Any ideas to improve the quality of notes in Zettelkasten?

Edmund · August 15

Today I started a Root Cause Analysis:

GeoEng51 · August 15

@Edmund Interesting idea, but is a root cause analysis applicable in your situation? My understanding is that it is used when something has gone wrong or some complex system has failed, the cause of which is not obvious. One carries out a root cause analysis to determine the true (usually deeply hidden) source of the problem and eliminate it, rather than treating superficial symptoms.

(However, my understanding of this topic is likely biased by where I have seen it applied, i.e., in engineering applications.)

What is the problem you are trying to solve? What is the system you are examining?

harr · August 15

@Edmund, my approach to improve the quality of notes can be summarized in one question:

Do the notes fit their purpose?

tomp · August 15

@Edmund said:
Today I started a Root Cause Analysis:

I don't see how one can look for causes, root or not, without knowing in what regards the quality is low. That is closely related to the purpose of a note.

For example, if a handwritten note is hard to read, the immediate cause might be lack of practice on the part of the writer, or some physical condition that makes writing hard. Those are not the root causes but maybe the problem can be fixed by typing the notes even if the root cause analysis were never completed.

If the problem were that the notes were too complicated, the analysis would be quite different.

Edmund · August 15

@GeoEng51 said:

What is the problem you are trying to solve? What is the system you are examining?

Good questions. Let me improve the problem statement for this example:

Problem: “Permanent notes often fail to be useful when I return to them for writing.”

I think it works best when the problem statement names the effect we are observing.

tomp · August 15

@Edmund said:

@GeoEng51 said:

What is the problem you are trying to solve? What is the system you are examining?

Good questions. Let me improve the problem statement for this example:

Problem: “Permanent notes often fail to be useful when I return to them for writing.”

I think it works best when the problem statement names the effect we are observing.

Good! Getting closer. What did you expect or want from the notes, that isn't happening when you return to them?

andang76 · August 15

First, quality would need to be defined. Or rather, the many qualities.
Each of them could have its own specific paths.

In software development, I believe it even reaches up to 50 dimensions. (I wouldn't want to go that far in this case).

I have always liked the Sascha's Flower Idea Model, even if it does not cover all desirable qualities.
Then there are the "classic" properties like focus, connection, abstraction, and so on, but I would also consider clarity and findability/revisitability, degree of maturity, originality. List can be long.

Personally, I have never consolidated them all into an exhaustive list; I look for what I need in a specific moment based on intuition.

tomp · August 15

@Edmund said:

@GeoEng51 said:

What is the problem you are trying to solve? What is the system you are examining?

Good questions. Let me improve the problem statement for this example:

Problem: “Permanent notes often fail to be useful when I return to them for writing.”

I think it works best when the problem statement names the effect we are observing.

A good software bug report contains enough information to help the readers understand enough to make a start of fixing it. Let's try that out here - this template is a good enough representative of its kind:

What reproducible symptom(s) do you observe? What actually happens?
How can you make the symptoms happen?
When the symptom(s) happen, what did you expect to happen?
What steps have you taken to diagnose or fix the problem?

For software, one would also want to know what system and version you have. That's probably not quite right here, but please talk about at least the part of the system that is involved when the symptoms happen.

E.g., not

Nothing happens when I double-click on a word

but

When I double-click on a word in the edit pane, nothing shows as being selected and attempts to copy the word using CTRL-C fail.
I changed to a different mouse but got the same behavior.
I searched on the internet but could find nothing relevant.
I am using MagicZK v3.25 on Windows 11.

The symptoms may not be reproducible. In that case, fixing them will be harder and the apparent trigger may not be what you think.

harr · August 16

@Edmund said:
Today I started a Root Cause Analysis:

Here are a few ideas:

