbersome.