I don't want to remember more of what I read; I want to have access to a breadth and depth of ideas I can justify with evidence.
Repetition and flashcards will help you remember the content, but it won't help you understand it. That's only done by actively engaging with the content and connecting it to and comparing it with other facts and ideas.
The summarising, keeping lists of questions, and writeups will help you understand the content, and I think is the only valuable part of this process. Why rote memorise when you have lovely writeups you can refer back to.
I find Luhmann's Zettelkasten method, as described in 'How to Take Smart Notes' more persuasive. As you read make bibliographic notes in your own words (on page X it says Y), store these in one place for everything you read. Also note down key ideas as you read with cross references to the bibliographic notes, and to other key idea notes that are relevant; store all these notes in another place. When you're filing a key idea have a look for similar ideas already noted; is this the same? Supporting? Contradictory? These questions help engage with the content. Over a lifetime you can amass a treasure chest of ideas that you can refer back to at your leisure, as Luhmann did.
>I don't want to remember more of what I read; I want to have access to a breadth and depth of ideas I can justify with evidence.
That's bad, because without remembering you don't have the ability to quickly know where to look for those ideas and how to evaluate them. Nor do you know how to justify them with evidence (because that depends on remembering domain knowledge of evaluating, classifying and using the evidence itself).
Even if we assumed that you kept a working memory of "first principles" of every knowledge domain you're interested in, and only cared to search and evaluate ideas on demand, you'd still be at a disadvantage to anybody who remembered not just first principles but also higher level information about the knowledge domain -- and thus could skim through tons of BS or bad ideas and sources of information and quickly pick and evaluate only what's relevant.
> Repetition and flashcards will help you remember the content, but it won't help you understand it.
I use flashcards in a very similar fashion to that described in the article, and what I have found is that it is something of an art form. Done poorly, it's an exercise in rote memorisation. Done well, with well phrased and thought provoking questions, it helps you understand. Moreover, it periodically engages you with the content and key ideas.
Repetition and flashcards will help you remember the content, but it won't help you understand it. That's only done by actively engaging with the content and connecting it to and comparing it with other facts and ideas.
The summarising, keeping lists of questions, and writeups will help you understand the content, and I think is the only valuable part of this process. Why rote memorise when you have lovely writeups you can refer back to.
I find Luhmann's Zettelkasten method, as described in 'How to Take Smart Notes' more persuasive. As you read make bibliographic notes in your own words (on page X it says Y), store these in one place for everything you read. Also note down key ideas as you read with cross references to the bibliographic notes, and to other key idea notes that are relevant; store all these notes in another place. When you're filing a key idea have a look for similar ideas already noted; is this the same? Supporting? Contradictory? These questions help engage with the content. Over a lifetime you can amass a treasure chest of ideas that you can refer back to at your leisure, as Luhmann did.