Content & Resources
- Unverified sources — Some people copy and paste references without checking them. This creates a false sense of security. Unless you check the reference yourself, you can't be sure that the source exists and that the source contains what you think it does.
- Grammar & spelling — I consider poor spelling and bad grammar a warning sign. Do you really understand, what you wrote in that note, when you can't describe it in a grammatically correct sentence? Do you use the wrong word because you accidentally misspelled it or because you don't know that it doesn't mean what you think it does?
People
- Increase traceability with literal quotes — Electronic sources rarely have page numbers. Kindle-locators are platform dependent. What works well in my experience is a literal quote, that you can search for in a PDF, ePub, web page or even Google.
Environment & Culture
- Embrace imperfection — Don't fall for perfectionism. Don't expect all notes to be good or even perfect. Instead, design the system to deal with sloppy, fuzzy and incomplete notes.
Feedback & Metrics
- Clear goals — If you don't know what you want to achieve with your notes, no metric will help you get there. So it's not only a question of what you measure, but also of why you measure it. Metrics and feedback can help you get closer to a goal. But if there's no goal, what do you measure and what kind of feedback do you expect?

@Edmund said:
See also: Saschas' Definition of Good

Hmmm. None of these criteria work for me.

"A high number of cognitive actions were invested into the note (leading indicator)" — Compare this with the sunk cost fallacy, where people stick with a poor investment, because it had cost them so much work. Some people write good notes with little effort, other people waste lots of effort on writing bad notes. :-)
"The idea itself is of a high quality" — I think that you can write bad notes about good ideas and vice versa. :-)
"The proper amount of value-adding has taken place (instead of just extracting the evidence from the source)" — In my experience, finding a verifiable source that provides evidence for a claim and reliably documenting it adds a lot of value to a note. Why shouldn't this be enough? How much is the "proper" amount?
"The proper relationship of the embedded idea(s) is established." — How do we determine if the "proper" relationship is established?

@Sascha's definition of Good depends on a definition of "proper". Apparently there is an ideal that needs to be matched. What is this ideal? How can we measure how close we came to the ideal? How can we determine that we have achieved this ideal? (Do you want to chime in, @Sascha?)

I think of a good note as a note that captures your thoughts and supports your thinking in a way that is useful for you. If you find it useful to have "proper" notes, I'd recommend clearly stating what makes a note "proper" by your own standards.

Sascha · August 16

Currently, I don't see any difference between improving the idea and improving the note (as long as you aim to capture one idea per note). Nietzsche wrote:

Improving the style is improving the thought.

I say: Improving the idea is improving the note.

This is why I wrote the guide to atomic note-taking (which is a universal skill, independent of the Zettelkasten Method): partially as an introduction to that skill.

harr · August 16

@Sascha said:
(…) Nietzsche wrote:
Improving the style is improving the thought.

I like the quote, so I checked the source. This is the German original:¹

Den Stil verbessern – das heißt den Gedanken verbessern, und gar nichts weiter! – Wer dies nicht sofort zugibt, ist auch nie davon zu überzeugen.

I find the relationship between writing and thinking fascinating. This quote was missing in my Zettelkasten. Thanks!

Friedrich Nietzsche: Menschliches, Allzumenschliches. http://www.zeno.org/Philosophie/M/Nietzsche,+Friedrich/Menschliches,+Allzumenschliches/Zweiter+Band/Zweite+Abteilung%3A+Der+Wanderer+und+sein+Schatten/131.+Den+Gedanken+verbessern?hl=stil+verbessern ↩︎

andang76 · August 16

In my current internal framework, an idea and a note now almost always coincide by default, but sometimes it is useful to treat them separately.

A note is a physical level, while an idea is a mental level.

Where separating these two levels becomes particularly useful is precisely when discussing properties and qualities.
In my case, for instance, the same property, "future proof" has two different meanings, and therefore requires two different treatments, depending on whether you intend to pursue the physical one or the cognitive one.

harr · August 16

I find the relationship between idea and note interesting. What do you all think:

Can we can write bad notes about good ideas?
Can we write good notes about bad ideas?
Is it possible to write a note in such a manner that a reader, who is not the note's author, can perfectly grasp the author's idea?

Edmund · August 16

@GeoEng51 said:
What is the system you are examining?

Let’s use my own Zettelkasten. Here’s the systems map:

It's better to have a specific example than a general concept for further discussion.

Edmund · August 16

@andang76 said:
First, quality would need to be defined. Or rather, the many qualities.
Each of them could have its own specific paths.

My view on quality:
Principles to improve your Zettelkasten — Zettelkasten Forum

How would you define it?

Edmund · August 16

@tomp said:
A good software bug report contains enough information to help the readers understand enough to make a start of fixing it. Let's try that out here - this template is a good enough representative of its kind:

What reproducible symptom(s) do you observe? What actually happens?

How can you make the symptoms happen?

When the symptom(s) happen, what did you expect to happen?

What steps have you taken to diagnose or fix the problem?

Four questions, four answers:
1. I do not find useful ideas within my Permanent Notes when trying to fill gaps when writing.
2. I search for relevant key terms in my indexes. I narrow the search by using tags. I inspect my ideas network within Obsidian Local Graph. I do not find useful ideas.
3. I expect to find a Permanent Note that helps closing the gap.
4. I took more time for searching. I started to reread sources already mentioned in my Literature Notes. I started research for other sources outside my Zettelkasten. I asked experts for help.

andang76 · August 16

@harr said:
I find the relationship between idea and note interesting. What do you all think:

Can we can write bad notes about good ideas?

Can we write good notes about bad ideas?

Is it possible to write a note in such a manner that a reader, who is not the note's author, can perfectly grasp the author's idea?

yes, it is not guaranteed that a good thinker is also a good notetaker (for oneself) or a good writer (for others). Idea Development and Idea Representation, even concerning the same idea, may have different properties. I might write down a good idea in a poor way, rendering it unusable or losing it after a while.
Need to think about it. Very interesting. Maybe very bad ideas simply remain bad stuff. But bad ideas can generate something useful, in some way. They can trigger an interesting reaction. The problem here is defining what means "bad idea". I have identified more than twenty properties of a Zettel, combining them there infinite way of having a bad idea, with low value of some of them. For example, I could take a very unoriginal, often overused idea (one of low value) and present it in a novel way that somehow offers a fresh perspective. Or I can turn a weak idea into something interesting, causing it to acquire potential. If I’m particularly good at it, I can evoke a strong emotion from a completely banal thought :-)
Possible, but not that simple. Writing a zettel for myself can be very different from writing something for another person. Other requirements, in addition to the opportunity to transder a good idea. The major obstacle is being able to transfer everything needed to fully grasp the idea into the note itself. Often, part of what is required remains in our heads—things we simply take for granted. I think a Zettelkasten contains a great deal of tacit knowledge by default, much of which is not explicitly represented in the notes themselves.
This is one of the reasons why writing a Zettel differs significantly from producing a final output; very often, the idea within the Zettel needs to be "rehydrated", provided context enough for comprehension and tailoring writing for the audience.
Another big point, often the author use writing oriented towards future personal reactivation for its Zettelkasten. To ensure it can be conveyed to others, one must cultivate clarity for others.
I think you can create a Zettelkasten that is "usable by others", but you have to build it specifically with that intention, it doesn't happen automatically.

andang76 · August 16

@Edmund said:

@andang76 said:
First, quality would need to be defined. Or rather, the many qualities.
Each of them could have its own specific paths.

My view on quality:
Principles to improve your Zettelkasten — Zettelkasten Forum

How would you define it?

There are things I never considered. The list of potential zettel qualities is like Gremlins :-)

tomp · August 16

@Edmund said:

@tomp said:
A good software bug report contains enough information to help the readers understand enough to make a start of fixing it. Let's try that out here - this template is a good enough representative of its kind:

What reproducible symptom(s) do you observe? What actually happens?

How can you make the symptoms happen?

When the symptom(s) happen, what did you expect to happen?

What steps have you taken to diagnose or fix the problem?

Ok, this is goof, thanks.

Four questions, four answers:
1. I do not find useful ideas within my Permanent Notes when trying to fill gaps when writing.

Let me make sure I understand you. Do you mean you know there is a card but you can't find it? Or the search doesn't surface one so you are pretty sure there isn't one?

I search for relevant key terms in my indexes. I narrow the search by using tags. I inspect my ideas network within Obsidian Local Graph. I do not find useful ideas.

I expect to find a Permanent Note that helps closing the gap.

Do you expect to find a card that is almost ready to slot into the writing, or are you hoping to find inspiration?

