Atomicity in Literature Notes

daviddelven

Considering literature notes as bibliographical-based own words, unlike Zettels or atomic notes, are based on your arguments and synthesis,

• Which level of atomicity do you think Literature Notes should have (if atomicity applies to them. Does it?)

tags: #zettelkasten #notetaking

zk_1000

Looking at Luhmann's bibliographic Zettelkasten I believe the atomicity is based on reference, that means, one note per book.

One entry per reference makes the most sense to me. Additionally, I have some notes for use out of context.

daviddelven

@zk_1000 Hello.

Thanks for your quick feedback.
I distinguish between granularity and atomicity, considering the second one a concept-centred attribute. That means you could combine a high-granular or low-granular note deployment with also a high or low level of atomicity (meaning including one single idea or several per each of those notes).

Options:

1. Many small notes but including several ideas each one
2. One single note but including one single idea
3. One single note but including several ideas
4. Many small notes but including one single idea for each one (atomic notes/zettels).

From that standpoint, I wonder if the reference-focused Literature Notes should also be "atomic" (single idea) as the Zettels are.

Sascha

@daviddelven said:
Considering literature notes as bibliographical-based own words, unlike Zettels or atomic notes, are based on your arguments and synthesis,

• Which level of atomicity do you think Literature Notes should have (if atomicity applies to them. Does it?)

tags: #zettelkasten #notetaking

The principle of atomicity applies to notes that are in your ZK. So, anything in your Zettelkasten should be as atomic as possible wether the ideas and thoughts are based on an external thought or are your own.

The principle is about the mechanics of the base network in your ZK. It is similar to the platonic realm of ideas which does not care about the source but just about the content.

daviddelven

Nice comparison. It makes that clearer for me.

_Note: thanks for the hashtag editing on the original post, @Sascha . _