I'm having some trouble understanding what note-taking systems the author is attacking. There are some hints:
> Getting lost in your knowledge management system is a fantastic way to avoid creating things.
> All of the above applies to reading books about note-taking, taking courses about note-taking, and watching videos about note-taking.
> I am waiting for any evidence that our most provocative thinkers and writers are those who rely on elaborate, systematic note-taking systems. I am seeing evidence that people taught knowledge management for its own sake produce unexciting work.
It sounds like Mr. Chapin is referring to formalized techniques or processes for format and organization of notes. But he doesn't give any examples, and I'm not familiar with the ones he hints at - I've never watched any YouTube videos on note taking or read any books on organizing your thoughts.
When I was in college, I took detailed notes in paper notebooks, and still do so occasionally when I'm sitting in a lecture. Otherwise, I send narrative emails to myself, write more business-style notes in Microsoft OneNote, or doodle in a small memo pad. It's clear to me that this is not what he means by a "note-taking system," but what is?
I think the author is largely setting up a strawman. He's alluding to various structured notetaking methodologies (presumably, elaborate wikis, zettels, concept maps, etc.) but then says those methodologies are fine if you're doing detailed, real research work. But honestly, isn't that the only type of person who uses these things? Who would spend all this time building a giant structured notebase just for bits of information of personal interest, with no real application in mind? Most people would lose patience quickly.
I suspect that's the author's point: unless you're doing detailed "real" research work, you probably don't need or even really want the myriad tools optimized for the sorts of structured notetaking and mindmapping and whatnot that such "real" research work entails.
Said point resonates with me quite a bit. It's always inspiring to see people with elaborate Org-mode setups or what have you to maintain every last detail of their lives, and being the disorganized and forgetful hot mess of ADD and possible undiagnosed depression and/or anxiety that I am, it's tempting to think "wow, if I just adopt this complex system with these cool tools then I'll be able to actually get my shit together and not be a complete fuck-up" - and every time I give into that temptation, I learn the hard way that a complex organizational system only really works for those who are already prone to self-organization, and doesn't magically turn chaos into order - and then I'm sad again.
> Getting lost in your knowledge management system is a fantastic way to avoid creating things.
> All of the above applies to reading books about note-taking, taking courses about note-taking, and watching videos about note-taking.
> I am waiting for any evidence that our most provocative thinkers and writers are those who rely on elaborate, systematic note-taking systems. I am seeing evidence that people taught knowledge management for its own sake produce unexciting work.
It sounds like Mr. Chapin is referring to formalized techniques or processes for format and organization of notes. But he doesn't give any examples, and I'm not familiar with the ones he hints at - I've never watched any YouTube videos on note taking or read any books on organizing your thoughts.
When I was in college, I took detailed notes in paper notebooks, and still do so occasionally when I'm sitting in a lecture. Otherwise, I send narrative emails to myself, write more business-style notes in Microsoft OneNote, or doodle in a small memo pad. It's clear to me that this is not what he means by a "note-taking system," but what is?