I took more time for searching. I started to reread sources already mentioned in my Literature Notes. I started research for other sources outside my Zettelkasten. I asked experts for help.

Ok, none of those in 4) address either case I asked about: no card, or card but can't find it (except maybe asking experts).

Can you show us a representative card you would expect to find, even though it's not right for closing the gap? How were you able to find it - search terms or however you did find it.

If you will indulge me I will write a little about how I worked up the slides for for the presentation version of a paper of mine. Maybe it will give you ideas.

Since the publication version was done. I used that as a guide to the slides. But the slide audience was different - live slide show instead of reading a long paper in a browser, and I had a time limit for presenting it. So I couldn't simply copy the paper. What I have found is that writing for a new audience forced me to make new distinctions and find new ways to clarify and simplify the content. I also got some new ideas as I did that - writing tends to do that for me.

Since some of this material was new or involved new distinctions, although I was able to refer back to the existing notes - which include many I created during writing the paper - there were no notes for some of the new material. When I thought the new work warranted it I created new cards.

I also outlined and expanded much of the material by making new mind maps, and I also looked at mind maps I had made for the paper. One of them made it into the slides.

I put several mind map images and rendered cards up on my second monitor where I could keep looking at them and this was very helpful. Some of these cards were parts of the slides and were never going to become permanent cards. But seeing several of them at a time helped to keep the flow right, and reminded me of what I had written before, or what the outline was.

Working this way was fun and stimulating, and I got too many ideas to fit into the slides, though some became notes. Some went by the wayside and I will probably never remember them.

My pre-existing cards were somewhat familiar because I had used or created them while writing the paper but I needed to remind myself of what they said. Sometimes they would kick off ideas that made their way into paper and sometimes into new notes. Sometimes not. Sometimes I would realize that a card needed updating.

I created a few new citation cards during this process, too as I found some new references.

For me, this dance or continual interaction is what makes things happen. Having the ZK makes them happen faster and better, and is more enjoyable.

Sorry to be so long-winded.

tomp · August 16

@tomp said:
[snip, snip, snip]
For me, this dance or continual interaction is what makes things happen. Having the ZK makes them happen faster and better, and is more enjoyable.

Sorry to be so long-winded.

I forgot to say that there was no instance in which text from any card made its way as is into either the paper or slides except for a few quotations, eg., from Luhmann. The cards helped the writing but not by slotting text in.

harr · August 16

I have similar questions to @tomp.

@Edmund said:
Four questions, four answers:
1. I do not find useful ideas within my Permanent Notes when trying to fill gaps when writing.

Do you mean gaps in your manuscript or gaps in your zettelkasten? Do you have difficulties to find zettels that might be useful, but don't resurface when you need them?

I search for relevant key terms in my indexes. I narrow the search by using tags. I inspect my ideas network within Obsidian Local Graph. I do not find useful ideas.

Are those ideas missing in your ZK? In that case you might have to write more zettels. :-)

Do you know that there are useful zettels in your zettelkasten, but you just can't find them?

Are you hoping for some kind of zettelkasten magic, like serendipity or emergence?

I expect to find a Permanent Note that helps closing the gap.

Can you give an example of such a gap? When I hear "gap", I think of a gap between (at least) two existing things. What are those?

I took more time for searching. I started to reread sources already mentioned in my Literature Notes. I started research for other sources outside my Zettelkasten. I asked experts for help.

That's how I find answers to my questions. Hmm. Are you sure that you ask the right questions, when you write zettels or look for zettels?

tomp · August 17

@Edmund said:

@andang76 said:
First, quality would need to be defined. Or rather, the many qualities.
Each of them could have its own specific paths.

My view on quality:
Principles to improve your Zettelkasten — Zettelkasten Forum

From that comment:

Content Quality

Relevance: Focus on relevant information that directly contribute to your research objectives. Avoid details that may clutter your Zettelkasten.
Accuracy: Verify sources and cross-reference information.
Completeness: Include predefined sections for various types of information to ensure that all relevant aspects of the topic are covered.

Each of these criteria are excellent for documentation. They work against what I want in my zettelkasten. If you focus tightly, you won't have notes with general applicability. If you spend a lot of time on accuracy and completeness, you are removing the opportunity for sparking creativity, connecting ideas, letting the cards have semantic value instead of being polished catalogs, of having the cards be valuable across projects.

Naturally we all need reference material of all sorts. But dozens of systems can provide that.

Here is one of my cards. It could seem tiny and
stupid but it inspires me every time I see it again. It gets me thinking about how I can use my own ZK even more effectively, it reminds me how much I value those qualities, and it reminds me of what I was thinking when I was first working out what I think are the important factors underlying successful systems of this sort.

The positioning of this card, at a quick glance, puts me in touch with related cards of all sorts. Here's a part of that neighborhood:

    Zettels aka Z-cards
        Ignition: Effective zettel design
        Scenes and Frames
        Use Cards To Get More Ideas
        About "Quotation" Cards
        Reuse Z-cards In Other Contexts
        A Z-card/Zettel Holds A Flattened Idea
            How can a complex idea be captured in a Zettelkasten?
            There are many kinds of complex ideas
                Trains of thought are one kind of complex idea
                Syllogisms are a kind of complex idea
                Arguments are a kind of complex idea
            Different kinds of complex ideas probably need different ways to capture them
                Mind maps are good for one-thing-leads-to-another
                    Mind Maps are not well suited for ideas with many inputs
    Software
        The Archive
        My Zettelkasten in Sublime
        Eastgate Tinderbox the tool for notes
        Zettels (command line)
        Zkn3
    Note Taking
        How to Take Smart Notes - Chapt 1
    The Zettelkasten as a Topic Map

    A ZK card should be a bundle
    Zettelkasten-Topic Maps Duality
        Can a Topic Map Annotate Parts Of An Occurrence?
    How Zettelkasten Work
-->     The Zettelkasten Triad (Serendipity, Synergy, Syzygy)
    Zettelkasten And Surprise
    Dialogs: Zettelkasten and Others
    Zettelksten Analogies and Metaphors
        How A Zettelkasten Can Stimulate Creativity
        Zettelkasten is Like "The Everlasting Meal"
        Zettelkastek Movie Analogy: Scene Re-inflation
        Zettelkasten- The Card Game
        Zettelkasten As A Game Of Trivial Pursuit

    Luhmann Archives
        Luhmann on Zettelkastens
        Luhman's Folgezettels: On Equality
            6.1 References On Equality
            6.2 Different Senses Of Equality
            6.3  [Equality] Conceptual Basics
                6.3.1 This point of view for comparison is generally
                6.3.2 Point Of View Is A Condition For Comparability 
                    6.3.2a [cont'd from 6.3] an aspect like this cannot be compared

I probably don't even agree with each of those cards any more but that's not the point. This kind of neighborhood is even more important when you don't find a card that exactly fits the bill. It's like going into a library and looking through a likely part of the stacks. You are more likely to find something useful, interesting, or wonderful than of you just sent in call numbers and received those particular books.

If I want to refresh myself on how Luhmann used the numbering system as Folgezettel, it's right there. "Can a Topic Map Annotate Parts Of An Occurrence?" - this card reminds me that I still am not sure if I want to or need to use compound metadata, and if yes, how I would do it (the card does not have the answer!).

Simple keywords and tags aren't up to this kind of thing. Local graph views don't answer either, at least they never have for me. Following links from card to card don't give you this neighborhood view that you can scan for reminders and ideas. Well-designed search results are highly effective at building temporary neighborhoods. I have never seen Obsidian so I don't know how that aspect works; I only know about Obsidian and The Archive from what I read here in the Forum. If there isn't a plugin for a really effective search, someone could presumably write one.

[sigh, long-winded again]

tomp · August 17

@tomp said:

Here is one of my cards. It could seem tiny and
stupid but it inspires me every time I see it again. It gets me thinking about how I can use my own ZK even more effectively, it reminds me how much I value those qualities, and it reminds me of what I was thinking when I was first working out what I think are the important factors underlying successful systems of this sort.

Somehow my card got removed. Not sure how that happened. Here it is:

The Zettelkasten Triad (Serendipity, Synergy, Syzygy)
------------------------------------------------------

:id: tom.20260317232754.1
:created: 2026-03-17 23:28
:seealso: tom.20260317173731.1 How Zettelkasten Work
:seealso: tom.20260311232848.1 Zettelkasten and the Five Levels Of Thinking Support
:seealso: tom.20260317233456.1 Zettelkasten And Surprise
:seealso: tom.20260318003715.1 Zettelkasten As A Game Of Trivial Pursuit

The holy triad of Zettelkasten creative support:

Serendipity - Find the unexpected.
Synergy - Feel the reinforcement.
Syzygy - Ride the resonance.

andang76 · August 17

Not all ideas (and the zettel representing them) need to be refined to the highest level of quality in every dimension of it.
It requires too much time and effort, is overly complex, and there are some conflicts between some dimensions, too.
Experience and intuition guide one in setting priorities and determining, on a case-by-case basis, when to stop.

andang76 · August 17

I think a great tool for developing a solid theory of properties is to create a template similar to the one used for Design Patterns.
I tried to draft a template, useful for carrying out a systematic work of identifying, representing and generating ideas about a set of useful elements:

given a property

the benefits brought to the Zettelkasten when property is taken to a high value
the properties that are enabling factors, the precursors to its development
the properties of which it, in turn, is precursor
the operating principles for developing the property
the properties they conflict with, for which a balance must be sought
the scale of application: some properties apply to an individual zettel, to a cluster of zettels, or to the entire zettelkasten

I had an AI generate and fill out this template by asking it to do so for one of the properties I identified Semantic Stability (I'm too lazy to reapply the scheme to an already taken zettel about, I've already done the work of writing my Semantic Stability).

Here is the result, the scheme and the example

N.B. I won't be doing this kind of work myself.
I've already developed far more than what I need to build a decent Zettelkasten. It's just an interesting theoretical idea :-)

The content in the example is purely demonstrative and generated by AI; it doesn't align perfectly with what I would write in my own personal analysis.

Property Pattern

A Property Pattern is a framework for systematically describing a property of a Knowledge Management System (KMS), and especially how that property interacts with other properties and with the practices used to develop the system.

Identifying a property answers the question:

What characteristic can a KMS have?

A Property Pattern allows us to explore a different set of questions:

What does this property enable? What enables it? How can it be developed? What benefits does it provide? What tensions does it create with other properties?

The model is inspired by design patterns. It is not intended as a mandatory procedure or as a prescription for an optimal value for every property. Rather, it provides a reusable framework for identifying and describing recurring dynamics.

Not every property needs a complete Property Pattern. The schema is a set of dimensions that can be explored whenever they are relevant.

Property

The property being described and its definition.

Benefits

The benefits produced when the property reaches a sufficiently high level.

What value does it add to the KMS?

Enabling Properties

Properties that may facilitate or enable the development of the property being considered.

What properties act as enablers or precursors?

Enabled Properties

Properties that may be facilitated by the property being considered.

What other properties can it contribute to enabling?

Practices

Practices, strategies, or operational choices that can help develop the property.

What can I actually do to develop it?

Tensions / Trade-offs

Properties with which the property may conflict or compete for limited resources such as time, attention, simplicity, or readability.

What other properties may be compromised by developing it?

Balance

The principle or criterion for managing the identified tensions.

What balance should be sought, depending on the purpose and context?

Context

The circumstances in which the property becomes particularly important, or in which it can reasonably be neglected.

When is it worth investing in it?

Scale

The scale at which the property can be observed: a single Point, a group of Points, a cluster, a portion of the network, or the entire KMS.

At what level of the system does it manifest itself?

A model, not a checklist

A Property Pattern does not have to be completed in every respect.

One property may have only one or two relevant relationships, while another may reveal a complex network of precursors, consequences, practices, and trade-offs.

The schema is therefore intended as an exploratory tool rather than a documentation requirement.

Not every property needs a complete Property Pattern; the pattern is a way of discovering which aspects of a property are worth investigating.

Property

Semantic Stability

The ability of a Point to evolve over time while maintaining sufficient semantic continuity to preserve the validity of the relationships within the network in which it is embedded.

The property does not imply immutability. Rather, it concerns the ability to change without losing compatibility with the existing network.

Benefits

Good Semantic Stability:

reduces the need to continuously repair the network as Points evolve;
allows connections to retain their meaning over time;
facilitates the preservation and reuse of Points;
contributes to the [[Future Proofness (KMS)|Future Proofness]] of the KMS;
allows the KMS to evolve without requiring continuous retrospective restructuring.

Enabling Properties

Some properties may facilitate Semantic Stability:

[[Atomicity (KMS)|Atomicity]] → limits the semantic surface affected by a change;
[[Sharpness (KMS)|Sharpness]] → makes the boundaries of meaning more clearly defined;
[[Cohesion (KMS)|Cohesion]] → reduces dependence on semantically unrelated elements;
[[Modularity (KMS)|Modularity]] → promotes the autonomy of a Point from the structures in which it is used.

Enabled Properties

Semantic Stability may in turn facilitate:

[[Future Proofness (KMS)|Future Proofness]] → the Point remains usable despite the evolution of the KMS;
[[Reusability (KMS)|Reusability]] → a Point whose meaning remains stable can be reused more easily;
[[Composability (KMS)|Composability]] → components can evolve without losing compatibility with existing compositions;
[[Antifragility (KMS)|Antifragility]] → the ability to absorb change without breaking makes it easier for a Point to improve through challenge and revision.

Practices

Practices that may support Semantic Stability include:

clearly delimiting the concept represented by a Point;
avoiding the accumulation of heterogeneous content within a Point;
separating substantially autonomous ideas into distinct Points rather than continuously modifying an existing one;
formulating Points in a way that is sufficiently independent of the particular context in which they originated;
when the meaning of a Point changes significantly, reviewing the relationships that depend on it;
distinguishing the evolution of an idea from the mere accumulation of material within the same note.

Tensions / Trade-offs

Semantic Stability may come into tension with other properties.

Stability ↔ Evolvability

A Point that is too strongly constrained by the need to preserve its meaning may become difficult to modify. Stability should therefore not turn into rigidity.

Stability ↔ Completeness

Continuously adding qualifications and new aspects may increase the completeness of a Point but, beyond a certain point, may progressively alter its original meaning.

Stability ↔ Atomicity

Frequently separating new concepts into distinct Points may preserve the stability of existing Points, but may also increase the number of components and relationships that need to be managed.

Balance

The property should not be maximized indiscriminately.

The goal is to achieve sufficient semantic continuity to keep relationships valid while leaving the Point free to evolve when new evidence, reflections, or connections require it.

When an evolution substantially changes the meaning of a Point, it may be preferable to create a new Point and establish an explicit relationship between the two rather than forcing the old Point to retain an identity it no longer has.

Context

Semantic Stability becomes particularly important when:

a Point has many connections;
it is used in numerous compositions;
it constitutes an element of important structures;
it is intended to be preserved and reused over a long period.

It is less important when a Point is still highly exploratory or when its relationships are provisional.

Scale

Semantic Stability can manifest at different scales:

Point → cluster → portion of network → entire KMS

At the local level, it concerns the semantic compatibility of a Point with its connections. At larger scales, it may concern the ability of an entire structure to evolve without losing the coherence of the relationships connecting it to the rest of the network.

Pattern summary

Atomicity + Sharpness + Cohesion + Modularity
↓
Semantic Stability
↓
Future Proofness + Reusability + Composability + Antifragility

with tensions to be managed with respect to Evolvability, Completeness, and Atomicity.

harr · August 17

@tomp said:
Here's a part of that neighborhood:

I like this part:

A Z-card/Zettel Holds A Flattened Idea
How can a complex idea be captured in a Zettelkasten?

There are many kinds of complex ideas
Trains of thought are one kind of complex idea

Syllogisms are a kind of complex idea

Arguments are a kind of complex idea

Different kinds of complex ideas probably need different ways to capture them
Mind maps are good for one-thing-leads-to-another
Mind Maps are not well suited for ideas with many inputs

It has a nice Folgezettel feeling to it. :-)

tomp · August 17

@harr said:

@tomp said:
Here's a part of that neighborhood:

I like this part:

A Z-card/Zettel Holds A Flattened Idea
How can a complex idea be captured in a Zettelkasten?

There are many kinds of complex ideas
Trains of thought are one kind of complex idea

Syllogisms are a kind of complex idea

Arguments are a kind of complex idea

Different kinds of complex ideas probably need different ways to capture them
Mind maps are good for one-thing-leads-to-another
Mind Maps are not well suited for ideas with many inputs

It has a nice Folgezettel feeling to it. :-)

As it should because I used that sequence to experiment with Folgezettling. It does make for long titles. In return one can get a lot of value by scanning even without examining the cards themselves.

Sascha · August 17

@tomp Do you distinguish between syllogisms and arguments or is the separation an artefact of note creation?

andang76 · August 17

@harr said:

@tomp said:
Here's a part of that neighborhood:

I like this part:

A Z-card/Zettel Holds A Flattened Idea
How can a complex idea be captured in a Zettelkasten?

There are many kinds of complex ideas
Trains of thought are one kind of complex idea

Syllogisms are a kind of complex idea

Arguments are a kind of complex idea

Different kinds of complex ideas probably need different ways to capture them
Mind maps are good for one-thing-leads-to-another
Mind Maps are not well suited for ideas with many inputs

It has a nice Folgezettel feeling to it. :-)

Yup, it’s precisely the way I create "my own" Folgezettel. On a plane, the body of a note.

tomp · August 17

@harr said:

@tomp said:
Here's a part of that neighborhood:

I like this part:

A Z-card/Zettel Holds A Flattened Idea
How can a complex idea be captured in a Zettelkasten?

There are many kinds of complex ideas
Trains of thought are one kind of complex idea

Syllogisms are a kind of complex idea

Arguments are a kind of complex idea

Different kinds of complex ideas probably need different ways to capture them
Mind maps are good for one-thing-leads-to-another
Mind Maps are not well suited for ideas with many inputs

It has a nice Folgezettel feeling to it. :-)

Here is an example to illustrate how a local neighborhood can spark off new ideas or areas to investigate. Let's say I landed here because I ran a search for "syllogism". I wanted to refresh myself on its definition because of my current project. The definition turned out to be in a different neighborhood but this one caught my eye. If I let my mind relax and be more receptive, here are some things that occur to me (I am writing this as it happens):

Is a train of thought the same thing as a "trail" that Vannebar Bush described in his 1945 article about a Memex?
Maybe a "trail" is really the proper building block of thought;
I need to revisit how to represent different kinds of complex ideas with z-cards;
Could I make a diagram that has multiple inputs yet still recognizably be a mind map?
Arguments - I would like to work out a principled way to assess the reliability of an argument;
Arguments - What different kinds of arguments are there and do they have different purposes?
Complex ideas - can I include more fanciful (romantic, etc) elements in a z-card and what would that be good for?
Can I use a ZK to help develop a poem? How could I do that?
Mind maps - can't a mind map be a z-card in my ZK? After all, I can link to it in another card, and it represents a single idea, as indicated by its central node; (But how could it show up in my neighborhoods?)
"Trains of thought" - what about other metaphors for this phenomena, would they make sense and bring in new ideas? How about "airplanes of thought", "caravans of thought", "parades of thought"? Something else? Hmm, "parade" has connotations of discipline, marching, direction. That might be appropriate for project-related work. Interesting.

See what has happened here? Five minutes scanning the fragment of a neighborhood has given me a year's worth of ideas if I followed up on them all.

Or I could just have looked at the card with the definition of "syllogism" and moved on with my project. The ZK cannot provide the ideas and the inspirations all by itself.

harr · August 17

@tomp said:
Here is an example (…)

A beautiful example! I noticed that you ask many questions. I do this too. I find questions an extremely useful tool for note-writing. They keep the flow going, they spark my curiosity when I'm revisiting a note and they prompt the next todos.

Zettelkasten Forum

Any ideas to improve the quality of notes in Zettelkasten?

Comments

Property Pattern

Property

Benefits

Enabling Properties

Enabled Properties

Practices

Tensions / Trade-offs

Balance

Context

Scale

A model, not a checklist

Property

Semantic Stability

Benefits

Enabling Properties

Enabled Properties

Practices

Tensions / Trade-offs

Balance

Context

Scale

Pattern summary

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion