How to take smart notes: one simple technique to boost writing, learning and thinking

SönkeAhrens

HowtoTakeSmartNotes

OneSimpleTechniquetoBoostWriting,LearningandThinking–forStudents,Academicsand

NonfictionBookWriters.

2017

takesmartnotes.comEditedbyKathyDrouin-KeithCoverDesignbyOliverFerreira

“Notesonpaper,oronacomputerscreen[...]

donotmakecontemporaryphysicsorotherkindsofintellectualendeavoreasier,theymakeitpossible…nomatterhowinternalprocessesareimplemented[...you..]needtounderstandtheextenttowhichthemindisreliantuponexternalscaffolding.”(Levy2011,270)“Onecannotthinkwithoutwriting.”(Luhmann1992,53)

TABLEOFCONTENTS

Introduction1

EverythingYouNeedtoKnow

2

EverythingYouNeedtoDo

3

EverythingYouNeedtoHave

4

AFewThingstoKeepinMind

TheFourUnderlyingPrinciples5

WritingIstheOnlyThingThatMatters

6

SimplicityIsParamount

7

NobodyEverStartsFromScratch

8

LettheWorkCarryYouForward

TheSixStepstoSuccessfulWriting9

Separateand

InterlockingTasks

10

ReadforUnderstanding

11

TakeSmartNotes

12

DevelopIdeas

13

ShareYourInsight

14

MakeItaHabit

AfterwordBibliographyIndex

INTRODUCTION

Everybodywrites.Especially inacademia.Studentswriteandprofessorswrite.Andnonfictionwriters,whoarethethirdgroupofpeoplethisbookisaimingtohelp, obviously write as well. And writing doesn’t necessarily mean papers,articles or books, but everyday, basic writing. We write when we need toremembersomething,beitanidea,aquoteortheoutcomeofastudy.Wewritewhenwewant to organise our thoughts andwhenwewant to exchange ideaswithothers.Studentswritewhentheytakeanexam,butthefirstthingtheydotoprepareevenforanoralexaminationis tograbpenandpaper.Wewritedownnotonly those thingswefearwewon’t rememberotherwise,butalso theverythingswetrytomemorise.Everyintellectualendeavourstartswithanote.Writingplayssuchacentral role in learning,studyingandresearch that it is

surprising how little we think about it. If writing is discussed, the focus liesalmostalwaysonthefewexceptionalmomentswherewewritealengthypiece,abook,anarticleor,asstudents, theessaysandtheseswehavetohandin.Atfirstglance,thatmakessense:thesearethetasksthatcausethemostanxietyandwith which we struggle the longest. Consequently, these “written pieces” arealsowhatmostself-helpbooksforacademicsorstudyguidesfocuson,butveryfewgiveguidancefortheeverydaynote-takingthattakesupthebiggestchunkofourwriting.The

availablebooksfallroughlyintotwocategories.Thefirstteachestheformalrequirements:style,structureorhowtoquotecorrectly.Andthentherearethepsychologicalones,whichteachyouhowtogetitdonewithoutmentalbreakdownsandbeforeyoursupervisororpublisherstartsrefusingtomovethedeadline

oncemore.Whattheyallhaveincommon,though,isthattheystartwithablankscreenorsheetofpaper.[1]Butbydoingthis,theyignorethemainpart,namelynote-taking,failingtounderstandthatimprovingtheorganisationofallwritingmakesadifference.Theyseemtoforgetthattheprocessofwritingstartsmuch,muchearlierthanthatblankscreenandthattheactualwritingdownoftheargumentisthesmallestpartofitsdevelopment.Thisbookaimstofillthisgapbyshowingyouhowtoefficientlyturnyourthoughtsanddiscoveriesintoconvincingwrittenpiecesandbuildupatreasureofsmartandinterconnectednotesalongtheway.Youcanusethispoolofnotesnotonlytomakewritingeasierandmorefunforyourself,butalsotolearnforthelongrunandgeneratenewideas.Butmostofall,youcanwriteeverydayinawaythatbringsyourprojectsforward.

Writingisnotwhatfollowsresearch,learningorstudying,itisthemediumofall this work. And maybe that is the reason why we rarely think about thiswriting,theeverydaywriting,thenote-takinganddraft-making.Likebreathing,itisvitaltowhatwedo,butbecausewedoitconstantly,itescapesourattention.

Butwhileeventhebestbreathingtechniquewouldprobablynotmakemuchofadifferencetoourwriting,anyimprovementinthewayweorganisetheeverydaywriting, howwe takenotes ofwhatwe encounter andwhatwedowith them,willmakeallthedifferenceforthemomentwedofacetheblankpage/screen–or rathernot, as thosewho take smart noteswill never have the problemof ablankscreenagain.There

isanotherreasonthatnote-takingfliesmostlyundertheradar:Wedon’texperienceanyimmediatenegativefeedbackifwedoitbadly.Butwithoutanimmediateexperienceoffailure,thereisalsonotmuchdemandforhelp.Andthepublishingmarketworkinghowitworks,thereisnotmuchhelpinsupplyforthislackofdemandeither.Itisthepanicinfrontoftheblankscreenthatbringsstudentsandacademicwriterstoturntothebookshelvesfullofself-helpbooksonwriting,amarketpublishersmeetindrovesbyfocusingonhowtodealwiththishorse-has-already-left-the-barnsituation.Ifwetakenotesunsystematically,inefficientlyorsimplywrong,wemightnotevenrealiseituntilweareinthemidstofadeadlinepanicandwonderwhytherealwaysseemtobeafewwhogetalotofgoodwritingdoneandstillhavetime

getalotofgoodwritingdoneandstillhavetimeforacoffeeeverytimeweaskthem.Andeventhen,itismorelikelythatsomeformofrationalizationwillcloudtheviewoftheactualreason,whichismostlikelythedifferencebetweengoodandbadnote-taking.“Somepeoplearejustlikethat,”“writinghastobedifficult,”“thestruggleispartofthedeal”

arejustafewofthemantrasthatkeeptoomanyfrominquiringwhatexactlydistinguishessuccessfulwritingstrategiesfromlesssuccessfulones.

The

rightquestionis:Whatcanwedodifferentlyintheweeks,monthsorevenyearsbeforewefacetheblankpagethatwillgetusintothebestpossiblepositiontowriteagreatpapereasily?Veryfewpeoplestrugglewiththeirpapersbecausetheydon’tknowhowtocitecorrectlyorbecausetheysufferfromapsychologicalissuethatkeepsthemfromwriting.Fewstruggleto

texttheirfriendsorwriteemails.Therulesofcitationcanbelookedupandthereisnowaythatthereareasmanymentalissuesaspaperspostponed.Mostpeoplestruggleformuchmoremundanereasons,andoneisthemythoftheblankpageitself.Theystrugglebecausetheybelieve,astheyaremadetobelieve,thatwritingstartswithablankpage.Ifyoubelievethatyouhaveindeednothingathandtofillit,youhaveaverygoodreasontopanic.Justhavingitallinyourheadisnotenough,asgettingitdownonpaperisthehardbit.Thatiswhygood,productivewritingisbasedongoodnote-taking.

Gettingsomethingthatisalreadywrittenintoanotherwrittenpieceisincomparablyeasierthanassemblingeverythinginyourmindandthentryingtoretrieveitfromthere.

To

sumitup:Thequalityofapaperandtheeasewithwhichitiswrittendependsmorethan

anythingonwhatyouhavedoneinwritingbeforeyouevenmadeadecisiononthetopic.Butifthatistrue(andIwholeheartedlybelieveitis),andthekeytosuccessfulwritingliesinthepreparation,italsomeansthatthevastmajorityofself-helpbooksandstudyguidescanonlyhelpyoutoclosethebarndoorcorrectlyandaccordingtoofficialrules–notjustamoment,butmanymonthsafterthehorsehasalreadyescaped.

With

thatinmind,itisnotsurprisingthatthesinglemostimportantindicatorofacademicsuccessisnottobefoundinpeople’sheads,butinthewaytheydotheireverydaywork.Infact,thereisnomeasurablecorrelationbetweenahighIQandacademicsuccess–atleastnotnorthof120.Yes,acertainintellectualcapacityhelpstogetintoacademia,andifyoustruggleseverelywithanIQtest,itislikelythatyouwillstruggletosolveacademicproblems,too.Butonceyouare

in,asuperiorIQwillneitherhelpyoutodistinguishyourselfnorprotectyoufromfailure.Whatdoesmakeasignificantdifferencealongthewholeintelligencespectrumissomethingelse:howmuchself-disciplineorself-controloneusestoapproachthetasksathand(DuckworthandSeligman,2005;Tangney,Baumeister,andBoone,2004).

It

isnotsoimportantwhoyouare,butwhatyoudo.Doingtheworkrequiredanddoingitinasmartwayleads,somehowunsurprisingly,tosuccess.Atfirstglance,thisisbothgoodandbadnews.Thegoodnewsisthatwewouldn’tbeabletodomuchaboutourIQanyway,whileitseemstobewithinourcontroltohavemoreself-disciplinewithalittlebitofwillpower.Thebadnewsisthatwedonothavethiskindofcontroloverourselves.Self-disciplineorself-controlisnotthateasytoachievewithwillpoweralone.Willpoweris,asfarasweknowtoday,[2]a

limitedresourcethatdepletesquicklyandisalsonotthatmuchupforimprovementoverthelongterm(Baumeister,Bratslavsky,Muraven,andTice,1998;Muraven,Tice,andBaumeister,1998;Schmeichel,Vohs,andBaumeister,2003;Moller,2006).Andwhowouldwanttoflogoneselftowork,anyway?

Luckily,thisisnotthewholestory.Weknowtodaythatself-controlandself-disciplinehavemuchmoretodowithourenvironmentthanwithourselves(cf.Thaler,2015,ch.2)–andtheenvironmentcanbechanged.

Nobodyneedswillpowernottoeatachocolatebarwhenthereisn’tonearound.

Andnobodyneedswillpowertodosomethingtheywantedtodoanyway.Everytaskthatisinteresting,meaningfulandwell-definedwillbedone,becausethereisnoconflictbetweenlong-andshort-terminterests.Havingameaningfulandwell-definedtaskbeatswillpowereverytime.Nothavingwillpower,butnothavingtousewillpowerindicatesthatyousetyourselfupforsuccess.

Thisiswheretheorganisationofwritingandnote-takingcomesintoplay.

1EverythingYouNeedtoKnowUntilnow,writingandnote-takingtechniqueswereusuallytaughtwithoutmuchregardtotheoverarchingworkflow.Thisbookaimstochangethat.

Itwillpresentyouwiththetoolsofnote-takingthatturnedthesonofabrewerintooneofthemostproductiveandreveredsocialscientistsofthe20thcentury.Butmoreover,itdescribeshowheimplementedthemintohisworkflowsohecouldhonestlysay:“IneverforcemyselftodoanythingIdon’tfeellike.WheneverIamstuck,Idosomethingelse.”Agoodstructureallowsyoutodothat,tomoveseamlesslyfromonetasktoanother–withoutthreateningthewholearrangementorlosingsightofthebiggerpicture.

A

goodstructureissomethingyoucantrust.Itrelievesyoufromtheburdenofrememberingandkeepingtrackofeverything.Ifyoucantrustthesystem,youcanletgooftheattempttoholdeverythingtogetherinyourheadandyoucan

startfocusingonwhatisimportant:Thecontent,theargumentandtheideas.Bybreakingdowntheamorphoustaskof“writingapaper”intosmallandclearlyseparatedtasks,youcanfocusononethingatatime,completeeachinonegoandmoveontothenextone(Chapter3.1).Agoodstructureenablesflow,thestateinwhichyougetsocompletelyimmersedinyourworkthatyoulosetrackoftimeandcanjustkeepongoingastheworkbecomeseffortless(Csikszentmihalyi,1975).Somethinglikethatdoesnothappenbychance.

As

students,researchersandnonfictionwriters,wehavesomuchmorefreedomthanotherstochoosewhatwewanttospendourtimeon.Still,weoftenstrugglethemostwithprocrastinationandmotivation.Itiscertainlynotthelackofinterestingtopics,butrathertheemploymentofproblematicworkroutinesthatseemstotakechargeofusinsteadofallowingustosteertheprocessintherightdirection.Agood,structured

processintherightdirection.Agood,structuredworkflowputsusbackinchargeandincreasesourfreedomtodotherightthingattherighttime.

Havingaclearstructuretoworkiniscompletelydifferentfrommakingplansabout something. If you make a plan, you impose a structure on yourself; itmakes you inflexible. To keep going according to plan, you have to pushyourself and employ willpower. This is not only demotivating, but alsounsuitable for an open-ended process like research, thinking or studying ingeneral, where we have to adjust our next steps with every new insight,understandingor achievement –whichwe ideally haveon a regular basis andnotjustasanexception.Eventhoughplanningisoftenatoddswiththeveryideaof research and learning, it is the mantra of most study guides and self-helpbooksonacademicwriting.Howdoyouplanfor insight,which,bydefinition,cannotbeanticipated?Itisahugemisunderstandingthattheonlyalternativetoplanning is aimless messing around. The challenge is to structure one’sworkflowinawaythatinsightandnewideascanbecomethedrivingforcesthatpushusforward.Wedonotwanttomakeourselvesdependentonaplanthatisthreatenedbytheunexpected,likeanewidea,discovery–orinsight.Unfortunately, even universities try to turn students into planners. Sure,

planningwillgetyouthroughyourexamsifyousticktothemandpushthrough.But it will not make you an expert in the art of learning/writing/note-taking(thereisresearchonthat:cf.Chapter1.3).Plannersarealsounlikelytocontinuewiththeirstudiesaftertheyfinishtheirexaminations.Theyarerathergladit isover.Experts,ontheotherhand,wouldnotevenconsidervoluntarilygivingupwhat has already proved to be rewarding and fun: learning in a way thatgenerates real insight, isaccumulativeandsparksnew ideas.The fact thatyouinvestedinthisbooktellsmethatyouwouldratherbeanexpertthanaplanner.And

ifyouareastudentseekinghelpwithyourwriting,thechancesarethatyoualreadyaimhightoo,becauseitisusuallythebeststudents

hightoo,becauseitisusuallythebeststudentswhostrugglethemost.Goodstudentswrestlewiththeirsentencesbecausetheycareaboutfindingtherightexpression.Ittakesthemlongertofindagoodideatowriteaboutbecausetheyknowfromexperiencethatthefirstideaisrarelythatgreatandgoodquestionsdonotfallintotheirlaps.Theyspendmoretimeinthelibrarytogetabetteroverviewoftheliterature,whichleadstomorereading,whichmeansthattheyhavetojugglemoreinformation.Havingreadmoredoesnotautomaticallymeanhavingmoreideas.Especiallyinthebeginning,itmeanshavingfewerideastoworkwith,becauseyouknowthatothershavealreadythoughtofmostofthem.

Good

studentsalsolookbeyondtheobvious.Theypeekoverthefencesoftheirowndisciplines–andonceyouhavedonethat,youcannotgobackanddowhateveryoneelseisdoing,evenifyounowmustdealwithheterogeneousideasthatcomewithoutamanualonhowtheymightfit

comewithoutamanualonhowtheymightfittogether.Allthatmeansisthatasystemisneededtokeeptrackoftheever-increasingpoolofinformation,whichallowsonetocombinedifferentideasinanintelligentwaywiththeaimofgeneratingnewideas.

Poor

studentsdonothaveanyoftheseproblems.Aslongastheystickwithintheboundariesoftheirdisciplineandreadonlyasmuchastheyaretoldto(orless),noseriousexternalsystemisrequiredandwritingcanbedonebystickingwiththeusualformulasof“howtowriteascientificpaper.”Infact,poorstudentsoftenfeelmoresuccessful(untiltheyaretested),becausetheydon’texperiencemuchself-doubt.Inpsychology,thisisknownastheDunning-Krugereffect(KrugerandDunning,1999).Poorstudentslackinsightintotheirownlimitations–astheywouldhavetoknowaboutthevastamountofknowledgeouttheretobeabletoseehowlittletheyknowincomparison.

Thatmeansthatthosewhoarenotverygoodatsomethingtendtobeoverlyconfident,whilethosewhohavemadeanefforttendtounderestimatetheirabilities.Poorstudentsalsohavenotroublefindingaquestiontowriteabout:theyneitherlackopinionsnortheconfidencethattheyhavealreadythoughtthemthrough.Theyalsowon’thavetroublefindingconfirmingevidenceintheliteratureastheyusuallylackbothinterestandskilltodetectandthinkthroughdis-confirmingfactsandarguments.

Goodstudents,on theotherhand, constantly raise thebar for themselvesasthey focus on what they haven’t learned and mastered yet. This is why highachieverswhohavehada tasteof thevastamountofknowledgeout therearelikelytosufferfromwhatpsychologistscallimpostersyndrome,thefeelingthatyouarenotreallyuptothejob,eventhough,ofallpeople,theyare(ClanceandImes 1978; Brems et al. 1994). This book is for you, the good students,ambitiousacademicsandcuriousnonfictionwriterswhounderstandthatinsightdoesn’tcomeeasyandthatwritingisnotonlyforproclaimingopinions,butthemaintooltoachieveinsightworthsharing.

1.1GoodSolutionsareSimple–andUnexpectedThere isnoneedtobuildacomplexsystemandthere isnoneedtoreorganiseeverything you already have. You can start working and developing ideasimmediatelybytakingsmartnotes.Complexity is an issue, though. Even if you don’t aim to develop a grand

theory and justwant to keep track ofwhat you read, organise your notes anddevelopyourthoughts,youwillhavetodealwithanincreasinglycomplexbodyofcontent,especiallybecauseit isnotjustaboutcollectingthoughts,butaboutmaking connections and sparking new ideas. Most people try to reducecomplexity by separatingwhat theyhave into smaller stacks, piles or separatefolders.Theysorttheirnotesbytopicsandsub-topics,whichmakesitlooklesscomplex,butquicklybecomesverycomplicated.Plus,itreducesthelikelihoodof building and finding surprising connections between the notes themselves,whichmeansatrade-offbetweenitsusabilityandusefulness.Thankfully,wedon’thavetochoosebetweenusabilityandusefulness.Quite

thecontrary.

Thebestwaytodealwithcomplexityistokeepthingsassimpleaspossibleandtofollowafewbasicprinciples.Thesimplicityofthestructureallowscomplexitytobuildupwherewewantit:onthecontentlevel.Thereisquiteextensiveempiricalandlogicalresearchonthisphenomenon(foranoverview:cf.SullandEisenhardt,2015).Takingsmartnotesisassimpleasitgets.

Anotheritemofgoodnewsregardstheamountoftimeandeffortyouhavetoputintogettingstarted.Eventhoughyouwillchangeconsiderablythewayyouread,takenotesandwrite,thereisalmostnopreparationtimeneeded(exceptforunderstanding the principle and installing one or two free programs). It is notabout redoing what you have done before, but about changing the way ofworking from now on. There is really no need to reorganise anything youalreadyhave.

Justdealwiththingsdifferentlythemomentyou

Justdealwiththingsdifferentlythemomentyouhavetodealwiththemanyway.

There ismoregoodnews.There is noneed to reinvent thewheel.Weonlyneed to combine two well-known and proven ideas. The first idea lies at theheartofthisbookandisthetechniqueofthesimpleslip-box.Iwillexplaintheprincipleofthissysteminthenextchapterandshowhowitcanbeimplementedintheeverydayroutinesofstudents,academicsornonfictionwriters.

Thankfully,therearedigitalversionsforallmajoroperatingsystemsavailable,butifyouprefer,youcanalsousepenandpaper.Intermsofproductivityandease,youwillstilleasilysurpassthosewhoaretakingnot-so-smartnotes.

The

secondideaisequallyimportant.Eventhebesttoolwillnotimproveyourproductivityconsiderablyifyoudon’tchangeyourdailyroutinesthetoolisembeddedin,justasthefastestcarwon’thelpyoumuchifyoudon’thaveproperroadstodriveiton.Likeeverychangeinbehaviour,achangeinworkinghabitsmeansgoingthroughaphasewhereyouaredrawnbacktoyouroldways.Thenewwayofworkingmightfeelartificialatfirstandnot

workingmightfeelartificialatfirstandnotnecessarilylikewhatyouintuitivelywoulddo.Thatisnormal.Butassoonasyougetusedtotakingsmartnotes,itwillfeelsomuchmorenaturalthatyouwillwonderhowyouwereeverabletogetanythingdonebefore.Routinesrequiresimple,repeatabletasksthatcanbecomeautomaticandfittogetherseamlessly(cf.Mata,Todd,andLippke,2010).Onlywhenalltherelatedworkbecomespartofanoverarchingandinterlockedprocess,whereallbottlenecksareremoved,cansignificantchangetakeplace(whichiswhynoneofthetypical“10

mind-blowingtoolstoimproveyourproductivity”tipsyoucanfindallovertheinternetwilleverbeofmuchhelp).

The

importanceofanoverarchingworkflowisthegreatinsightofDavidAllen’s“GettingThingsDone”(Allen,2001).Therearefewseriousknowledgeworkersleftwhohaven’theardof“GTD”andthatisforagoodreason:Itworks.

“GTD”andthatisforagoodreason:Itworks.TheprincipleofGTDistocollecteverythingthatneedstobetakencareofinoneplaceandprocessitinastandardisedway.Thisdoesn’tnecessarilymeanthatweactuallydoeverythingweonceintendedtodo,butitforcesustomakeclearchoicesandregularlycheckifourtasksstillfitintothebiggerpicture.Onlyifweknowthateverythingistakencareof,fromtheimportanttothetrivial,canweletgoandfocusonwhatisrightinfrontofus.OnlyifnothingelseislingeringinourworkingmemoryandtakingupvaluablementalresourcescanweexperiencewhatAllencallsa“mindlikewater”-thestatewherewecanfocusontheworkrightinfrontofuswithoutgettingdistractedbycompetingthoughts.Theprincipleissimplebutholistic.Itisnotaquickfixorafancytool.Itdoesn’tdotheworkforyou.Butitdoesprovideastructureforoureverydayworkthatdealswiththefactthatmostdistractionsdonotcomesomuchfromourenvironment,butourownminds.

Unfortunately, David Allen’s technique cannot simply be transferred to thetaskofinsightfulwriting.ThefirstreasonisthatGTDreliesonclearlydefinedobjectives,whereas insight cannot be predeterminedby definition.Weusuallystartwithrathervagueideasthatareboundtochangeuntiltheybecomeclearerin the course of our research (cf. Ahrens, 2014, 134f.). Writing that aims atinsight must therefore be organised in a much more open manner. The otherreason is thatGTD requiresprojects tobebrokendown into smaller, concrete“next steps.”Of course, insightfulwriting or academicwork is also done onestep at a time, but these are most often too small to be worth writing down(lookingupafootnote,rereadingachapter,writingaparagraph)ortoograndtobefinishedinonego.Itisalsodifficulttoanticipatewhichstephastobetakenafter the next one.Youmight notice a footnote,which you check quickly on.You try to understand a paragraph and need to look up something forclarification.Youmake a note, go back to reading and then jump up towritedownasentencethatformeditselfinyourmind.Writing is not a linear process.We constantly have to jump back and forth

betweendifferent tasks. Itwouldn’tmakeanysense tomicromanageourselveson that level. Zooming out to the bigger picture does not really help, either,becausethenwehavenextstepslike“writingapage.”Thatdoesnotreallyhelpwithnavigatingthethingsyouhavetodotowriteapage,oftenawholebunchofother things that can take an hour or amonth.One has to navigatemostly bysight. These are probably the reasons why GTD never really caught on inacademia, although it is very successful inbusiness andhas agood reputationamongtheself-employed.What

wecantakefromAllenasanimportantinsightisthatthesecrettoasuccessfulorganizationliesintheholisticperspective.Everythingneedstobetakencareof,otherwisetheneglectedbitswillnagusuntiltheunimportanttasksbecomeurgent.Eventhebesttoolswon’tmakemuchofadifferenceiftheyareusedinisolation.Onlyif

adifferenceiftheyareusedinisolation.Onlyiftheyareembeddedinawell-conceivedworkingprocesscanthetoolsplayouttheirstrengths.Thereisnopointinhavinggreattoolsiftheydon’tfittogether.

When

itcomestowriting,everything,fromresearchtoproofreading,iscloselyconnected.Allthelittlestepsmustbelinkedinawaythatwillenableyoutogoseamlesslyfromonetasktoanother,butstillbekeptseparateenoughtoenableustoflexiblydowhatneedstobedoneinanygivensituation.AndthisistheotherinsightofDavidAllen:Onlyifyoucantrustyoursystem,onlyifyoureallyknowthateverythingwillbetakencareof,willyourbrainletgoandletyoufocusonthetaskathand.

Thatiswhyweneedanote-takingsystemthatisascomprehensiveasGTD,but one that is suitable for the open-ended process of writing, learning andthinking.

Entertheslip-box.

1.2TheSlip-boxIt is the 1960s, somewhere in Germany. Among the staff of a Germanadministrationoffice is the sonof abrewer.Hisname isNiklasLuhmann.Hewenttolawschool,buthehaschosentobeapublicservant,ashedidnotliketheideaofhavingtoworkformultipleclients.Fullyawareheisalsonotsuitedfor a career in administration, as it involves a lot of socializing, he excuseshimselfeverydayafterhis9-5shiftandgoeshome todowhathe likedmost:readingandfollowinghisdiverseinterests inphilosophy,organizational theoryandsociology.Wheneverheencounteredsomethingremarkableorhadathoughtaboutwhat

heread,hemadeanote.Now,manypeoplereadintheeveningandfollowtheirinterests,andsomeeventakenotes.ButforveryfewisitthepathtosomethingasextraordinaryasLuhmann’scareer.Aftercollectingnotesforawhileinthewaymostpeopledo,commentingin

themarginsofatextorcollectinghandwrittennotesbytopic,Luhmannrealisedhisnote-takingwasnotleadinganywhere.Soheturnednote-takingonitshead.

Insteadofaddingnotestoexistingcategoriesortherespectivetexts,hewrotethemallonsmallpiecesofpaper,putanumberinthecornerandcollectedtheminoneplace:theslip-box.

He

soondevelopednewcategoriesofthesenotes.Herealisedthatoneidea,onenotewasonlyasvaluableasitscontext,whichwasnotnecessarilythecontextitwastakenfrom.Sohestartedtothinkabouthowoneideacouldrelateandcontributetodifferentcontexts.Just

andcontributetodifferentcontexts.Justamassingnotesinoneplacewouldnotleadtoanythingotherthanamassofnotes.Buthecollectedhisnotesinhisslip-boxinsuchawaythatthecollectionbecamemuchmorethanthesumofitsparts.Hisslip-boxbecamehisdialoguepartner,mainideageneratorandproductivityengine.Ithelpedhimtostructureanddevelophisthoughts.Anditwasfuntoworkwith–becauseitworked.

And

itledhimtoenteracademia.Oneday,heputsomeofthesethoughtstogetherintoamanuscriptandhandeditovertoHelmutSchelsky,oneofthemostinfluentialsociologistsinGermany.Schelskytookithome,readwhatthisacademicoutsiderhadwrittenandcontactedLuhmann.HesuggestedthatheshouldbecomeaprofessorofsociologyinthenewlyfoundedUniversityofBielefeld.Asattractiveandprestigiousasthispositionwas,Luhmannwasn’tasociologist.Hedidn’thavetheformalqualificationsrequiredeventobecomean

qualificationsrequiredeventobecomeanassistantforasociologyprofessorinGermany.Hehadn’twrittenahabilitation,thehighestacademicqualificationinmanyEuropeancountries,whichisbasedonthesecondbookafterthedoctoralthesis.Hehadneverheldadoctorateorevenobtainedasociologydegree.Mostpeoplewouldtaketheofferasahugecompliment,butpointouttheimpossibilityofitandmoveon.

Not

Luhmann.Heturnedtohisslip-boxandwithitshelpheputtogetheradoctoralthesisandthehabilitationthesisinlessthanayear–whiletakingclassesinsociology.Shortlyafter,in1968,hewaschosentobecomeprofessorofsociologyattheUniversityofBielefeld–apositionhewouldholdfortherestofhislife.

In

Germany,aprofessortraditionallystartswithapubliclecturepresentinghisorherprojects,andLuhmann,too,wasaskedwhathismainresearch

Luhmann,too,wasaskedwhathismainresearchprojectwillbe.Hisanswerwouldbecomefamous.Helaconicallystated:“Myproject:theoryofsociety.Duration:30years.Costs:zero”(Luhmann,1997,11).Insociology,a“theoryofsociety”isthemotherofallprojects.

When

hefinishedthefinalchapter,almostexactly29andahalfyearslater,asatwo-volumebookwiththetitle“TheSocietyofSociety”(1997),itstirredupthescientificcommunity.[3]Itwasaradicalnewtheorythatnotonlychangedsociology,butstirredheateddiscussionsinphilosophy,education,politicaltheoryandpsychologyaswell.

Noteveryonewasabletofollowthediscussions,though.Whathedidwasunusuallysophisticated,verydifferentandhighlycomplex.Thechapterswerepublishedindividually,eachbookdiscussingonesocialsystem.Hewroteonlaw,politics,economy,communication,art,

law,politics,economy,communication,art,education,epistemology–andevenlove.

In

30years,hepublished58booksandhundredsofarticles,translationsnotincluded.Manybecameclassicsintheirrespectivefields.Evenafterhisdeath,abouthalfadozenmorebooksondiversesubjectslikereligion,educationorpoliticswerepublishedinhisname–basedonalmostfinishedmanuscriptslyingaroundinhisoffice.TherearemorethanafewcolleaguesIknowwhowouldgivealottobeasproductiveintheirwholelifetimeasLuhmannwasafterhisdeath.

Whilesomecareer-orientedacademicstrytosqueezeasmanypublicationsoutof one idea as possible, Luhmann seemed to do the opposite. He constantlygeneratedmoreideasthanhewasabletowritedown.Histextsreadasifheistrying to squeeze as much insight and as many ideas as possible into onepublication.When

hewasaskedifhemissedanythinginhislife,hefamouslyanswered:“IfIwantsomething,it’smoretime.Theonlythingthatreallyisanuisanceisthelackoftime.”(Luhmann,

nuisanceisthelackoftime.”(Luhmann,Baecker,andStanitzek,1987,139)Andwhilesomeacademicslettheirassistantsdothemainworkorhaveateamthatiswritingthepaperstowhichtheyaddtheirnames,Luhmannrarelyhadanyassistanceatall.Thelastassistantwhoworkedforhimsworeblindthattheonlyhelphewasabletogivewastospotafewtyposinhismanuscriptshereandthere.

Luhmann’sonlyrealhelpwasahousekeeperwhocookedforhimandhischildrenduringtheweek,notthatextraordinaryconsideringhehadtoraisethreechildrenonhisownafterhiswifediedearly.Fivewarmmealsaweekofcoursedonotexplaintheproductionofroughly60influentialbooksandcountlessarticles.

After doing extensive research on Luhmann’s workflow, the Germansociologist Johannes F.K. Schmidt concluded his productivity could only beexplainedbyhisuniqueworkingtechnique(Schmidt2013,168).Thattechniquehas never been a secret – Luhmann was always open about it. He regularlymentionedtheslip-boxasthereasonforhisproductivity.Fromasearlyas1985,hisstandardanswertothequestionofhowanyonecouldbesoproductivewas:“I,of course,donot thinkeverythingbymyself. It happensmainlywithin theslip-box”(Luhmann,Baecker,andStanitzek1987,142).Butfewgavetheslip-boxandthewayheworkedwithitacloserlook,dismissinghisexplanationasthemodestunderstatementofagenius.

His

productivityis,ofcourse,impressive.Butwhatisevenmoreimpressivethanthesheernumberofpublicationsortheoutstandingqualityofhiswritingisthefactthatheseemedtoachieveallthiswithalmostnorealeffort.Henotonlystressedthatheneverforcedhimselftodosomethinghedidn’tfeellike,heevensaid:“Ionlydowhatiseasy.IonlywritewhenIimmediatelyknowhowtodoit.IfIfalterforamoment,Iputthematterasideanddosomethingelse.”(Luhmannetal.,1987,154f.)[4]

Untilrecently,almostnoonereallyseemedtobelieveit.Wearestillsousedtotheideathatagreatoutcomerequiresgreateffortthatwetendnottobelievethat a simple change in our work routines could not only make us moreproductive,but theworkalsomore fun.Butdoesn’t itmakemuchmoresensethattheimpressivebodyofworkwasproducednotinspiteofthefacthenevermadehimselfdoanythinghedidn’tfeellike,butbecauseofit?Evenhardworkcanbefunaslongasitisalignedwithourintrinsicgoalsandwefeelincontrol.Theproblemsarisewhenwesetupourworkinsuchaninflexiblewaythatwecan’tadjustitwhenthingschangeandbecomearrestedinaprocessthatseemstodevelopalifeofitsown.The

bestwaytomaintainthefeelingofbeingincontrolistostayincontrol.Andtostayin

controlistostayincontrol.Andtostayincontrol,it'sbettertokeepyouroptionsopenduringthewritingprocessratherthanlimityourselftoyourfirstidea.Itisinthenatureofwriting,especiallyinsight-orientedwriting,thatquestionschange,thematerialweworkwithturnsouttobeverydifferentfromtheoneimaginedorthatnewideasemerge,whichmightchangeourwholeperspectiveonwhatwedo.

Onlyiftheworkissetupinawaythatisflexibleenoughtoallowthesesmallandconstantadjustmentscanwekeepourinterest,motivationandworkaligned–whichisthepreconditiontoeffortlessoralmosteffortlesswork.

Luhmannwasabletofocusontheimportantthingsrightinfrontofhim,pickup quickly where he left off and stay in control of the process because thestructureofhisworkallowedhimtodothis.Ifweworkinanenvironmentthatisflexibleenoughtoaccommodateourworkrhythm,wedon’tneedtostrugglewithresistance.Studiesonhighlysuccessfulpeoplehaveprovenagainandagainthat success is not the result of strongwillpower and the ability to overcomeresistance, but rather the result of smart working environments that avoidresistanceinthefirstplace(cf.Nealetal.2012;Painteretal.

2002;Hearnetal.1998).Insteadofstruggling

withadversedynamics,highlyproductivepeopledeflectresistance,verymuchlikejudochampions.Thisisnotjustabouthavingtherightmindset,itisalsoabouthavingtherightworkflow.ItisthewayLuhmannandhisslip-boxworkedtogetherthatallowedhimtomovefreelyandflexiblybetweendifferenttasksandlevelsofthinking.

Itisabouthavingtherighttoolsandknowinghowtousethem–andveryfewunderstandthatyouneedboth.

People still search for Luhmann’s “secret,” putting down his remarkableoutput tohimbeingageniusoreven thinking theyonlyneedhis slip-boxandtheywouldbeset.Sure,youneedtobesmarttobesuccessfulinacademiaandwriting,but ifyoudon’thaveanexternalsystem to thinkinandorganiseyourthoughts, ideas and collected facts, or have no idea how to embed it in youroverarchingdailyroutines,thedisadvantageissoenormousthatitjustcan’tbecompensatedbyahighIQ.As

farasthetechnologyisconcerned,thereisnosecret.Ithasallbeenintheopenformorethanthreedecadesnow.Sowhyisnoteverybodyusingaslip-boxandworkingeffortlesslytowardssuccess?Isitbecauseitistoo

towardssuccess?Isitbecauseitistoocomplicated?

Certainlynot.Itisrathersurprisinglysimple.Thereasonsaremuchmoremundane:

1.Untilveryrecently,whenthefirstresultsfromtheresearchonthefilesystemwere published, some crucial misunderstandings prevailed about howLuhmannactuallyworked,which led todisappointing results formanywhotried to emulate the system. The main misunderstanding stems from anisolatedfocusontheslip-boxandaneglectoftheactualworkflowinwhichitisembedded.

2.AlmosteverythingthatispublishedaboutthissystemwasonlyaccessibleinGermanandwasalmostexclusivelydiscussedwithinasmallgroupofdevotedsociologistswhospecialised inLuhmann’s theoryofsocialsystems–hardlythekindofcriticalmassthatwoulddrawmuchattention.

3. The third and maybe the most important reason is the very fact that it issimple.Intuitively,mostpeopledonotexpectmuchfromsimpleideas.Theyrather assume that impressive results must have equally impressivelycomplicatedmeans.

ThecontemporariesofHenryForddidnotunderstandwhysomethingassimpleastheconveyorbeltshouldbethatrevolutionary.Whatdifferencedoesitmaketolet thecarsmovefromworkertoworkerinsteadoflettingtheworkerswalkfromcartocar?IwouldnotbesurprisedifsomeofthemeventhoughtofFordas a bit simpleminded and overly enthusiastic about a ratherminor change inworkorganization.Itisonlyinhindsightthatthescaleoftheadvantagesofthissmall tweakbecameobvious toeveryone. Iwonderhowlong itwill takeuntilthe advantages of Luhmann’s slip-box and work routines become equallyobvioustoeveryone.Butbythen,everyonewillalreadyhaveknownitallalongtheway.Whateverthereasonswere:ThewordisoutnowandIwouldn’tbesurprised

ifitspreadsfast.

1.3Theslip-boxmanualHowdoestheslip-box,theheartofthissystem,work?Strictlyspeaking,Luhmannhadtwoslip-boxes:abibliographicalone,which

containedthereferencesandbriefnotesonthecontentoftheliterature,andthemainone inwhichhecollectedandgeneratedhis ideas,mainly in response towhat he read. The notes were written on index cards and stored in woodenboxes.Wheneverhereadsomething,hewouldwritethebibliographicinformationon

one side of a card and make brief notes about the content on the other side(Schmidt2013,170).Thesenoteswouldendupinthebibliographicslip-box.In

asecondstep,shortlyafter,hewouldlookathisbriefnotesandthinkabouttheirrelevanceforhisownthinkingandwriting.Hethenwouldturntothemainslip-boxandwritehisideas,commentsandthoughtsonnewpiecesofpaper,usingonlyoneforeachideaandrestrictinghimselftoonesideofthepaper,tomakeiteasiertoreadthemlaterwithouthavingtotakethemoutofthebox.Hekeptthemusuallybriefenoughtomakeoneideafitonasinglesheet,butwouldsometimesaddanothernotetoextendathought.

He

usuallywrotehisnoteswithaneyetowards

usuallywrotehisnoteswithaneyetowardsalreadyexistingnotesintheslip-box.Andwhilethenotesontheliteraturewerebrief,hewrotethemwithgreatcare,notmuchdifferentfromhisstyleinthefinalmanuscript:infullsentencesandwithexplicitreferencestotheliteraturefromwhichhedrewhismaterial.Moreoftenthannot,anewnotewoulddirectlyfollowuponanothernoteandwouldbecomepartofalongerchainofnotes.Hethenwouldaddreferencestonotessomewhereelseintheslip-box,someofthemwhichwerelocatednearby,othersincompletelydifferentareasandcontexts.Someweredirectlyrelatedandreadmorelikecomments,otherscontainednot-so-obviousconnections.Rarelywouldanotestayinisolation.

He

didnotjustcopyideasorquotesfromthetextsheread,butmadeatransitionfromonecontexttoanother.Itwasverymuchlikeatranslationwhereyouusedifferentwordsthatfitadifferentcontext,butstrivetokeeptheoriginalmeaning

astruthfullyaspossible.Writingthatanauthorstrugglesinonechaptertojustifyhismethodcanbeamuchmoreadequatedescriptionofthischapter’scontentthananyquotefromthetextitself(thiswouldcallforanexplanation,ofcourse).

The

trickisthathedidnotorganisehisnotesbytopic,butintheratherabstractwayofgivingthemfixednumbers.Thenumbersborenomeaningandwereonlytheretoidentifyeachnotepermanently.Ifanewnotewasrelevantordirectlyreferredtoanalreadyexistingnote,suchasacomment,correctionoraddition,headdeditdirectlybehindthepreviousnote.Iftheexistingnotehadthenumber22,thenewnotewouldbecomenotenumber23.If23alreadyexisted,henamedthenewnote22a.Byalternatingnumbersandletters,withsomeslashesandcommasinbetween,hewasabletobranchoutintoasmanystringsofthoughtasheliked.Forexample,anoteaboutcausalityandsystems

example,anoteaboutcausalityandsystemstheorycarriedthenumber21/3d7a7followinganotewiththenumber21/3d7a6.

Wheneverheaddedanote,hecheckedhisslip-boxforotherrelevantnotestomakepossibleconnectionsbetweenthem.Addinganotedirectlybehindanothernote is only one way of doing this. Another way is by adding a link on thisand/ortheothernote,whichcouldbeanywhereinthesystem.Thisverymuchresembles,ofcourse, thewayweusehyperlinkson the internet.But,as Iwillexplainlater,theyarequitedifferentanditwouldberathermisleadingtothinkofhisslip-boxasapersonalWikipediaoradatabaseonpaper.Thesimilaritiesare obviously there, but the subtle differences are what makes this systemunique.By

addingtheselinksbetweennotes,Luhmannwasabletoaddthesamenotetodifferentcontexts.Whileothersystemsstartwithapreconceivedorderoftopics,Luhmanndevelopedtopicsbottomup,thenaddedanothernotetohisslip-box,onwhichhewouldsortatopicbysortingthelinksoftherelevantothernotes.

The

lastelementinhisfilesystemwasanindex,fromwhichhewouldrefertooneortwonotesthatwouldserveasakindofentrypointintoalineofthoughtortopic.Noteswithasorted

lineofthoughtortopic.Noteswithasortedcollectionoflinksare,ofcourse,goodentrypoints.

That’sit.Actually,itisevensimplerthanthis,aswenowhavesoftwarethatmakesitmucheasier(cf.chapter1.3):wedon’tneedtomanuallyaddnumbersonnotesorcutoutpaperasLuhmannhadto.[5]Now

thatyouknowhowtheslip-boxworks,youonlyneedtounderstandhowtoworkwithit.Andthebestwaytounderstandthisistounderstandalittlebitaboutthewaywethink,learnanddevelopideas.AndifIwereforcedtoboilitdowntoasinglebulletpoint,itwouldbethis:Weneedareliableandsimpleexternalstructuretothinkinthatcompensatesforthelimitationsofourbrains.Butfirst,letmeguideyouthroughtheprocessofwritingapaperwiththeslip-box.

2EverythingYouNeedtoDoImagineyoudonotstartwithacleansheet.Imagineinsteadsomefriendlygenie(or well-paid personal assistant – whatever is more likely for you to haveavailable) prepared a rough draft of your paper for you. It is already a fullydevelopedargumentincludingallreferences,quotesandsomereallysmartideas.Theonly thing left todo is to revise this roughdraftandsend itoff.Makenomistake: there is stillwork to do and it ismore than just finding some typos.Editing iswork thatneeds focus.Youhave to rephrasesomesentences,deleteoneortworedundanciesandmaybeaddacoupleofsentencesorevenpassagestofillsomeholesleftintheargument.Butatthesametime,itisawell-definedtask:nothingthatcouldn’tbedonewithinafewdaysandcertainlynothingyouwouldhavetroublemotivatingyourselftodo:Everybodyismotivatedwhenthefinishlineiswithinreach.Noproblemsofar.Imaginenowyouarenot theonewhohas toedit theroughdraftandturn it

intothefinalpaper,buttheonewhohastoprepareit.Whatwouldbehelpfultoachievethatquickly?Itwouldcertainlymakethingsa loteasier ifyoualreadyhad everything you need right in front of you: The ideas, the arguments, thequotes, long developed passages, complete with bibliography and references.Andnotjustreadilyavailable,butalreadyinorder,sortedbychaptersthathavedescriptiveheadlines.Nowthat’salsoaclearassignment.

Noworriesaboutperfectsentences(someoneelsewilltakecareofthat),noworriesaboutfindingthingsandcomingupwithideas(someoneelsealreadytookcareofthat),youjustfocusonturningastringofideasintoacontinuoustext.Again,thatisstillseriousworkandyouhavetoputsomeeffortintoit,ifyouwanttomakeitgreat.Youmightspotamissingstepinanargumentandhavetofillit,oryou

stepinanargumentandhavetofillit,oryoumightwanttorearrangesomenotesorleavesomethingoutthatyouregardaslessrelevant.But,again,thisisnotanoverwhelmingtaskandluckily,itdoesn’tneedtobeperfect.Noproblemsofar.

Equallymanageable is the taskofbringingalreadyexistingnotes intoorder,especially ifhalfof themalreadyare inorder.Searching througha filesystemwithstringsofdiscussions,plentyofmaterialandideasis,believeitornot,fun.Itdoesnotrequirethekindoffocusedattentionyouwouldneedtoformulateasentenceortounderstandadifficulttext.Yourattentionisratherateaseanditevenhelpstohaveaplayfulmindset.Onlywithalessnarrowfocuswillyoubeable to see connections and patterns. You see clearly where long strings ofdiscussionshavealreadybeenbuiltup–thisisagoodstartingpoint.Ifyoudolookforspecificnotes,youhaveanindextoturnto.Noproblematallsofar.At

thispoint,itshouldbecomeclearthatyoudon’tneedtowaitforagenietoappear,aseachstepisclearlynotonlywithinyourabilities,butalsostraightforwardandwelldefined:Assemblenotesandbringthemintoorder,turnthesenotesintoadraft,reviewitandyouaredone.

Now,

that’sallwellandgood,youmightsay,butwhat

aboutwritingthesenotes?Obviously,itiseasytowriteapaperifthemainpartofthewritingisalreadydoneandonlyneedstobeturnedintoalineartext.Butisn’tthatalittlebitlikesaying:Ifyouareshortofmoney,justtakewhatyouneedoutofyourpiggybank?Everyonecanmakethingslookeasybyleavingoutthemainpart.So,whereisthegenieforthat?

Granted,writingthesenotesisthemainwork.Itwilltakeenormousamountsofeffort, time,patienceandwillpower, andyouwillprobablybreakunder theweightofthistask.Justkidding.Itistheeasiestpartofall.Writingthesenotesisalsonotthemainwork.Thinkingis.Readingis.Understandingandcomingupwithideasis.Andthisishowitissupposedtobe.Thenotesarejustthetangibleoutcomeof it.Allyouhave todo is tohaveapen inyourhandwhileyouaredoingwhatyouaredoinganyway(orakeyboardunderyourfingers).

Writingnotesaccompaniesthemainworkand,doneright,ithelpswithit.Writingis,withoutdispute,thebestfacilitatorforthinking,reading,learning,understandingandgeneratingideaswehave.Notesbuildupwhileyouthink,read,understandandgenerateideas,becauseyouhavetohaveapeninyourhandifyouwanttothink,read,understandandgenerateideasproperlyanyway.Ifyouwanttolearnsomethingforthe

longrun,youhavetowriteitdown.Ifyouwanttoreallyunderstandsomething,youhavetotranslateitintoyourownwords.Thinkingtakesplaceasmuchonpaperasinyourownhead.

“Notesonpaper,oronacomputerscreen[...]donotmakecontemporaryphysicsorotherkindsofintellectualendeavoureasier,theymakeitpossible,”

neuroscientistNeilLevyconcludesintheintroductiontotheOxfordHandbookofNeuroethics,summarizingdecadesofresearch.Neuroscientists,psychologistsandotherexpertsonthinkinghaveverydifferentideasabouthowourbrainswork,but,asLevywrites:“nomatterhowinternalprocessesareimplemented,(you)needtounderstandtheextenttowhichthemindisreliantuponexternalscaffolding.”(2011,270)Ifthereisonethingtheexpertsagreeon,thenitisthis:Youhavetoexternaliseyourideas,youhavetowrite.

RichardFeynmanstressesitasmuchas

RichardFeynmanstressesitasmuchasBenjaminFranklin.Ifwewrite,itismorelikelythatweunderstandwhatweread,rememberwhatwelearnandthatourthoughtsmakesense.Andifwehavetowriteanyway,whynotuseourwritingtobuilduptheresourcesforourfuturepublications?

Thinking, reading, learning, understanding and generating ideas is themainworkofeveryonewhostudies,doesresearchorwrites.Ifyouwritetoimprovealloftheseactivities,youhaveastrongtailwindgoingforyou.Ifyoutakeyournotesinasmartway,itwillpropelyouforward.

2.1Writingapaperstepbystep1.Makefleetingnotes.Alwayshavesomethingathandtowritewithtocaptureeveryideathatpopsintoyourmind.

Don’tworrytoomuchabouthowyouwriteitdownorwhatyouwriteiton.Thesearefleetingnotes,mereremindersofwhatisinyourhead.Theyshouldnotcauseanydistraction.Putthemintooneplace,whichyoudefineasyourinbox,andprocessthemlater.Iusuallyhaveasimplenotebookwithme,butIamhappywithnapkinsorreceiptsifnothingelseisathand.SometimesIleaveavoicerecordonmyphone.Ifyourthoughtsarealreadysortedandyouhavethe

thoughtsarealreadysortedandyouhavethetime,youcanskipthisstepandwriteyourideadirectlydownasaproper,permanentnoteforyourslip-box.

2.Make literaturenotes.Wheneveryou read something,makenotes about thecontent.Write downwhat you don’twant to forget or think youmight use inyourownthinkingorwriting.Keepitveryshort,beextremelyselective,anduseyourownwords.Beextra selectivewithquotes–don’tcopy them to skip thestepofreallyunderstandingwhattheymean.Keepthesenotestogetherwiththebibliographicdetailsinoneplace–yourreferencesystem.3.Makepermanentnotes.Nowturntoyourslip-box.Gothroughthenotesyoumade in step one or two (ideally once a day and before you forgetwhat youmeant) and think about how they relate to what is relevant for your ownresearch, thinkingor interests.Thiscansoonbedoneby looking into theslip-box–itonlycontainswhatinterestsyouanyway.Theideaisnottocollect,butto develop ideas, arguments and discussions. Does the new informationcontradict,correct,supportoraddtowhatyoualreadyhave(in theslip-boxoron your mind)? Can you combine ideas to generate something new? Whatquestionsaretriggeredbythem?Write exactly one note for each idea and write as if you were writing forsomeoneelse:Usefullsentences,discloseyoursources,makereferencesandtrytobeasprecise,clearandbriefaspossible.Throwawaythefleetingnotesfromsteponeandput the literaturenotes fromstep two intoyour referencesystem.Youcanforgetaboutthemnow.Allthatmattersisgoingintotheslip-box.4.Nowaddyournewpermanentnotestotheslip-boxby:a)Filingeachonebehindoneormorerelatednotes(withaprogram,youcanput one note “behind” multiple notes; if you use pen and paper likeLuhmann,youhavetodecidewhereitfitsbestandaddmanuallinkstotheothernotes).Looktowhichnotethenewonedirectlyrelatesor,ifitdoesnotrelatedirectlytoanyothernoteyet,justfileitbehindthelastone.

b)Addinglinkstorelatednotes.c) Makingsureyouwillbeabletofindthisnotelaterbyeitherlinkingtoit

fromyourindexorbymakingalinktoitonanotethatyouuseasanentrypointtoadiscussionortopicandisitselflinkedtotheindex.

5.Developyour topics,questionsandresearchprojectsbottomupfromwithinthe system.Seewhat is there,what ismissing andwhat questions arise.Readmoretochallengeandstrengthenyourargumentsandchangeanddevelopyourargumentsaccordingtothenewinformationyouarelearningabout.Takemorenotes,developideasfurtherandseewherethingswilltakeyou.Justfollowyourinterestandalwaystakethepaththatpromisesthemostinsight.Builduponwhatyouhave.Evenifyoudon’thaveanythinginyourslip-boxyet,youneverstartfromscratch–youalreadyhaveideasonyourmindtobetested,opinionstobechallengedandquestionstobeanswered.

Donotbrainstormforatopic.Lookintotheslip-boxinsteadtoseewherechainsofnoteshavedevelopedandideashavebeenbuiltuptoclusters.

Don’tclingtoanideaifanother,morepromisingonegainsmomentum.Themoreyoubecomeinterestedinsomething,themoreyouwillreadandthinkaboutit,themorenotesyouwillcollectandthemorelikelyitisthatyouwillgeneratequestionsfromit.Itmightbeexactlywhatyouwereinterestedinfromthebeginning,butitismorelikelythatyourinterestswillhavechanged–thatiswhatinsightdoes.

6.Afterawhile,youwillhavedevelopedideasfarenoughtodecideonatopicto write about. Your topic is now based on what you have, not based on anunfounded idea aboutwhat the literature you are about to readmight provide.Look through the connections and collect all the relevant notes on this topic(mostoftherelevantnoteswillalreadybeinpartialorder),copythemontoyour“desktop”[6] and bring them in order. Look for what is missing and what isredundant.Don’twaituntilyouhaveeverything together.Rather, try ideasoutandgiveyourselfenoughtimetogobacktoreadingandnote-takingtoimproveyourideas,argumentsandtheirstructure.7. Turn your notes into a rough draft. Don’t simply copy your notes into amanuscript.Translate them into something coherent and embed them into thecontextofyourargumentwhileyoubuildyourargumentoutofthenotesatthesametime.Detectholesinyourargument,fillthemorchangeyourargument.8.Editandproofreadyourmanuscript.Giveyourselfapatontheshoulderandturntothenextmanuscript.These are the steps, presented as if youwill write only one paper/article at atime. In reality, you neverwork on just one idea, butmany ideas in differentstagesatthesametime.Andthatiswherethesystemplaysoutitsrealstrengths.Wecannothelpbutthinkaboutmorethanonequestionatatimeandthechancesare that you will think and write in the future as well. It might not be foracademiaorapublication,butcertainlyforyourownintellectualgrowth.Gatherwhat you encounter along yourway and don’t let any good idea go towaste.Youmightreadacertainbookinhopeitcouldbeusefulforoneofthepapersyou write. Maybe you are wrong, but it still might contain some interestingthoughtsworthkeepingandusefulforsomethingelseyouhaven’tthoughtaboutyet.In

truth,itishighlyunlikelythateverytextyoureadwillcontainexactlytheinformationyoulookedforandnothingelse.Otherwise,youmusthavealreadyknownwhatwasinthereand

wouldn’thavehadreasontoreaditinthefirstplace.[7]Astheonlywaytofindoutifsomethingisworthreadingisbyreadingit(evenjustbitsofit),itmakessensetousethetimespentinthebestpossibleway.Weconstantlyencounterinterestingideasalongthewayandonlyafractionofthemareusefulfortheparticularpaperwestartedreadingitfor.Whyletthemgotowaste?Makeanoteandaddittoyourslip-box.Itimprovesit.Everyideaaddstowhatcanbecomeacriticalmassthatturnsamerecollectionofideasintoanidea-generator.

A

typicalworkdaywillcontainmany,ifnotall,ofthesesteps:Youreadandtakenotes.Youbuildconnectionswithintheslip-box,whichinitselfwillsparknewideas.Youwritethemdownandaddthemtothediscussion.Youwriteonyourpaper,noticeaholeintheargumentandhaveanotherlookinthefilesystemforthemissinglink.Youfollowuponafootnote,gobacktoresearchandmightaddafittingquotetooneof

researchandmightaddafittingquotetooneofyourpapersinthemaking.

How

focusedyouwanttoreaddependsonyourpriorities.Youdon’thavetoreadanythingyoudon’tconsideranabsolutenecessityforfinishingyourmosturgentpaper,butyouwillstillencounteralotofotherideasandinformationalongtheway.Spendingthelittleextratimetoaddthemtoyoursystemwillmakeallthedifference,becausetheaccidentalencountersmakeupthemajorityofwhatwelearn.

Imagine ifwewent through life learning onlywhatwe planned to learn orbeing explicitly taught. I doubt we would have even learned to speak. Eachadded bit of information, filtered only by our interest, is a contribution to ourfuture understanding, thinking andwriting.And the best ideas are usually theoneswehaven’tanticipatedanyway.Most

peoplefollowdifferentlinesofthoughtatthesametime.Theymightfocusforawhileononeidea,butthenleaveitaloneforanotherwhileuntiltheyseehowtoproceedfurther.Itishelpfulthentobeabletopickuponanotheridea

helpfulthentobeabletopickuponanotherideanowandgobacktotheearlierthoughtlater.Itismuchmorerealistictokeepthisflexibilityandyoudon’thavetoworryaboutstartingallover.

3EverythingYouNeedtoHaveThereisthisstorywhereNASAtriedtofigureouthowtomakeaballpointpenthatworksinspace.Ifyouhaveevertriedtouseaballpointpenoveryourhead,youhaveprobablyrealiseditisgravitythatkeepstheinkflowing.

Afteraseriesofprototypes,severaltestrunsandtonsofmoneyinvested,NASAdevelopedafullyfunctionalgravity-independentpen,whichpushestheinkontothepaperbymeansofcompressednitrogen.Accordingtothisstory,theRussiansfacedthesameproblem.Sotheyusedpencils(DeBono,1998,141).Theslip-boxfollowstheRussianmodel:Focusontheessentials,don’tcomplicatethingsunnecessarily.

Academicwritinginitselfisnotacomplicatedprocessthatrequiresavarietyof complicated tools, but is in constant danger of being clogged withunnecessarydistractions.Unfortunately,moststudentscollectandembraceovertimeavarietyof learningandnote-taking techniques, eachpromising tomakesomethingeasier,butcombinedhavetheoppositeeffect.The

wholeworkflowbecomescomplicated:Thereisthetechniqueofunderliningimportantsentences

(sometimesindifferentcoloursorshapes),commentinginthemarginsofatext,writingexcerpts,employingreadingmethodswithacronymslikeSQ3R[8]orSQ4R,[9]writingajournal,brainstormingatopicorfollowingmulti-stepquestionsheets–andthenthereare,ofcourse,theonethousandandtwelveappsandprogramsthataresupposedtohelpwithlearningandwriting.Fewofthesetechniquesareparticularlycomplicatedinthemselves,buttheyareusuallyusedwithoutanyregardtotheactualworkflow,whichthenquicklybecomesamess.Asnothingreallyfitstogether,workingwithinthisarrangementbecomesextremelycomplicatedindeedanddifficulttogetanythingdone.

And

ifyoustumbleupononeideaandthinkthatitmightconnecttoanotheridea,whatdoyoudowhenyouemployallthesedifferenttechniques?Gothroughallyourbookstofindtherightunderlinedsentence?Rereadallyourjournals

underlinedsentence?Rereadallyourjournalsandexcerpts?Andwhatdoyoudothen?Writeanexcerptaboutit?Wheredoyousaveitandhowdoesthishelptomakenewconnections?Everylittlestepsuddenlyturnsintoitsownprojectwithoutbringingthewholemuchfurtherforward.

Addinganotherpromisingtechniquetoit,then,wouldmakethingsonlyworse.

That

iswhytheslip-boxisnotintroducedasanothertechnique,butasacrucialelementinanoverarchingworkflowthatisstrippedofeverythingthatcoulddistractfromwhatisimportant.Goodtoolsdonotaddfeaturesandmoreoptionstowhatwealreadyhave,buthelptoreducedistractionsfromthemainwork,whichhereisthinking.Theslip-boxprovidesanexternalscaffoldtothinkinandhelpswiththosetasksourbrainsarenotverygoodat,mostofallobjectivestorageofinformation.

That is pretty much it. To have an undistracted brain to think with and areliable collection of notes to think in is prettymuch allwe need. Everythingelseisjustclutter.

3.1TheToolBoxWeneedfourtools:·Somethingtowritewithandsomethingtowriteon(penandpaperwilldo)·Areferencemanagementsystem(thebestprogramsarefree)·Theslip-box(thebestprogramisfree)·Aneditor(whateverworksbestforyou:verygoodonesarefree)

Moreisunnecessary,lessisimpossible.1. Youneedsomethingtocaptureideaswheneverandwherevertheypopintoyourhead.Whateveryouuse,itshouldnotrequireanythoughts,attentionormultiplestepstowriteitdown.Itcanbeanotebook,anapkin,anapponyourphoneoriPad.Thesenotesarenotmeanttobestoredpermanently.Theywillbe deleted or chucked soon anyway.They only function as a reminder of athoughtandarenotmeanttocapturethethoughtitself,whichrequirestimetophrasepropersentencesandcheckfacts.Irecommendhavingpenandpaperwithyouatall times. It is reallyhard tobeatanotebook in itssimplicity. Ifyouuseothertools,makesureeverythingendsupinoneplace,acentralinboxorsomethinglikethat,whereyoucanprocessitsoon,ideallywithinaday.

2.Thereferencesystemhastwopurposes:Tocollectthereferences(duh)andthe notes you take during your reading. I strongly recommend using a freeprogram like Zotero, which allows you to make new entries via browserpluginsorjustbyenteringtheISBNordigitalobjectidentifier(DOI)number.Zoteroalsocanbe integrated intoMicrosoftWord,OpenOffice,LibreOfficeandNeoOffice,whichallowsyoutoinsertquotationswithoutactuallytypinginthereference.Thatnotonlymakesthingseasier,youalsomitigatetheriskofmessingthingsupwhenyouadd,editordeleteadditionalreferences.Youcanalsoeasilychangetheformataccordingtothestandardsrequiredbyyourprofessorsorthejournalyouwritefor.Youcanaddnotestoeachentry–butit would also be fine to write your notes by hand and link them to thereferenceifyouprefertowritebyhandatthisstage.Inthatcase,justgivethenotes a standardised title like “AuthorYear” and keep them in alphabeticalorderinoneplace.YoucandownloadZoteroforfreeatzotero.org(Windows,

Mac and Linux). You will find the links to all recommended programs ontakesmartnotes.com.[10] If youpreferor alreadyworkwith another, equallysimpleprogram,thereisnoreasonnottousethat.

3. The slip-box. Some prefer the old-fashioned pen and paper version in awoodenbox.That'sfine–computerscanonlyspeeduparelativelyminorpartof theworkanyway, likeadding linksandformattingreferences.Theycan’tspeed up the main part of the work, which is thinking, reading andunderstanding. All you would need are sheets of paper about the size of apostcard (Luhmann used the DIN A6 size, 148 x 105 mm or 5.83 x 4.13inches)andaboxtokeepthemin.

Andeventhoughthereareclearbenefitsofhandwriting(cf.belowchapter3.2.1),Irecommendusingthedigitalversion,ifonlyformobility.Eventhoughyoucouldbasicallyemulatetheslip-boxwithanyprogramthatallowssettinglinksandtagging(likeEvernoteoraWiki),IstronglyrecommendusingDanielLüdecke’sZettelkasten.ItistheonlyprogramIknowthatreallyimplementstheprinciplesbehindLuhmann’ssystemandisatthesametimesimpleandeasytouse.Itisfreeandavailablefordifferentoperatingsystems.Youcandownloaditfromzettelkasten.danielluedecke.de(pleaseconsidersendingadonationtothedeveloperifyoulikeit).

it).

4.Finally,theeditor:IfyouuseZotero,Irecommendusingoneoftheeditorsitiscompatiblewith(MicrosoftWord,OpenOffice,LibreOfficeorNeoOffice),becauseitmakeslifealoteasierifyoudon’thavetotypeineveryreferencemanually.Exceptfor that,everythingworksfine–noeditorcanimproveanargument.

Ifyouhavepenandpaper,aneditor,yourslip-boxandreferencesystemathand,youarereadytogo.

4AFewThingstoKeepinMindGettingthetoolsreadyshouldn’thavetakenmorethan5-10minutes.Buthavingtheright tools isonlyonepartof theequation.It iseasytogetfooledbytheirsimplicity. Many “tried them out” without really understanding how to workwiththemandwereexpectedlydisappointedwiththeresults.Toolsareonlyasgoodasyourabilitytoworkwiththem.Everybodyknowshowtohandleaflute(you blow into one end and press your fingers on the holes according to thenotes you are playing), but nobody would try it out once and then judge theinstrumentonwhattheyhear.[11]Butwith tools like theslip-box,wesometimes forget that thehandling isas

important as the possibilities of the tool itself. Ifwe try to use a toolwithoutputtinganythoughtintothewayweworkwithit,eventhebesttoolwouldnotbe ofmuch help.The slip-box, for example,wouldmost likely be used as anarchivefornotes–orworse:agraveyardfor thoughts(cf.Hollier2005,40onMallarmé’s index cards). Unfortunately, there are quite a few explanations ofLuhmann’s technique on the Internet that focus in a misleading way on thetechnicalitiesoftheslip-box.Thishasledtoplentyofmisconceptionsaboutitsabilities.Butthingsarechanging:Luhmann’sslip-boxiscurrentlytheobjectofalong-termresearchprojectattheUniversityofBielefeld,andtheirfirstresultshave already given us a comprehensive understanding about how Luhmannreallyworkedwith it.Youcan lookupforyourselfsomeofhisnoteson theirwebsite.[12] Soon, you will be able to access the whole digitalised slip-boxonline.Add to thisunderstanding recentpsychological insights about learning,creativityandthinking,andwealsogetaprettygoodpicturewhyitworks.Andit is indeedcruciallyimportantnotonlytoknowhowitworksorhowtoworkwith it,butalsowhy itworks.Only thenwillyoubeable to tweak it foryourownneeds.Andthisiswhatthisbookisfor:Togiveyoualltheresourcesyouneed to work in the best possible way with the best technique available. Bykeeping just a few basic principles inmind andwith an understanding of thelogicbehindthefilesystem,IseenoreasonwhyanyoneshouldnotbeabletoreplicateLuhmann’sformulaforsuccessfullearning,writingandresearch.

THEFOURUNDERLYINGPRINCIPLES

5WritingIstheOnlyThingThatMattersForstudents,theneedforwritingmainlyappearsintheformofexamination.Inthisunderstanding,thewrittenworkrepresentsaprecededperformance,namelylearning, understanding and the ability to analyse other texts critically. Bywriting,studentsdemonstratewhattheyhavelearned,showtheirabilitytothinkcriticallyandabilitytodevelopideas.

Thisunderstandingisrelatedtotheideathatstudentsprepareforindependentresearch.Inthismindset,thewritingofapaperisjustanotherskilltobelearned.Itiscompartmentalisedfromtheothertasks–itisseenasonetaskamongothers.Studentsshouldnotonlylearntowritepapers,butalsolearnfacts,beabletodiscusstheirideasinseminarsandlistencarefullytolectures.Writingpapersisseenasataskinitselfwithabeginningandanend.Almostallbookswrittenonacademicwritingstartfromthisassumption.

Andalmostallofthemproceedaccordingly,describinganidealisedprocessincertainconsecutivesteps.

First,thetasktowriteisgiven,thenthereisthechallengetofindatopicoraspecificangleonaproblem,theresearchtodo,startingwiththecollectionoftherelevantliterature,followedbyreadingthematerial,processingitandcomingtoaconclusion.Writingiswhatfollows:Inthebeginningstandsthequestiontobeanswered,followedbyanoverviewoftheliterature,thediscussionofitandtheconclusion.This,accordingtothisthinking,preparesyoufordoingindependentresearch.Alas,itdoesnot.Ifyoubecomesuccessfulinyourresearch,itwasnotbecauseyoulearnedtoapproachwritinginthisway,butdespiteit.Thisbookisbasedonanotherassumption:Studyingdoesnotpreparestudents

forindependentresearch.Itisindependentresearch.Nobodystartsfromscratchandeverybodyisalreadyabletothinkforthemselves.Studying,doneproperly,isresearch,becauseitisaboutgaininginsightthatcannotbeanticipatedandwillbe shared within the scientific community under public scrutiny. There is nosuchthingasprivateknowledgeinacademia.Anideakeptprivateisasgoodasoneyouneverhad.Anda factnoone can reproduce isno fact at all.Makingsomethingpublicalwaysmeans towrite itdownsoitcanberead.There isnosuchthingasahistoryofunwrittenideas.School is different. Pupils are usually not encouraged to follow their own

learningpaths,questionanddiscusseverythingtheteacheristeachingandmoveontoanothertopicifsomethingdoesnotpromisetogenerateinterestinginsight.

Theteacheristhereforthepupilstolearn.But,asWilhelmvonHumboldt,founderoftheHumboldtUniversityofBerlinandbrothertothegreatexplorerAlexandervonHumboldt,putit,theprofessorisnotthereforthestudentandthestudentnotfortheprofessor.Bothareonlythereforthetruth.Andtruthisalwaysapublicmatter.Everythingwithintheuniversityaimsatsomekindofpublication.Awrittenpiecedoesnot

necessarilyneedtobeacceptedinaninternationaljournaltobecomepublic.Infact,thevastmajorityofwhatiswrittenanddiscussedisnotpublishedinthisnarrowsense.Thereviewprocessitselfisaformofpresentinganideapubliclytothepeersandsoiseverythingastudenthandsovertoaprofessororlecturer.Eventhehandoutforapresentationdiscussedwithfellowstudentsisawrittenpiecemadepublic.Itispublicbecauseinthediscussion,itdoesnotmatteranymorewhattheauthormeant,onlywhatisthereinwriting.Themomenttheauthorcanberemovedfromthescene,thewrittenpieceisapublicclaimontruth.

Thecriteriaforaconvincingargumentarealwaysthesame,regardlessofwhotheauthorisorthestatusofthepublisher:Theyhavetobecoherentandbasedonfacts.Truthdoesnotbelongtoanyone;itistheoutcomeofthescientificexchangeofwrittenideas.Thisiswhythepresentationandtheproductionofknowledgecannotbeseparated,butarerathertwosidesofthesamecoin(PetersandSchäfer

twosidesofthesamecoin(PetersandSchäfer2006,9).Ifwritingisthemediumofresearchandstudyingnothingelsethanresearch,thenthereisnoreasonnottoworkasifnothingelsecountsthanwriting.

Workingasifnothingelsecountsthanwritingdoesnotmeanspendingmoretimewritingattheexpenseofeverythingelse.Onlyifwecompartmentaliseourworkintodifferent, isolatedtaskswill itseemlikefocusingonwritingreducesthetimewespendonothertasks.Butitdoesnotmeantoreadless,forthisisthemainsourceofthewritingmaterial.Itdoesn’tmeantoattendfewerlecturesorseminars,becausetheyprovideyouwiththeideastowriteaboutandquestionsworthanswering.Attendinglecturesisalsooneofthebestwaystogetanideaaboutthecurrentstateofresearch,nottomentiontheabilitytoaskanddiscussquestions.Focusingonwritingalsodoesn’tmeantostopgivingpresentationsorfindingotherwaysofmakingyour thoughts public.Where else couldyougetfeedbackforyourideas?Focusingonwritingas ifnothingelsecountsdoesnotnecessarilymeanyou

shoulddoeverythingelselesswell,butitcertainlymakesyoudoeverythingelsedifferently.

Havingaclear,tangiblepurposewhenyouattendalecture,discussionorseminarwillmakeyoumoreengagedandsharpenyourfocus.Youwillnotwasteyourtimewiththeattempttofigureoutwhatyou“should”learn.Rather,youwilltrytolearnasefficientlyaspossiblesoyoucanquicklygettothepointwhereactualopen

questionsarise,asthesearetheonlyquestionsworthwritingabout.Youquicklylearntodistinguishgood-soundingargumentsfromactualgoodones,asyouwillhavetothinkthemthroughwheneveryoutrytowritethemdownandconnectthemwithyourpreviousknowledge.Itwillchangethewayyoureadaswell:Youwillbecomemorefocusedonthemostrelevantaspects,knowingthatyoucannotwritedowneverything.Youwillreadinamoreengagedway,becauseyoucannotrephraseanythinginyourownwordsifyoudon’tunderstandwhatitisabout.Bydoingthis,youwillelaborateonthemeaning,whichwillmakeitmuchmorelikelythatyouwillrememberit.Youalsohavetothinkbeyondthethingsyouread,becauseyouneedtoturnitintosomethingnew.Andbydoingeverythingwiththeclearpurposeofwritingaboutit,youwilldowhatyoudodeliberately.Deliberatepracticeistheonlyseriouswayofbecomingbetteratwhatwearedoing(cf.AndersEricsson,2008).Ifyouchangeyourmindabouttheimportanceofwriting,you

willalsochangeyourmindabouteverythingelse.Evenifyoudecidenevertowriteasinglelineofamanuscript,youwillimproveyourreading,thinkingandotherintellectualskillsjustbydoingeverythingasifnothingcountsotherthanwriting.

6SimplicityIsParamountWetendtothinkthatbigtransformationshavetostartwithanequallybigidea.Butmoreoftenthannot,itisthesimplicityofanideathatmakesitsopowerful(and often overlooked in the beginning). Boxes, for example, are simple.Malcom McLean, the owner of a trucking company and a former truckerhimself,regularlygotstuckintrafficonthecrowdedcoastalhighways.Whenhecameupwithanideatocircumventthecongestedroads,itwasasimpleone.

Hehadnocluethatitwouldtiptheworldinanewdirection.Hedidnotforeseethathissimpleideawouldreshapethepoliticallandscape,letsomenationsrisetothetopandotherfallbehind,makecentury-oldprofessionsredundant,givebirthtonewindustries,andwouldbarelyleaveasinglepersononearthunaffectedbyit.Iamspeaking,ofcourse,oftheshippingcontainer,whichisbasicallyjustabox.WhenMcLeanconvertedthetankerIdealXtobeabletocarry58containersandsetittosailon26April1956,itwasjustbecauseitmademoresensetoshippartsofalorrythanthewholelorryitself,whichinitselfmademoresensethantohavethemstandintrafficfordays.HecertainlydidnotaimtoturnworldtradeupsidedownandpavethewayforAsiatobecomethenextbig

pavethewayforAsiatobecomethenextbigeconomicpower.Hejustdidn’twanttogetstuckintrafficanymore.

It

wasn’tjustthatnobodyforesawtheimpactofsomethingassimpleasthisbox.

Mostshipownershadinfactconsideredtheideaofputtingdifferentkindsofproductsintothesamesizedboxesasfairlyabstruse.Experiencedstevedoreswereabletousethestorageroomonashipoptimallybyarrangingandfittingthegoods,andeverygoodcameinitsoptimalpackage.Whyreplaceitwithanobviouslylessoptimalsolution?Andspeakingofsuboptimal,whywouldanyonewanttotrytofitsquareboxesintoaround-shapedshipbodyanyway?Shipownersalsodidn’thavemanycustomerswhowantedtoshipexactlytheamountthatfitintoacontainer.Thateitherleftcustomersunhappyorcontainershalfemptyorfilledwithgoodsfromdifferentcustomers,whichmeantthatyouhadtounpackandrearrangethe

thatyouhadtounpackandrearrangethecontainerstountangledifferentordersineverysingleharbour.Thatdidnotsoundveryefficienttotheearsofexperiencedshippers.Andthenyouhadtheproblemwiththeboxesthemselves.

Onceunloadedandsentoffontrucks,youhadtofindawaytogetthemback.

McLeanlosthundredsofcontainersthisway.Itwasalogisticalnightmare.

And by the way: McLean wasn’t the only one who had the idea to usecontainersonships.Manyotherstriedit,too,andalmostallgaveupontheideasoon after – not because they were too stubborn to accept a great idea, butbecause they lost toomuchmoney on it (Levinson, 2006, 45f). The ideawassimple,butitwasn’teasytoputitefficientlyintopractice.In

hindsight,weknowwhytheyfailed:Theshipownerstriedtointegratethecontainerintotheirusualwayofworkingwithoutchangingtheinfrastructureandtheirroutines.Theytriedtobenefitfromtheobvioussimplicityofloadingcontainersontoshipswithoutlettinggoofwhattheywereusedto.Inthebeginning,theperceptionwasverymuchshapedbywhat

perceptionwasverymuchshapedbywhatworkedbefore,andonlythemostimmediateeffectswerevisible.Theshipownerslookedatthebagsandcratesofgoodsandwonderedwhytheyshouldpackthemasecondtimeintoanotherbox.Theyweregladwhentheyunloadedtheirgoodsattheharbourandtheywereeagertomoveon.Theywonderedwhytheyshouldgocontainer-huntinginstead.Theylookedattheshipstheyhadandwonderedhowtofitcontainersintothem.McLeanunderstoodbetterthanothersthatitisnottheperspectiveoftheship-ownersthatcounts,butthepurposeofthewholetrade:tobringgoodsfromtheproducertothefinaldestination.Onlyafteraligningeverysinglepartofthedeliverychain,frompackagingtodelivery,fromthedesignoftheshipstothedesignoftheharbours,wasthefullpotentialofthecontainerunleashed.

When the advantages became obvious, second-order effects came into playandwentintoaself-reinforcingpositivefeedbackloop.Themoreharbourswereable to handle containers, the more container ships were needed to be built,which made shipping cheaper, which increased the range of goods worthshipping, which created more traffic, which made bigger container ships

economical,whichcreatedmoredemandforinfrastructureandsoon.Itwasn’tjustanotherwayofshippinggoods.Itwasawholenewwayofdoingbusiness.Manystudentsandacademicwritersthinkliketheearlyshipownerswhenit

comestonote-taking.Theyhandletheirideasandfindingsinthewayitmakesimmediatesense: If theyreadan interestingsentence, theyunderline it. If theyhavea comment tomake, theywrite it into themargins. If theyhave an idea,theywriteitintotheirnotebook,andifanarticleseemsimportantenough,theymaketheeffortandwriteanexcerpt.Workinglikethiswillleaveyouwithalotofdifferentnotesinmanydifferentplaces.Writing,then,meanstorelyheavilyonyourbraintorememberwhereandwhenthesenoteswerewrittendown.

Atextmustthenbeconceptualisedindependentlyfromthesenotes,whichexplainswhysomanyresorttobrainstormingtoarrangetheresourcesafterwardsaccordingtothispreconceivedidea.Inthistextualinfrastructure,thisso-often-taughtworkflow,itindeeddoesnotmakemuchsensetorewritethesenotesandputthemintoabox,onlytotakethemoutagainlaterwhenacertainquoteorreferenceisneededduringwritingandthinking.

In

theoldsystem,thequestionis:UnderwhichtopicdoIstorethisnote?Inthenewsystem,thequestionis:InwhichcontextwillIwanttostumbleuponitagain?Moststudentssorttheir

stumbleuponitagain?Moststudentssorttheirmaterialbytopicorevenbyseminarsandsemester.Fromtheperspectiveofsomeonewhowrites,thatmakesasmuchsenseassortingyourerrandsbypurchasedateandthestoretheywereboughtfrom.

Can’tfindyourtrousers?Maybetheyarewiththebleachyouboughtthesamedayatyourdepartmentstore.

The slip-box is the shipping container of the academic world. Instead ofhavingdifferentstoragefordifferent ideas,everythinggoes into thesameslip-box and is standardised into the same format. Instead of focusing on the in-betweenstepsandtryingtomakeascienceoutofunderliningsystems,readingtechniquesorexcerptwriting,everythingisstreamlinedtowardsonethingonly:insight that can be published. The biggest advantage compared to a top-downstoragesystemorganisedbytopicsisthattheslip-boxbecomesmoreandmorevaluablethemoreitgrows,insteadofgettingmessyandconfusing.Ifyousortbytopic,youarefacedwiththedilemmaofeitheraddingmoreandmorenotestoone topic,whichmakes them increasinglyhard to find,oraddingmoreandmoretopicsandsubtopicstoit,whichonlyshiftsthemesstoanotherlevel.Thefirstsystemisdesignedtofindthingsyoudeliberatelysearchfor,puttingalltheresponsibilityonyourbrain.Theslip-boxisdesignedtopresentyouwithideasyouhavealreadyforgotten,allowingyourbraintofocusonthinkinginsteadofremembering.Eventhoughtheslip-box,beingorganisedbottom-up,doesnotfacethetrade-

offproblembetweentoomanyortoofewtopics,ittoocanloseitsvaluewhennotesareaddedtoitindiscriminately.Itcanonlyplayoutitsstrengthswhenweaimforacriticalmass,whichdependsnotonlyonthenumberofnotes,butalsotheirqualityandthewaytheyarehandled.To

achieveacriticalmass,itiscrucialtodistinguishclearlybetweenthreetypesofnotes:

1. Fleetingnotes,whichareonlyremindersof information,canbewritten inanykindofwayandwillendupinthetrashwithinadayortwo.

2. Permanent notes, which will never be thrown away and contain thenecessary information in themselves in a permanently understandable way.They are always stored in the same way in the same place, either in thereferencesystemor,writtenasifforprint,intheslip-box.

3. Project notes,which are only relevant to one particular project.They arekeptwithinaproject-specificfolderandcanbediscardedorarchivedaftertheprojectisfinished.

Onlyifthenotesofthesethreecategoriesarekeptseparateditwillbepossibletobuildacriticalmassofideaswithintheslip-box.Oneofthemajorreasonsfornot getting much writing or publishing done lies in the confusion of thesecategories.A

typicalmistakeismadebymanydiligentstudentswhoareadheringtotheadvicetokeepascientificjournal.Afriendofminedoesnotletanyidea,interestingfindingorquotehestumblesupondwindleawayandwriteseverythingdown.Healwayscarriesanotebookwithhimandoftenmakesafewquicknotesduringaconversation.Theadvantageisobvious:Noideaevergetslost.Thedisadvantagesareserious,though:Ashetreatseverynoteasifitbelongstothe“permanent”category,thenotes

belongstothe“permanent”category,thenoteswillneverbuildupacriticalmass.Thecollectionofgoodideasisdilutedtoinsignificancebyalltheothernotes,whichareonlyrelevantforaspecificprojectoractuallynotthatgoodonsecondsight.Ontopofthat,thestrictchronologicalorderdoesnotofferanyhelptofind,combineorrearrangeideasinaproductivesense.

Itisnotsurprisingthatmyfriendhasabookshelffilledwithnotebooksfullofwonderfulideas,butnotasinglepublicationtoshow.

Thesecondtypicalmistakeistocollectnotesonlyrelatedtospecificprojects.

Onfirstsight,itmakesmuchmoresense.Youdecideonwhatyouaregoingtowriteaboutandthencollecteverythingthathelpsyoutodothat.Thedisadvantageisthatyouhavetostartalloveraftereachprojectandcutoffallotherpromisinglinesofthought.Thatmeansthateverythingyoufound,thoughtorencounteredduringthetimeofaprojectwillbelost.Ifyoutrytomitigatetheeffectbyopeninganewfolder

trytomitigatetheeffectbyopeninganewfolderforeverypotentialnewprojectwheneveryoustumbleuponsomethingthatmightbeinterestingforthat,youwillsoonendupwithanoverwhelmingamountofunfinishedprojects.Ifthatinitselfdoesnotbecomeadragonyourmotivation,thetaskofkeepingtrackofthemwill.Butmostimportantly,withoutapermanentreservoirofideas,youwillnotbeabletodevelopanymajorideasoveralongerperiodoftimebecauseyouarerestrictingyourselfeithertothelengthofasingleprojectorthecapacityofyourmemory.Exceptionalideasneedmuchmorethanthat.

Thethirdtypicalmistakeis,ofcourse,totreatallnotesasfleetingones.Youcan easily spot this approach by themess that comeswith it, or rather by thecycle of slowly growing piles of material followed by the impulse for majorclean-ps.Justcollectingunprocessedfleetingnotesinevitablyleadstochaos.

Evensmallamountsofunclearandunrelatednoteslingeringaroundyourdeskwillsooninducethewishofstartingfromscratch.

What all these category-confusing approaches have in common is that the

benefitofnote-takingdecreaseswiththenumberofnotesyoukeep.Morenoteswill make it more difficult to retrieve the right ones and bring related onestogetherinaplayfulway.Butitshouldbejusttheopposite:Themoreyoulearnandcollect, themorebeneficialyournotesshouldbecome, themore ideascanmingle and give birth to new ones – and the easier it should be to write anintelligenttextwithlesseffort.It

isimportanttoreflectonthepurposeofthesedifferenttypesofnotes.

Fleetingnotesarethereforcapturingideasquicklywhileyouarebusydoingsomethingelse.Whenyouareinaconversation,listingtoalecture,hearsomethingnoteworthyoranideapopsintoyourmindwhileyouarerunningerrands,aquicknoteisthebestyoucandowithoutinterruptingwhatyouareinthemiddleofdoing.Thatmightevenapplytoreading,ifyouwanttofocusonatextwithoutinterruptingyourreadingflow.Thenyoumightwanttojustunderlinesentencesorwriteshortcommentsinthemargins.Itisimportanttounderstand,though,thatunderliningsentencesorwritingcommentsinthemarginsarealsojustfleetingnotesanddonothingtoelaborateonatext.

Theywillverysoonbecomecompletelyuseless–unlessyoudosomethingwiththem.Ifyoualreadyknowthatyouwillnotgobacktothem,don’ttakethesekindofnotesinthefirstplace.Takepropernotesinstead.Fleetingnotesareonlyusefulifyoureviewthemwithinadayorsoandturnthemintopropernotesyoucanuselater.Fleetingliteraturenotescanmakesenseifyouneedanextrasteptounderstandorgraspanidea,buttheywillnothelpyouinthelaterstagesofthewritingprocess,asnounderlinedsentencewilleverpresentitselfwhenyouneeditinthedevelopmentofanargument.Thesekindsofnotesarejustremindersofathought,whichyouhaven’thadthetimetoelaborateonyet.Permanentnotes,ontheotherhand,arewritteninawaythatcanstillbeunderstoodevenwhenyouhaveforgottenthecontexttheyaretakenfrom.

Mostideaswillnotstandthetestoftime,whileothersmightbecometheseedforamajorproject.Unfortunately, theyarenoteasy todistinguish rightaway.Thatiswhythethresholdtowriteanideadownhastobeaslowaspossible,butitisequallycrucialtoelaborateonthemwithinadayortwo.Agoodindicationthatanotehasbeenleftunprocessedtoolongiswhenyounolongerunderstand

what youmeant or it appears banal. In the first case, you forgot what it wassupposedtoremindyouof.Inthesecondcase,youforgotthecontextthatgaveititsmeaning.The only permanently stored notes are the literature notes in the reference

systemandthemainnotes intheslip-box.Theformercanbeverybriefas thecontextisclearlythetexttheyreferto.Thelatterneedbewrittenwithmorecareand details as they need to be self-explanatory. Luhmann never underlinedsentencesinthetexthereadorwrotecommentsinthemargins.Allhedidwastakebriefnotesabouttheideasthatcaughthisattentioninatextonaseparatepieceofpaper:“Imakeanotewiththebibliographicdetails.OnthebacksideIwould write ‘on page x is this, on page y is that,’ and then it goes into thebibliographicslip-boxwhereIcollecteverythingIread.”(Hagen,1997)[13]Butbeforehestoredthemaway,hewouldreadwhathenoteddownduringtheday,thinkaboutitsrelevanceforhisownlinesofthoughtandwriteaboutit,fillinghis main slip-box with permanent notes. Nothing in this box would ever getthrownaway.Somenotesmightdisappearintothebackgroundandnevercatchhisattentionagain,whileothersmightbecomeconnectionpointstovariouslinesofreasoningandreappearonaregularbasisinvariouscontexts.As

itisnotpossibletoforeseethedevelopmentoftheslip-box,thefateofthenotesisnothingtoworryabout.Incontrasttothefleetingnotes,everypermanentnotefortheslip-boxiselaboratedenoughtohavethepotentialtobecomepartoforinspireafinalwrittenpiece,butthatcannotbedecidedonupfrontastheirrelevancedependsonfuturethinkinganddevelopments.Thenotesarenolongerremindersofthoughtsorideas,butcontaintheactualthoughtorideainwrittenform.Thisisa

actualthoughtorideainwrittenform.Thisisacrucialdifference.

It

isthestandardisedformatthatenablesthenotestobuildupacriticalmassinoneplace.Itisalsothekeytofacilitatingthethinkingandwritingprocessbyremovingallunnecessarycomplicationsordecisionsthatcomewithavarietyofdifferentformatsandstorageplaces.Onlybecauseeverynoteisinthesameformatatthesameplacecantheylaterbecombinedandassembledintosomethingnewandnothoughtiseverwastedonthequestionofwheretoputorlabelit.

Thelasttypeofnote,theonesthatarerelatedtoonlyonespecificproject,arekept together with other project-related notes in a project-specific folder. Itdoesn’tmatterinwhichformatthesenotesareastheyaregoingtoendupinthebin after the project is finished anyway (or in an archive – the bin for theindecisive).Project-relatednotescanbe:

·commentsinthemanuscript·collectionsofproject-relatedliterature·outlines·snippetsofdrafts·reminders·to-dolists·andofcourse

thedraftitself.

TheZettelkastenhas thebuilt-in functionofproject-specificdesktops.Here,youcannotonlystructureyourthoughtsandconceptualisethechaptersofyourdraft,butalsocollectandsortthenotesforthisspecificprojectwithoutfearthattheywillwaterdownorinterferewiththeslip-boxitself.Youcanevenchangethenotesaccordingtoyourprojectwithoutaffectingthenotesintheslip-box.Thesameappliestothereferencesystem.InZotero,youcancollectliterature

inproject-specificfolderswithouttakingthemoutofthereferencesystemitself.All this keeps the permanent notes from the project-related notes clearlyseparated and allows you to experiment and tinkerwith them asmuch as youlike within the boundaries of each project without interfering with the actualslip-box. I suggest keeping a physical binder for each project to keep all thehandwritten notes and printouts separate from the rest and combined in oneplace.Whenyouclosethefolderforyourcurrentprojectintheeveningandnothing

isleftonyourdeskotherthanpenandpaper,youknowthatyouhaveachievedaclearseparationbetweenfleeting,permanentandproject-relatednotes.

7NobodyEverStartsFromScratch“Thewhitesheetofpaper–ortoday:theblankscreen–isafundamentalmisunderstanding”

(Nassehi2015,185)

The process of writing is vastly misunderstood. If you grab off the shelf arandom study guide or self-help book on writing and skim through the firstpages, the chances are that youwill encounter something like this: “Tomakeyourresearchmoreefficient,yourfirststepshouldbetonarrowtheaspectyouchoosetofocusonandalsoformulateanexplicitquestionthatyourresearchandanalysiswilladdress.”[14]Almostalways,thedecisiononthetopicispresentedasthenecessaryfirststep,afterwhichfollowseverythingelse,likeinthisguide:“When you have chosen a topic that is right for you, having taken intoconsiderationyourpersonalinterestsandanynecessarybackgroundknowledgethatmaybeneeded,assesstheavailabilityofsources.”[15]Thereafter,youwillcertainlyfindamulti-stepplanyouaresupposedtofollow:Beit twelvesteps,accordingtotheAcademicSkills&LearningCentreoftheAustralianNationalUniversity,oreight,ifyougowiththerecommendationsoftheWritingCenterof the University ofWisconsin, the rough order is always the same:Make adecision on what to write about, plan your research, do your research, write.Interestinglyenough,theseroadmapsusuallycomewiththeconcessionthatthisis only an idealised plan and that in reality, it rarely works like that. This iscertainly true.Writing can’t be that linear. The obvious question is: If that istrue,whynotrootthecourseofactioninrealityinstead?Inordertodevelopagoodquestiontowriteaboutorfindthebestangleforan

assignment,onemustalreadyhaveputsomethoughtintoatopic.Tobeabletodecideonatopic,onemustalreadyhavereadquiteabitandcertainlynot justaboutone topic.And thedecision toreadsomethingandnotsomethingelse isobviously rooted in prior understanding, and that didn’t come out of thin air,either. Every intellectual endeavour starts from an already existingpreconception,which then can be transformed during further inquires and canserveasastartingpointforfollowingendeavours.Basically,thatiswhatHans-GeorgGadamercalledthehermeneuticcircle(Gadamer2004).Andeventhough

thehermeneuticcircleisregularlytaughtinuniversity,writingatthesametimecontinuestobetaughtasifwecouldstartfromscratchandmoveforwardinastraight line–as if itwerepossible topullagoodquestionoutof thinairandwait with the reading until the literature research is done. The seeminglypragmatic and down-to-earth-sounding advice – to decidewhat towrite aboutbeforeyoustartwriting–isthereforeeithermisleadingorbanal.Itisbanalifitmeansonlythatyoushouldthinkbeforeyouputwordsonpaper.Itismisleadingifitmeansthatyoucouldmakeasoundplanonwhattowritebeforeyouhaveimmersedyourselfinthetopicsathand,whichinvolveswriting.Itaccompanieseverything:We have to readwith a pen in hand, develop ideas on paper andbuildupanever-growingpoolofexternalisedthoughts.Wewillnotbeguidedbyablindlymade-upplanpickedfromourunreliablebrains,butbyourinterest,curiosity and intuition, which is formed and informed by the actual work ofreading, thinking,discussing,writinganddeveloping ideas–and is somethingthat continuously grows and reflects our knowledge and understandingexternally.By focusing on what is interesting and keeping written track of your own

intellectualdevelopment,topics,questionsandargumentswillemergefromthematerialwithoutforce.Notonlydoesitmeansthatfindingatopicoraresearchquestionwillbecomeeasier,aswedon’thavetosqueezeitoutofthefewideasthatareontopofourheadanymore,everyquestionthatemergesoutofourslip-boxwillnaturallyandhandilycomewithmaterialtoworkwith.Ifwelookintoourslip-boxtoseewhereclustershavebuiltup,wenotonlyseepossibletopics,but topicswehavealreadyworkedon–even ifwewerenot able to see itupfront. The idea that nobody ever starts from scratch suddenly becomes veryconcrete.Ifwetakeitseriouslyandworkaccordingly,weliterallyneverhavetostartfromscratchagain.Ofcourse,thosewhobelievethattheydostartfromscratchdon’treallystart

from scratch, either, as they too can only draw onwhat they have learned orencounteredbefore.Butastheyhaven’tactedonthisfact,theycan’ttrackideasback to their origins and have neither supporting material at hand nor theirsourcesinorder.Aswritinghasnotaccompaniedtheirpreviouswork,theyhaveto either startwith something completely new (which is risky) or retrace theirideas(whichisboring).Aspropernote-takingisrarelytaughtordiscussed,itisnowonderthatalmost

everyguideonwritingrecommendstostartwithbrainstorming.Ifyouhaven’twrittenalongtheway,thebrainisindeedtheonlyplacetoturnto.

Onitsown,itisnotsuchagreatchoice:itisneitherobjectivenorreliable–twoquiteimportantaspectsinacademicornonfictionwriting.Thepromotionofbrainstormingasastartingpointisallthemoresurprisingasitisnottheoriginofmostideas:Thethingsyouaresupposedtofindinyourheadbybrainstormingusuallydon’thavetheiroriginsinthere.Rather,theycomefromtheoutside:throughreading,havingdiscussionsandlisteningtoothers,throughallthethingsthatcouldhavebeenaccompaniedandoftenevenwouldhavebeenimprovedbywriting.Theadvicetothinkaboutwhattowriteaboutbeforeyouwritecomesbothtooearlyandtoolate.Toolate,asyoualreadyhavepassedupthechancetobuildupwrittenresourceswhenyoufacethewhitesheetofpaperortheblankscreen,butalsotooearly,ifyoutrytopostponeeveryseriouscontent-relatedworkuntilyouhavemadeadecisiononthetopic.

Ifsomethingcomestooearlyandtoolateatthesametime,itisnotpossibletofix itby rearranging theorderas the fictional linearity is theproblemin itself.Takingsmartnotesisthepreconditiontobreakwiththelinearorder.

Thereisonereliablesignifyoumanagedtostructureyourworkflowaccordingtothefactthatwritingisnotalinearprocess,butacircularone:theproblemoffindingatopicisreplacedbytheproblemofhavingtoomanytopicstowriteabout.Havingtroublefindingtherighttopicisasymptomofthewrongattempttorelyheavilyonthelimitationsofthebrain,nottheinevitableproblematicstartingpoint,asmoststudyguidesinsinuate.Ifyouontheotherhanddevelopyourthinkinginwriting,openquestionswillbecomeclearlyvisibleandgiveyouanabundanceofpossibletopicstoelaboratefurtherinwriting.

Aftermanyyearsofworkingwithstudents,Iamconvincedthattheattemptofthesestudyguidestosqueezeanonlinearprocesslikewritingintoalinearorderisthemainreasonfortheveryproblemsandfrustrationstheypromisetosolve.

Howcanyounothavetroublefindingatopicifyoubelieveyouhavetodecideononebeforeyouhavedoneyourresearch,havereadandlearnedaboutsomething?Howcanyounotfeelthreatenedbyanemptypageifyouhaveliterallynothingathandtofillitwith?Whocanblame

nothingathandtofillitwith?Whocanblameyouforprocrastinatingifyoufindyourselfstuckwithatopicyoudecidedonblindlyandnowhavetostickwithitasthedeadlineisapproaching?Andhowcananyonebesurprisedthatstudentsfeeloverwhelmedwithwritingassignmentswhentheyarenottaughthowtoturnmonthsandyearsofreading,discussingandresearchintomaterialtheycanreallyuse?

Thesestudyguides,whichneglecteverythingbeforeawritingassignment isgiven, area littlebit like financial advisorswhodiscusshow65-year-oldscansave for retirement. At this point you would be better off curbing yourenthusiasm (which is exactlywhat one of themost often sold study guides inGermany recommends: first, lower your expectations on quality and insight).[16]Butthosewhohavealreadydevelopedtheirthinkingthroughwritingcankeep

the focus on what is interesting for them at the moment and accumulatesubstantialmaterial justbydoingwhat theymost feel likedoing.Thematerialwillclusteraroundthequestionstheyreturnedtomostoften,sotheydon’trisktoofarofadeparturefromtheirinterest.Ifyourfirstchosentopicturnsouttobenot as interesting, you will just move on and your notes will cluster aroundsomething else. Maybe you will even note down the reasons why the firstquestionisnotinterestingandturnthatintoaninsightvaluableenoughtomakepublic.When it finallycomes to thedecisiononwhat towriteabout,youwillalreadyhavemadethedecision–becauseyoumadeitoneverysinglestepalongtheway,againandagaineveryday,improvingitgradually.Insteadofspendingyour time worrying about finding the right topic, you will spend your timeactuallyworkingonyouralreadyexistinginterestsanddoingwhatisnecessarytomakeinformeddecisions–reading,thinkingandwriting.Bydoingthework,youcantrustthatinterestingquestionswillemerge.

Youmightnotknowwhereyouwillendup(andyoudon’tneedto),butyoucan’tforceinsightintoapreconceiveddirectionanyway.Youminimiseboththeriskoflosinginterestinatopicyouhaveoncechosenill-informedandtheriskofhavingtostartalloveragain.

Eventhoughacademicwritingisnotalinearprocess,thatdoesnotmeanyoushould follow an anything-goes approach. On the contrary, a clear, reliablestructureisparamount.

8LettheWorkCarryYouForwardYoumay remember from school the difference between an exergonic and anendergonicreaction.Inthefirstcase,youconstantlyneedtoaddenergytokeeptheprocessgoing.Inthesecondcase,thereaction,oncetriggered,continuesbyitself and even releases energy. The dynamics of work are not so different.Sometimeswefeellikeourworkisdrainingourenergyandwecanonlymoveforwardifweputmoreandmoreenergyintoit.Butsometimesitistheopposite.Once we get into the workflow, it is as if the work itself gains momentum,pullingusalongandsometimesevenenergizingus.Thisisthekindofdynamicwearelookingfor.A

goodworkflowcaneasilyturnintoavirtuouscircle,wherethepositiveexperiencemotivatesustotakeonthenexttaskwithease,whichhelpsustogetbetteratwhatwearedoing,whichinreturnmakesitmorelikelyforustoenjoythework,andsoon.Butifwefeelconstantlystuckinourwork,wewillbecomedemotivatedandmuchmorelikelytoprocrastinate,leavinguswithfewerpositiveorevenbadexperienceslikemisseddeadlines.Wemightendupinaviciouscircleoffailure(cf.Fishbach,EyalandFinkelstein,2010).

Any attempts to trick ourselves intoworkwith external rewards (like doing

somethingniceafter finishinga chapter) areonly short-termsolutionswithnoprospect of establishing a positive feedback loop. These are very fragilemotivational constructions.Only if thework itself becomes rewarding can thedynamicofmotivationandrewardbecomeself-sustainableandpropelthewholeprocessforward(DePasqueandTricomi,2015).The extraordinary successful fitness motivation coach Michelle Segar uses

this dynamic to turn even the most stubborn coach potatoes into exerciseaficionados (Segar, 2015). She brings thosewho really don’t like exercise butknowtheyhave todo it intoasustainableworkoutroutinebyfocusingononething:Creatingsatisfying, repeatableexperienceswith sports. Itdoesn’tmatterwhat her clients are doing – running, walking, team sports, gymworkouts orbicycling towork.Theonly thing thatmatters is that theydiscover somethingthatgivesthemagoodexperiencethattheywouldliketohaveagain.Onceherclientsfindsomething,theyareencouragedenoughtotrysomethingelseaswell.They enter the virtuous circlewherewillpower isn’t needed anymore becausetheyfeellikedoingitanyway.Iftheytriedtotrickthemselvesintoexercisebyrewarding themselves afterwardswith a relaxed evening on the sofawatchingTV, it wouldn’t have taken them long until they went straight for the sofa,skippingtheworkoutaltogether,becausethisishowwetick.Feedbackloopsarenotonlycrucialforthedynamicsofmotivation,butalso

the key element to any learning process. Nothingmotivates usmore than theexperienceofbecomingbetteratwhatwedo.Andtheonlychancetoimproveinsomething is getting timely and concrete feedback. Seeking feedback, notavoiding it, is the first virtue of anyone who wants to learn, or in the moregeneraltermsofpsychologistCarolDweck,togrow.Dweckshowsconvincinglythat the most reliable predictor for long-term success is having a “growthmindset.”Toactivelyseekandwelcomefeedback,beitpositiveornegative,isoneof themost important factors for success (andhappiness) in the long run.Conversely, nothing is a bigger hindrance to personal growth than having a“fixedmindset.”

Thosewhofearandavoidfeedbackbecauseitmightdamagetheircherishedpositiveself-imagemightfeelbetterintheshortterm,butwillquicklyfallbehindinactualperformance

willquicklyfallbehindinactualperformance(Dweck2006;2013).Ironically,itisthereforeoftenthehighlygiftedandtalentedstudents,whoreceivealotofpraise,whoaremoreindangerofdevelopingafixedmindsetandgettingstuck.Havingbeenpraisedforwhattheyare(talentedandgifted)ratherthanforwhattheydo,theytendtofocusonkeepingthisimpressionintact,ratherthanexposingthemselvestonewchallengesandthepossibilityoflearningfromfailure.

Embracingagrowthmindsetmeanstogetpleasureoutofchangingforthebetter(whichismostlyinwardlyrewarding)insteadofgettingpleasureinbeingpraised(whichisoutwardlyrewarding).Theorientationtowardsthelattermakesonesticktosafe,provenareas.Theorientationtowardsthefirstdrawstheattentiontotheareasmostinneedofimprovement.Toseekasmanyopportunitiestolearnaspossibleisthemostreliablelong-termgrowthstrategy.Andifgrowthandsuccessarenotreasonsenough,thenmaybethefactthatthefearoffailurehas

theugliestnameofallphobias:Kakorrhaphiophobia.

Havingagrowthmindsetiscrucial,butonlyonesideoftheequation.Havinga learning system in place that enables feedback loops in a practical way isequallyimportant.Beingopenforfeedbackdoesn’thelpverymuchif theonlyfeedbackyoucangetcomesonceeveryfewmonthsforworkyouhavealreadyfinished.The linearmodelof academicwritingcomeswithvery few feedbackopportunities, and even those are usually spread out over time (vgl. Fritzsche,Young und Hickson, 2003). If you choose a topic for your paper and workaccordingtothelinearmodel,youwillonlylearnifyourchoicewaswiseaftermultiple stages of research. The same applies to the question of if youunderstoodwhatyoureadandifyourideaforanargumentmakessense.Following a circular approach, on the other hand, allows you to implement

many feedback loops,whichgiveyou thechance to improveyourworkwhileyouareworkingonit.Itisnotjustaboutincreasingthenumberofopportunitiestolearn,butalsotobeabletocorrectthemistakesweinevitablymake.Asthefeedback loopsareusually smaller thanonebigchunkof feedbackat theend,theyarealsomuchlessscaryandeasiertoembrace.Readingwithapeninthehand,forexample,forces,ustothinkaboutwhatwe

readandcheckuponourunderstanding.Itisthesimplesttest:Wetendtothinkweunderstandwhatweread–untilwe try to rewrite it inourownwords.Bydoingthis,wenotonlygetabettersenseofourability tounderstand,butalsoincreaseourabilitytoclearlyandconciselyexpressourunderstanding–whichinreturnhelpstograspideasmorequickly.Ifwetrytofoolourselveshereandwritedownincomprehensiblewords,wewilldetectitinthenextstepwhenwetrytoturnourliteraturenotesintopermanentnotesandtrytoconnectthemwithothers.The ability to express understanding in one’s own words is a fundamental

competencyforeveryonewhowrites–andonlybydoingitwiththechanceofrealizingourlackofunderstandingcanwebecomebetteratit.Butthebetterwebecome, the easier and quickerwe canmake notes,which again increases thenumber of learning experiences. The same applies to the crucial ability todistinguish the importantbitsofa text from the less importantones: thebetterwebecomeat it, themoreeffectiveourreadingwillbecome, themorewecan

read, the more we will learn. We will enter a beautiful, virtuous circle ofcompetency.

Youcannothelpbutfeelmotivatedbyit.

Thesamegoesforwritingpermanentnotes,whichhaveanotherfeedbackloopbuilt-in:Expressing our own thoughts inwritingmakes us realise ifwe reallythought them through. The moment we try to combine them with previouslywritten notes, the system will unambiguously show us contradictions,inconsistenciesandrepetitions.Whilethesebuilt-infeedbackloopsdonotmakeredundantthefeedbackfromyourpeersorsupervisor,theyaretheonlyonesthatarealwaysavailableandcanhelpustoimprovealittlebit,multipletimeseverysingle day. And the best thing about this is that while we learn and becomebetter, our slip-boxbecomesmore knowledgeable too. It grows and improves.Andthemoreitgrows,themoreusefulitbecomesandtheeasieritwillbeforustomakenewconnections.The slip-box is not a collection of notes. Working with it is less about

retrieving specific notes and more about being pointed to relevant facts andgenerating insightby letting ideasmingle. Itsusabilitygrowswith its size,notjust linearly but exponentially. When we turn to the slip-box, its innerconnectedness will not just provide us with isolated facts, but with lines ofdevelopedthoughts.Moreover,becauseofitsinnercomplexity,asearchthoughtthe slip-boxwill confront uswith related noteswe did not look for. This is averysignificantdifferencethatbecomesmoreandmorerelevantovertime.Themorecontent itcontains, themoreconnections itcanprovide,and theeasier itbecomestoaddnewentriesinasmartwayandreceiveusefulsuggestions.Our brains work not that differently in terms of interconnectedness.

Psychologists used to thinkof thebrain as a limited storage space that slowlyfillsupandmakesitmoredifficulttolearnlateinlife.Butweknowtodaythatthe more connected information we already have, the easier it is to learn,becausenewinformationcandocktothatinformation.Yes,ourabilitytolearnisolatedfactsisindeedlimitedandprobablydecreaseswithage.Butiffactsarenot kept isolated nor learned in an isolated fashion, but hang together in anetworkofideas,or“latticeworkofmentalmodels”(Munger,1994),itbecomeseasiertomakesenseofnewinformation.Thatmakesiteasiernotonlytolearnand remember, but also to retrieve the information later in the moment and

contextitisneeded.As

wearetheauthorsofallthenotes,welearninlockstepwiththeslip-box.

ThisisanotherbigdifferencefromusinganencyclopaedialikeWikipedia.Weusethesamementalmodels,theoriesandtermstoorganiseourthoughtsinourbrainsasinourslip-box.Thattheslip-boxgeneratesanexcessofpossibilitiesenablesittosurpriseandinspireustogeneratenewideasanddevelopourtheoriesfurther.Itisnottheslip-boxorourbrainsalone,butthedynamicbetweenthemthatmakesworkingwithitsoproductive.

THESIXSTEPSTOSUCCESSFULWRITING

9SeparateandInterlockingTasks

9.1GiveEachTaskYourUndividedAttentionAccording toawidelycited study, theconstant interruptionofemailsand textmessagescutsourproductivitybyabout40%andmakesusatleast10IQ

pointsdumber.Eventhoughthisstudywasneverpublished,makesnoclaimsaboutintelligenceandisstatisticallyirrelevant,itdoesseemtoconfirmwhatmostofusbelieveanywayandthatisthatwemighthaveanattentiondeficitproblem.Itmightnotshowitbycontent,butthemerefactthatitwaspossibletohaveamisunderstandingspreadingsofastundertitleslike“E-mails‘hurtIQmorethanpot’”(CNN)istelling.Therearerealstudiesaboutthataswell.Weknowforexamplethatwatchingtelevisionreducestheattentionspanofchildren(Swingetal.2010).WealsoknowthattheaveragelengthofTVsoundbiteshassteadilydeclinedoverthelastseveraldecades(Fehrmann,2011).DuringtheU.S.presidentialelectionin1968,theaveragesoundbite—thatis,anyfootageofa

candidatespeakinguninterrupted—wasstillalittlemorethan40seconds,butthathadfallentolessthan10secondsattheendofthe80s(Hallin1994)and7.8secondsin2000(Lichter,2001).Thelastelectionhascertainlynotreversedthetrend.Whetherthatmeansthatthemediaadjusttoourdecreasingattentionspanoriscausingthetrendisnoteasytosay.[17]Buthoweveritmightbe,itisobviousthatwearesurroundedbymoresourcesofdistractionandlessopportunitiestotrainourattentionspans.

9.2MultitaskingisnotagoodideaIfmore than one thing tries to catch your attention, the temptation is great tolookatmorethanonethingatthesametime–tomultitask.Manypeopleclaimtobequitegoodatmultitasking.Forsome,itisoneofthemostimportantskillsto cope with today’s informational overload. It is a common belief that theyoungergenerationsarebetteratit,thatitevencomesnaturallytothemastheygrewup among the attention-seekingnewmedia.And studies show that thosewhoclaimtomultitaskalotalsoclaimtobeverygoodatit.Thoseinterviewedinthesestudiesdonotseetheirproductivityimpairedbyit.Onthecontrary,theythinkit’simproved.Buttheyusuallydon’ttestthemselvesincomparisonwithacontrolgroup.Psychologistswho interviewed themultitaskersdid test them insteadof just

asking.Theygavethemdifferenttaskstoaccomplishandcomparedtheirresultswith another group that was instructed to do only one thing at a time. Theoutcome is unambiguous:While those who multitasked feltmore productive,theirproductivityactuallydecreased–a lot (WangandTchernev2012;Rosen2008;Ophir,Nass,andWagner2009).Notonlythequantitybutalsothequality

oftheiraccomplishmentslaggedsignificantlybehindthatofthecontrolgroup.In

someareas,liketextinganddriving,thedownsidesofmultitaskingarepainfullyobvious.Butwhatismostinterestingaboutthesestudiesisnotthefactthattheproductivityandthequalityoftheworkdecreaseswithmultitasking,butthatitalsoimpairstheabilitytodealwithmorethanonethingatatime!

This

resultissurprising,becauseweusuallyexpecttobecomebetteratsomethingthemoreoftenwedoit.Butonacloserlook,itmakessense.Multitaskingisnotwhatwethinkitis.Itisnotfocusingattentiononmorethanonethingatatime.Nobodycandothat.Whenwethinkwemultitask,whatwereallydoisshiftourattentionquicklybetweentwo(ormore)things.Andeveryshiftisadrainonourabilitytoshiftanddelaysthemomentwemanagetogetfocusedagain.Tryingtomultitaskfatiguesusanddecreasesourabilitytodealwithmorethanone

decreasesourabilitytodealwithmorethanonetask.

The

factthatpeopleneverthelessbelievethattheycangetbetteratitandincreasetheirproductivitycaneasilybeexplainedbytwofactors.Thefirstisthelackofacontrolgrouporanobjectiveexternalmeasurementthatwouldprovideuswiththefeedbackweneedtolearn.Thesecondiswhatpsychologistscallthemere-exposureeffect:doingsomethingmanytimesmakesusbelievewehavebecomegoodatit–completelyindependentofouractualperformance(Bornstein1989).Weunfortunatelytendtoconfusefamiliaritywithskill.

If

theonlyreasontomentionthisistorecommendyounotwriteyourthesisorbookswhiledriving,itwouldbequitebanal(stillagoodidea,though).Butitdoeshavepracticalconsequencesforthewayweworkifwethinkaboutwhat“writing”trulymeans:manydifferenttaskswe

“writing”trulymeans:manydifferenttaskswemightenduptryingtodoatthesametimeifwedon’tseparatethemconsciouslyandpractically.

Writing

apaperinvolvesmuchmorethanjusttypingonthekeyboard.Italsomeansreading,understanding,reflecting,gettingideas,makingconnections,distinguishingterms,findingtherightwords,structuring,organizing,editing,correctingandrewriting.Allthesearenotjustdifferenttasks,buttasksrequiringadifferentkindofattention.Itisnotonlyimpossibletofocusonmorethanonethingatatime,butalsotohaveadifferentkindofattentiononmorethanonethingatatime.

Usually,

whenwethinkaboutattention,weonlythinkaboutfocusedattention–somethingthatrequireswillpowertosustain.Thisisnottoosurprising,becausethisiswhatmost

psychologists,philosophersandneuroscientistsusedtohaveinmindwhentheytalkedaboutattention(Bruya2010,5).Today,researchdifferentiatesbetweenmultipleformsofattention.EversinceMihalyCsikszentmihalyiinthe1970sdescribed“flow,”thestateinwhichbeinghighlyfocusedbecomeseffortless(Csikszentmihalyi,1975),[18]otherformsofattention,whicharemuchlessdependentonwillandeffort,attractedresearchers’interest.

When it comes to focusedattention,we focusonone thingonly, somethingwe can sustain for only a few seconds. The maximum duration of focusedattentionseemsnottohavechangedovertime(DoyleandZakrajsek2013,91).Focusedattentionisdifferentfrom“sustainedattention,”whichweneedtostayfocusedononetaskforalongerperiodandisnecessarytolearn,understandorget something done. This is the kind of attention that ismost certainly underthreatfromanincreaseindistractions.

Theaveragedurationseemstohaveshrunkenquiteconsiderablyovertime–wepracticemuchlessfocusedattentionthanweusedto(ibid).

Thegoodnewsisthatwecantrainourselvestostayfocusedononethingforlonger if we avoid multitasking, remove possible distractions and separatedifferentkindsoftasksasmuchaspossiblesotheywillnotinterferewitheachother.This too is not just a question of having the rightmindset, but, equally

important,ofhowweorganiseourworkflow.Alackofstructuremakesitmuchmore challenging to stay focused for extended periods of time. The slip-boxprovides not only a clear structure to work in, but also forces us to shift ourattentionconsciouslyaswecancompletetasksinreasonabletimebeforemovingon to the next one. Together with the fact that every task is accompanied bywriting,whichinitselfrequiresundistractedattention,theslip-boxcanbecomeahavenforourrestlessminds.

9.3GiveEachTasktheRightKindofAttentionOncloser look, itbecomesobvioushowdifferent thetasksare thatareusuallysummarised under “writing” and how different the kinds of attention are thattheyrequire.Proofreading, for example, is obviously part of the writing process, but

requiresaverydifferentstateofmindthantheattempttofindtherightwords.Whenweproofreadamanuscript,wetakeontheroleofacriticwhotakesastepbacktoseethetextwiththeeyesofadispassionatereader.Wescanthetextfortypos, try to smooth out patches and check structure. We deliberately putdistancebetweenourselvesand the text to seewhat is reallyon thepaper,notjustinourheads.Wetrytoblockouttheknowledgeofwhatwemeanttosaytobeabletoseewhatwewrote.While

takingontheroleofacriticisnotthesameasbeinganimpartialreader,itisenoughtospotmostofwhatwemissedbefore:theholesintheargument,thepartswedidnotexplainaswedidnotneedtoexplainthemtoourselves.Tobeabletoswitchbetweentheroleofcriticandtheroleofwriterrequiresaclearseparationbetweenthesetwotasks,andthatbecomeseasierwith

experience.Ifweproofreadamanuscriptanddon’tmanagetogetenoughdistancefromourselvesasauthors,wewillonlyseeourthoughts,nottheactualtext.Itisacommonissuethatcomesupduringdiscussionswithstudents:WhenIpointoutproblemswithintheargument,anill-definedtermorjustanambiguouspassage,studentsusuallyrefertowhattheymeanfirstandonlyshifttheirfocustowhattheyhavewrittenwhentheyfullyunderstandthatwhattheymeaniscompletelyirrelevantwithinthescientificcommunity.

Letting

theinnercriticinterferewiththeauthorisn’thelpful,either.Herewehavetofocusourattentiononourthoughts.Ifthecriticconstantlyandprematurelyinterfereswheneverasentenceisn’tperfectyet,wewouldnevergetanythingonpaper.Weneedtogetourthoughtsonpaperfirstandimprovethemthere,wherewecanlookatthem.Especiallycomplexideasaredifficultto

turnintoalineartextintheheadalone.Ifwetrytopleasethecriticalreaderinstantly,ourworkflowwouldcometoastandstill.Wetendtocallextremelyslowwriters,whoalwaystrytowriteasifforprint,perfectionists.Eventhoughitsoundslikepraiseforextremeprofessionalism,itisnot:Arealprofessionalwouldwaituntilitwastimeforproofreading,soheorshecanfocusononethingatatime.Whileproofreadingrequiresmorefocusedattention,findingtherightwordsduringwritingrequiresmuchmorefloatingattention.

It

isalsoeasiertofocusonfindingtherightwordsifwedon’thavetothinkaboutthestructureofthetextatthesametime,whichiswhyaprintedoutlineofthemanuscriptshouldbealwaysinfrontofoureyes.Wehavetoknowwhatwedon’thavetowriteaboutatthemoment,becauseweknowthatwewilltakecareofthatinanotherpartofourtext.

Outlining

orchangingtheoutlineisalsoaverydifferenttaskthatrequiresaverydifferentfocusonsomethingelse:notononethought,butonthewholeargument.Itisimportant,though,tounderstandoutliningnotasthepreparationofwritingorevenasplanning,butasaseparatetaskweneedtoreturntothroughoutthewritingprocessonaregularbasis.Weneedastructureallthetime,butasweworkourwaybottom-up,itisboundtochangeoften.Andwheneverweneedtoupdatethestructure,weneedtotakeastepback,lookatthebigpictureandchangeitaccordingly.

Proofreading, formulating and outlining are also different from the task ofcombininganddeveloping thoughts.Workingwith the slip-boxmeansplayingwithideasandlookingoutforinterestingconnectionsandcomparisons.Itmeansbuildingclusters,combiningthemwithotherclustersandpreparingtheorderofnotesforaproject.Here,weneedtopuzzlewithnotesandfindthebestfit.Itismuchmoreassociative,playfulandcreativethantheothertasksandrequiresaverydifferentkindofattentionaswell.Reading,

ofcourse,isalsodifferent.Readinginitselfcanrequireverydifferentkindsofattention,

dependingonthetext.Sometextsneedtobereadslowlyandcarefully,whileothersareonlyworthskimming.Itwouldberidiculoustoadheretoageneralformulaandreadeverytextinthesameway,eventhoughthatiswhatmanystudyguidesorspeed-readingcoursestrytoconvinceusof.

Itisnotasignofprofessionalismtomasteronetechniqueandsticktoitnomatterwhat,buttobeflexibleandadjustone’sreadingtowhateverspeedorapproachatextrequires.

In

short,academicwritingrequiresthewholespectrumofattention.Tomastertheartofwriting,weneedtobeabletoapplywhateverkindofattentionandfocusisneeded.

Psychologists used to associate scientific work exclusively with focussedattention, while other, more floating kinds of attention were exclusivelyassociatedwithcreativeworklikeart.Weknowtodaythatweneedbothkindsofattentionforartandscience.Itisnotsurprising,therefore,thatthisflexibilitycan be found among most, if not all, exceptional scientists. Oshin Vartaniancompared and analysed the dailyworkflowsofNobelPrizewinners andother

eminent scientists and concluded that it is not a relentless focus, but flexiblefocus that distinguishes them. “Specifically, the problem-solving behavior ofeminentscientistscanalternatebetweenextraordinarylevelsoffocusonspecificconceptsandplayfulexplorationofideas.Thissuggeststhatsuccessfulproblemsolving may be a function of flexible strategy application in relation to taskdemands.”(Vartanian2009,57)These

studieshelptosolveapuzzlethathasbotheredpsychologistswhostudycreativepeopleaswell.“Ononehand,thosewithwandering,defocused,childlikemindsseemtobethemostcreative;ontheother,itseemstobeanalysisandapplicationthat’simportant.Theanswertothisconundrumisthatcreativepeopleneedboth…Thekeytocreativityisbeingabletoswitchbetweenawide-open,playfulmindandanarrowanalyticalframe.”(Dean,2013,152)

What

psychologistsdonotdiscuss,though,aretheexternalconditionsthatallowustobeflexibleinthefirstplace.Thementalflexibilitytobeextremelyfocusedforonemomentandplayfullyexploreideasinthenextisjustonesideofthe

equation.Tobeflexible,weneedanequallyflexibleworkstructurethatdoesn’tbreakdowneverytimewedepartfromapreconceivedplan.Onecanbethebestdriverwiththequickestreactions,abletoadjustflexiblytodifferentstreetandweatherconditions.Noneofthatwillhelpabitifthedriverisstuckonrails.Anditdoesnothelpustohavegreatinsightintothenecessityofbeingflexibleinourworkifwearestuckinarigidorganisation.

Unfortunately, the most common way people organise their writing is bymakingplans.Althoughplanning is almostuniversally recommendedby studyguides,it’stheequivalentofputtingoneselfonrails.Don’tmakeplans.Becomeanexpert.

9.4BecomeanExpertInsteadofaPlanner“(An)

exclusiveuseofanalyticalrationalitytendstoimpedefurtherimprovementinhumanperformancebecauseofanalyticalrationality’sslowreasoninganditsemphasisonrules,principles,anduniversalsolutions.Second,bodilyinvolvement,speed,andanintimate

knowledgeofconcretecasesintheformofgoodexamplesisaprerequisitefortrueexpertise.”(Flyvbjerg2001,15)Themomentwestopmakingplansisthemomentwestarttolearn.Itisamatterofpracticetobecomegoodatgeneratinginsightandwritegoodtextsbychoosingandmovingflexiblybetweenthemostimportantandpromisingtasks,judgedbynothingelsethanthecircumstancesofthegivensituation.Itissimilartothemomentwherewehadthetrainingwheelsofourbikestakenoffandstartedtolearncyclingproperly.Wemighthavefeltabitinsecureinthefirstmoment,butatthesametime,itbecameobviousthatwewouldneverhavelearnedtobicycleifweleftthetrainingwheelson.Theonlythingwewouldhavelearnedistorideabikewithtrainingwheelson.

Similarly,noonewouldeverlearntheartofproductiveacademicwritingjustby following plans or linear, multistep prescripts – one would learn only tofollow plans or prescripts. The widespread praise for planning rests on themisconception that a process like writing an academic text, which is highlydependent on cognition and thinking, can rely on conscious decision-makingalone.Butacademicwritingisanart,aswell,whichmeansit issomethingwe

canbecomebetteratwithexperienceanddeliberatepractice.Experts

relyonembodiedexperience,whichenablesthemtoreachthestateofvirtuosity.Anexpertinacademicwritinghasafeelfortheprocess,anacquiredintuitionforwhichtaskwillbringoneclosertothefinishedmanuscriptandwhatisonlyadistraction.Therecanbenouniversallyapplicableruleaboutwhichstephastobetakenwhen.Eachnewprojectisdifferent,andateachstageoftheproject,itmightbebesttoreaduponsomething,toreviewapassage,todiscussanideaortochangetheoutlineofthemanuscript.Thereisnouniversalrulethatcouldtelloneupfrontatwhichstageitwouldn’tmakesensetofollowuponanidea,apossiblecontradictionorafootnote.

To

beabletobecomeanexpert,weneedthefreedomtomakeourowndecisionsandallthenecessarymistakesthathelpuslearn.Likebicycling,itcanonlybelearnedbydoingit.

bicycling,itcanonlybelearnedbydoingit.Moststudyguidesandacademicwritingteachersaretryingveryhardtospareyoufromthatexperiencebytellingyouwhat,whenandhowtowriteinstead.Buttheyarekeepingyoufromlearningtheverythingacademiaandwritingisallabout:gaininginsightandmakingitpublic.

Andthis,bytheway,isthereasonwhyyoushouldneverasktheteachersofparamedics for help if you find yourself in the admittedly unlikely situationwhereyoucanchoosethepersonwhoshouldperformCPRonyou.In an experiment, beginner and expert paramedics and their teachers were

shownscenesofCPRperformedbyeitherexperiencedparamedicsorthosewhohadjustfinishedtheirtraining(Flyvbjerg2001).[19]Asyoumightexpect,theexperiencedparamedicswereabletospottheirkind

correctlyinalmostallcases(~90%),whilethebeginnersweremoreorlessjustguessing (~50%). So far, so good.Butwhen the teacherswatched the videos,they systematically mistook the beginners for experts and the experts forbeginners.Theywerewronginmostofthecases(andonlyrightinaboutathirdofallthecases).Hubert and Stuart Dreyfus, researchers on expertise, have a simple

explanation:Teacherstendtomistaketheabilitytofollow(their)ruleswiththeabilitytomaketherightchoicesinrealsituations.Unliketheexpertparamedics,theydidnotlookattheuniquecircumstancesandcheckiftheparamedicsinthevideos did the best thing possible in each individual situation. Instead, theyfocusedonthequestionofwhetherthepeopleinthevideosactedaccordingtotherulestheytaught.Because trainees lack the experience to judge a situation correctly and

confidently,theyneedtosticktotherulestheyweretaught,muchtothedelightof their teachers. According to the Dreyfuses, the correct application ofteachable rules enables you to become a competent “performer” (which

correspondstoa“3”ontheirfive-gradeexpertscale),but itwon’tmakeyoua“master”(level4)andcertainlywon’tturnyouintoan“expert”(level5).Experts,ontheotherhand,haveinternalisedthenecessaryknowledgesothey

don’thavetoactivelyrememberrulesorthinkconsciouslyabouttheirchoices.Theyhaveacquiredenoughexperienceinvarioussituationstobeabletorelyontheirintuitiontoknowwhattodoinwhichkindofsituation.Theirdecisionsincomplex situations are explicitly not made by long rational-analyticalconsiderations,butrathercomefromthegut(cf.

Gigerenzer,2008a,2008b).

Here, gut feeling is not a mysterious force, but an incorporated history ofexperience.Itisthesedimentationofdeeplylearnedpracticethroughnumerousfeedback loops on success or failure.[20] Even a rational and analyticalendeavour like science does not function without expertise, intuition andexperience – which is one of the most interesting outcomes of the empiricalresearchonnaturalscientistsintheirlaboratories(Rheinberger1997).

Chessplayersseemtothinklessthanbeginners.Rather,theyseepatternsandletthemselvesbeguidedbytheirexperiencefromthepastratherthanattempttocalculateturnsfarintothefuture.

But like in professional chess, the intuition of professional academic andnonfictionwritingcanalsoonlybegainedbysystematicexposure to feedbackloopsandexperience,whichmeansthatsuccessinacademicwritingdependstoagreatdegreeontheorganizationofitspracticalside.

Theworkflowaroundtheslip-boxisnotaprescriptionthattellsyouwhattodoatwhatstageofwriting.Onthecontrary:Itgivesyoua

stageofwriting.Onthecontrary:Itgivesyouastructureofclearlyseparabletasks,whichcanbecompletedwithinreasonabletimeandprovidesyouwithinstantfeedbackthroughinterconnectedwritingtasks.Itallowsyoutobecomebetterbygivingyoutheopportunityfordeliberatepractice.Themoreexperienceyougain,themoreyouwillbeabletorelyonyourintuitiontotellyouwhattodonext.Insteadoftakingyou“fromintuitiontoprofessionalwritingstrategies”,asthetitleofatypicalstudyguidepromises,itishereallaboutbecomingaprofessionalbyacquiringtheskillsandexperiencetojudgesituationscorrectlyandintuitivelysoyoucanchuckmisleadingstudyguidesforgood.Realexperts,Flyvbjergwritesunambiguously,don’tmakeplans(Flyvbjerg2001,19).

9.5GetClosureAttention is not our only limited resource. Our short-term memory is alsolimited.Weneedstrategiesnottowasteitscapacitywiththoughtswecanbetterdelegatetoanexternalsystem.Whiletheestimationsofourlong-termmemory

capacityarewildlydiverseandratherspeculative,psychologistsusedtotendtoagreeonavery specificnumberwhen it came to short-termmemory:Wecanholdamaximumofseventhingsinourheadat thesametime,plus/minustwo(Miller1956).Information cannot be saved in short-termmemory like on amemory stick.

Rather, it kindof floats around inourheads, seeksour attention andoccupiesvaluablementalresourcesuntilitiseitherforgotten,replacedbysomethingmoreimportant(accordingtoourbrains)ormovedintolong-termmemory.Whenwetrytoremembersomething,sayitemsonashoppinglist,wejustkeeprepeatingthe itemsmentally, instead of storing them temporarily in some corner of ourbrains where we can pick them up later and think about something moreinterestinginthemeantime.But

whataboutmemoryartists?Itmightseemlikewecanincreasethenumberofthingswecanrememberbyemployingmemotechniques–andnotjustabit,butsignificantly.Butwhatweactuallydowhenweusememotechniquesistobundleitemstogetherinameaningfulwayandrememberthebundles–uptoaboutseven(LevinandLevin,1990).Or,ifrecentresearchisrightandtheparticipantsinearliertestshavealwaysalreadybundledthingstogether,thenthemaximumcapacityofourworkingmemoryisnotsevenplus/minustwo,butmorelikeamaximumoffour(Cowan2001).

Have

alookatthefollowingnumbersequenceonlyonceandtrytorememberitrightaway:1195821962319664197051974.

That’s

difficult,asithasclearlymorethansevendigits.ButitisquiteeasywhenyourealisethatthesearejustfiveyearsoftheWorldCupnumberedconsecutively.Therefore,youhavetoremembermuchlessthansevenindividualitems.Youonlyhavetoremembertwo–theruleandthestartingyear.[21]

This

iswhyitissomucheasiertorememberthingsweunderstandthanthingswedon’t.Itisnotthatwehavetochoosetofocuseitheronlearningorunderstanding.Itisalwaysaboutunderstanding–andifitisonlyforthesakeoflearning.Thingsweunderstandareconnected,eitherthrough

rules,theories,narratives,purelogic,mentalmodelsorexplanations.Anddeliberatelybuildingthesekindsofmeaningfulconnectionsiswhattheslip-boxisallabout.

Every

stepisaccompaniedbyquestionslike:Howdoesthisfactfitintomyideaof…?Howcanthisphenomenonbeexplainedbythattheory?Arethesetwoideascontradictoryordotheycomplementeachother?Isn’tthisargumentsimilartothatone?Haven’tIheardthisbefore?Andaboveall:Whatdoesxmeanfory?

Thesequestionsnotonlyincreaseourunderstanding,butfacilitatelearningaswell.Oncewemakeameaningfulconnectiontoanideaorfact,itisdifficultnottorememberitwhenwethinkaboutwhatitisconnectedwith.

While

wewanttoremembersomethingsaslongaspossible,wedon’twanttoclogourbrainswith

possible,wedon’twanttoclogourbrainswithirrelevantinformation.Andthewayweorganiseeverydayinformationmakesabigdifferencenotonlyforlong-termmemories,butshort-termaswell.

Here,

wehavetothankSovietpsychologistBlumaZeigarnikforherinsightandobservationalskills.Thestorygoesthatshewentforlunchwithhercolleaguesandwasveryimpressedbythewaiter’sabilitytoremembercorrectlywhoorderedwhatwithouttheneedtowriteanythingdown.Itissaidthatshehadtogobacktotherestauranttogetthejacketsheleftthere.Muchtohersurprise,thewaitersheadmiredjustminutesagoforhisgreatmemorydidn’tevenrecogniseher.Questionedaboutwhatseemedtoheracontradiction,heexplainedthatallthewaitershadnoproblemrememberingtheordersandmatchingthemwiththeguestsatthetable.Buttheveryseconddinerslefttherestaurant,thewaitersallforgotthemcompletelyandfocusedonthenextgroup.

onthenextgroup.

Zeigarnik

successfullyreproducedwhatisnowknownastheZeigarnikeffect:Opentaskstendtooccupyourshort-termmemory–untiltheyaredone.Thatiswhywegetsoeasilydistractedbythoughtsofunfinishedtasks,regardlessoftheirimportance.ButthankstoZeigarnik’sfollow-upresearch,wealsoknowthatwedon’tactuallyhavetofinishtaskstoconvinceourbrainstostopthinkingaboutthem.Allwehavetodoistowritethemdowninawaythatconvincesusthatitwillbetakencareof.That’sright:Thebraindoesn'tdistinguishbetweenanactualfinishedtaskandonethatispostponedbytakinganote.Bywritingsomethingdown,weliterallygetitoutofourheads.ThisiswhyDavidAllen’s“Gettingthingsdone”systemworks:Thesecrettohavea“mindlikewater”istogetallthelittlestuffoutofourshort-termmemory.Andaswecan’ttakecareofeverythingonceandforallrightnow,theonlywaytodothatistohavea

reliableexternalsysteminplacewherewecankeepallournaggingthoughtsaboutthemanythingsthatneedtobedoneandtrustthattheywillnotbelost.

And

thesameistruefortheworkwiththeslip-box.Tobeabletofocusonthetaskathand,wehavetomakesureother,unfinishedtasksarenotlingeringinourheadandwastingpreciousmentalresources.

The

firststepistobreakdowntheamorphoustaskof“writing”intosmallerpiecesofdifferenttasksthatcanbefinishedinonego.Thesecondstepistomakesurewealwayswritedowntheoutcomeofourthinking,includingpossibleconnectionstofurtherinquiries.Astheoutcomeofeachtaskiswrittendownandpossibleconnectionsbecomevisible,itiseasytopickuptheworkanytimewhereweleftitwithouthavingtokeep

itinmindallthetime.[22]Possiblesubsequenttasksareopenquestionsorconnectionstoothernotes,whichwecouldelaborateonfurtherornot.Italsocomesupinexplicitreminderslike“reviewthischapterandcheckforredundancies,”whichbelongintotheprojectfolder.Orthethirdoptionisthesimplefactthatsomethingisstillinourin-boxwaitingtobeturnedintoapermanentnote–aquickandnot-yet–crossed-outnoteinournotebook,orliteraturenotesnotyetarchivedinourreferencesystem.

All

thisenablesustolaterpickupataskexactlywherewestoppedwithouttheneedto“keepinmind”thattherestillwassomethingtodo.Thatisoneofthemainadvantagesofthinkinginwriting–everythingisexternalisedanyway.

Conversely,wecanusetheZeigarnikeffecttoouradvantagebydeliberatelykeepingunansweredquestionsinourmind.Wecanruminateaboutthem,evenwhenwedo something that hasnothing todowithwork and ideallydoesnotrequireourfullattention.Lettingthoughtslingerwithoutfocusingonthemgives

ourbrainstheopportunitytodealwithproblemsinadifferent,oftensurprisinglyproductiveway.Whilewehaveawalkorashowerorcleanthehouse,thebraincannothelpbutplayaroundwiththelastunsolvedproblemitcameacross.Andthatiswhywesooftenfindtheanswertoaquestioninrathercasualsituations.Bytakingintoaccounttheselittleinsightsintohowourbrainswork,wecan

makesurethatwewillnotgetdistractedbythoughtsofwhatweneedfromthesupermarketwhenwe sit at thedesk.Rather,wemay solve a crucial problemwhilewerunerrands.

9.6ReducetheNumberofDecisionsNext to the attention that can only be directed at one thing at a time and theshort-term memory that can only hold up to seven things at once, the thirdlimitedresourceismotivationorwillpower.Here,too,theenvironmentaldesignof our workflow makes all the difference. It shouldn’t come as a surpriseanymorethataclosecooperationwiththeslip-boxturnsouttobefarsuperiortoanysophisticatedplanning.For

thelongesttime,willpowerwasseenmoreasacharactertraitthanaresource.

Thishaschanged.Today,willpoweriscomparedtomuscles:alimitedresourcethatdepletesquicklyandneedstimetorecover.Improvementthroughtrainingispossibletoacertaindegree,buttakestimeandeffort.Thephenomenonisusuallydiscussedundertheterm“egodepletion”:“Weusethetermegodepletiontorefertoatemporaryreductionintheself’s

capacityorwillingnesstoengageinvolitionalaction(includingcontrollingtheenvironment,controllingtheself,makingchoices,andinitiatingaction)causedbypriorexerciseofvolition.”(Baumeisteretal.,1998,1253)One

ofthemostinterestingfindingsoftheresearchonegodepletionisthebroadvarietyofthingsthatcanhaveadepletingeffect.

“Our

resultssuggestthatabroadassortmentofactionsmakeuseofthesameresource.Actsofself-control,responsibledecisionmaking,andactivechoiceseemtointerferewithothersuchactsthatfollowsoonafter.Theimplicationisthatsomevitalresourceoftheselfbecomesdepletedbysuchactsofvolition.Tobesure,weassumethatthisresourceiscommonlyreplenished,althoughthefactorsthatmighthastenordelaythereplenishmentremainunknown,alongwiththeprecisenatureofthisresource.”(Baumeisteretal.,1998,1263f)

Even something seemingly unrelated like being the victim of prejudices canhavea significant effect (Inzlicht,McKay, andAronson,2006)as “controllingthe influence of stereotypes (… may rely on the same…) limited-strengthresourceonwhichpeopledrawforself-regulation” (GovorunandPayne2006,112).The

smartestwaytodealwiththiskindoflimitationistocheat.Insteadofforcingourselvestodosomethingwedon’tfeellikedoing,weneedtofindawaytomakeusfeellikedoingwhatmovesourprojectfurtheralong.Doingtheworkthatneedtobedonewithouthavingtoapplytoomuchwillpowerrequiresatechnique,aruse.

Even thoughresultsof thesestudiesarecurrentlyunder intensescrutinyandhavetobetakenwithagrainofsalt(CarterandMcCullough2014;EngberandCauterucci2016;Job,DweckandWalton2010),itissafetoarguethatareliableand standardised working environment is less taxing on our attention,concentrationandwillpower,or,ifyoulike,ego.Itiswellknownthatdecision-makingisoneof themost tiringandwearyingtasks,whichiswhypeople likeBarackObamaorBillGatesonlyweartwosuitcolours:darkblueordarkgrey.Thismeans theyhaveone lessdecision tomake in themorning, leavingmoreresourcesforthedecisionsthatreallymatter.In the way we organise our research and writing, we too can significantly

reduce the amount of decisions we have to make. While content-relateddecisions have to bemade (onwhat ismore andwhat is less important in anarticle, on the connections between notes, the structure of a text, etc.), mostorganisationaldecisionscanbemadeupfront,onceandforall,bydecidingononesystem.Byalwaysusingthesamenotebookformakingquicknotes,alwaysextractingthemainideasfromatextinthesamewayandalwaysturningthemintothesamekindofpermanentnotes,whicharealwaysdealtwithinthesame

manner,thenumberofdecisionsduringaworksessioncanbegreatlyreduced.Thatleavesuswithmuchmorementalenergythatwecandirecttowardsmoreusefultasks,liketryingtosolvetheproblemsinquestion.Beingabletofinishataskinatimelymannerandtopickuptheworkexactly

where we left it has another enjoyable advantage that helps to restore ourattention:Wecanhavebreakswithoutfearoflosingthethread.Breaksaremuchmorethanjustopportunitiestorecover.Theyarecrucialforlearning.

Theyallowthebraintoprocessinformation,moveitintolong-termmemoryandprepareitfornewinformation(DoyleandZakrajsek2013,69).[23]Ifwedon’tgiveourselvesabreakinbetweenworksessions,beitoutofeagernessorfearofforgettingwhatweweredoing,itcanhaveadetrimentaleffectonourefforts.Tohaveawalk(Ratey,2008)orevenanap[24]supportslearningandthinking.[25]

10ReadforUnderstanding“Iwould

adviseyoutoreadwithapeninyourhandandenterinalittlebookshorthintsofwhatyoufeelthatiscommonorthatmaybeuseful;forthiswillbethebestmethodofimprintingsuchportcullisinyourmemory.”–BenjaminFranklin[26]

10.1ReadWithaPeninHandTogetagoodpaperwritten,youonlyhavetorewriteagooddraft;togetagooddraftwritten,youonlyhavetoturnaseriesofnotesintoacontinuoustext.Andasaseriesofnotesisjusttherearrangementofnotesyoualreadyhaveinyourslip-box,allyoureallyhavetodoishaveapeninyourhandwhenyouread.If

youunderstandwhatyoureadandtranslateitintothedifferentcontextofyourownthinking,materialisedintheslip-box,youcannothelpbuttransformthefindingsandthoughtsofothersintosomethingthatisnewandyourown.Itworksbothways:Theseriesofnotesintheslip-boxdevelopsintoarguments,whichareshapedbythetheories,ideasandmentalmodelsyou

bythetheories,ideasandmentalmodelsyouhaveinyourhead.Andthetheories,ideasandmentalmodelsinyourheadarealsoshapedbythethingsyouread.Theyareconstantlychangingandchallengedbythesurprisingconnectionswithwhichtheslip-boxconfrontsyou.Therichertheslip-boxbecomes,thericheryourownthinkingbecomes.Theslip-boxisanideageneratorthatdevelopsinlockstepwithyourownintellectualdevelopment.

Together,youcanturnpreviouslyseparatedorevenisolatedfactsintoacriticalmassofinterconnectedideas.

The

stepfromtheslip-boxtothefinaltextisprettystraightforward.Thecontentisalreadymeaningful,thoughtthroughandinmanypartsalreadyputintowell-connectedsequences.Thenotesonlyneedtobeputintoalinearorder.

Whilethenotesthemselvesareformulatedsothattheycanbeunderstoodontheirown,they

thattheycanbeunderstoodontheirown,theyareatthesametimeembeddedinoneormorecontextsthatenrichtheirmeaning.Drawingfromtheslip-boxtodevelopadraftismorelikeadialoguewithitthanamechanicalact.Therefore,theoutcomeisneveracopyofpreviouswork,butalwayscomeswithsurprises.Therewillalwaysbesomethingyoucouldn’thaveanticipated.Obviously,thesameappliestoeverysinglestepbefore.Theoutcomeofreadingwithapeninthehandisnotpossibletoanticipateeither,andhere,too,theideaisnottocopy,buttohaveameaningfuldialoguewiththetextsweread.

When

weextractideasfromthespecificcontextofatext,wedealwithideasthatserveaspecificpurposeinaparticularcontext,supportaspecificargument,arepartofatheorythatisn’toursorwritteninalanguagewewouldn’tuse.

Thisiswhywehavetotranslatethemintoourownlanguagetopreparethemtobeembedded

ownlanguagetopreparethemtobeembeddedintonewcontextsofourownthinking,thedifferentcontext(s)withintheslip-box.Translatingmeanstogivethetruestpossibleaccountoftheoriginalwork,usingdifferentwords–itdoesnotmeanthefreedomtomakesomethingfit.Aswell,themerecopyingofquotesalmostalwayschangestheirmeaningbystrippingthemoutofcontext,eventhoughthewordsaren’tchanged.

Thisisacommonbeginnermistake,whichcanonlyleadtoapatchworkofideas,butneveracoherentthought.

While

theliteraturenoteswillbestoredwithinthereferencesystemtogetherwiththebibliographicdetails,separatefromtheslip-box,butstillclosetothecontextoftheoriginaltext,theyarealreadywrittenwithaneyetowardsthelinesofthoughtswithintheslip-box.Luhmanndescribesthisstepasfollows:“Ialwayshaveaslipofpaperathand,onwhichInotedowntheideasof

paperathand,onwhichInotedowntheideasofcertainpages.OnthebacksideIwritedownthebibliographicdetails.AfterfinishingthebookIgothroughmynotesandthinkhowthesenotesmightberelevantforalreadywrittennotesintheslip-box.ItmeansthatIalwaysreadwithaneyetowardspossibleconnectionsintheslip-box.”(Luhmannetal.,1987,150)

How

extensivetheliteraturenotesshouldbereallydependsonthetextandwhatweneeditfor.Italsodependsonourabilitytobeconcise,thecomplexityofthetextandhowdifficultitistounderstand.Asliteraturenotesarealsoatoolforunderstandingandgraspingthetext,moreelaboratenotesmakesenseinmorechallengingcases,whileineasiercasesitmightbesufficienttojustjotdownsomekeywords.Luhmann,certainlybeingontheouterspectrumofexpertise,contentedhimselfwithprettyshortnotesandwasstillabletoturnthemintovaluableslip-boxnoteswithoutdistortingthe

meaningoftheoriginaltexts.[27]Itismainlyamatterofhavinganextensivelatticeworkofmentalmodelsortheoriesinourheadsthatenableustoidentifyanddescribethemainideasquickly(cf.RickheitandSichelschmidt,1999).Wheneverweexploreanew,unfamiliarsubject,ournoteswilltendtobemoreextensive,butweshouldn’tgetnervousaboutit,asthisisthedeliberatepracticeofunderstandingwecannotskip.Sometimesitisnecessarytoslowlyworkourwaythroughadifficulttextandsometimesitisenoughtoreduceawholebooktoasinglesentence.Theonlythingthatmattersisthatthesenotesprovidethebestpossiblesupportforthenextstep,thewritingoftheactualslip-boxnotes.

Andwhatismosthelpfulistoreflectontheframe,thetheoreticalbackground,methodologicalapproachorperspectiveofthetextweread.Thatoftenmeanstoreflectasmuchonwhatisnotmentionedaswhatis

mentioned.

Taking

literaturenotesthiswayisverydifferentfromthewayliteraturenotesaretakenbymoststudents,whichiseithernotsystematicenoughoroverlysystematic.Mostoften,itisjustsystematicinthewrongway:Byemployingoften-recommendedreadingtechniqueslikeSQ3RorSQ4R,theytreateverytextthesame,regardlessofthecontent.Theydonotclearlydecideontheformatandtheorganisationoftheirnotesanddonothaveaplanforwhattodowiththemafterwards.Withoutaclearpurposeforthenotes,takingthemwillfeelmorelikeachorethananimportantstepwithinabiggerproject.Sometimes,longexcerptsarewrittenwithgoodintentions,butthatisnotsustainable.

Sometimestheonlythingthatisdoneisunderliningsentencesandmakingsomecommentsinthemarginsofabook,whichisalmostliketakingnonotesatall.

almostliketakingnonotesatall.

Andmoreoftenthannot,readingisnotaccompaniedbytakingnotes,whichis,intermsofwriting,almostasvaluableasnothavingreadatall.Here,everythingisaboutbuildingupacriticalmassofusefulnotesintheslip-box,whichgivesusaclearideaofhowtoreadandhowtotakeliteraturenotes.

While

thepurposeoftakingliteraturenotesisasclearastheprocedure,youarefreetousewhatevertechniquehelpsthemostwithunderstandingwhatyouarereadingandgettingtousefulnotes–evenifyouusetendifferentcoloursforunderliningandaSQ8Rreadingtechnique.Butallofthiswouldbejustanextrastepbeforeyoudotheonlystepthatreallycounts,whichistotakethepermanentnotethatwilladdvaluetotheactualslip-box.Youneedtotakesomeformofliteraturenotethatcapturesyourunderstandingofthetext,soyouhavesomethinginfrontofyoureyeswhileyouaremakingthe

infrontofyoureyeswhileyouaremakingtheslip-boxnote.Butdon’tturnitintoaprojectinitself.Literaturenotesareshortandmeanttohelpwithwritingslip-boxnotes.Everythingelseeitherhelpstogettothispointorisadistraction.

You

cantypealiteraturenotedirectlyintoZotero,whereitwillbestoredwiththebibliographicdetails.Youmightwanttowritethembyhand,though.Differentindependentstudiesindicatethatwritingbyhandfacilitatesunderstanding.Inasmallbutfascinatingstudy,twopsychologiststriedtofindoutifitmadeadifferenceifstudentsinalecturetooknotesbyhandorbytypingthemintotheirlaptops(MuellerandOppenheimer2014).

Theywerenotabletofindanydifferenceintermsofthenumberoffactsthestudentswereabletoremember.Butintermsofunderstandingthecontentofthelecture,thestudentswhotooktheirnotesbyhandcameoutmuch,muchbetter.

Afteraweek,thisdifferenceinunderstandingwasstillclearlymeasurable.

There is no secret to it and the explanation is pretty simple:Handwriting isslowerandcan’tbecorrectedasquicklyaselectronicnotes.

Becausestudentscan’twritefastenoughtokeepupwitheverythingthatissaidinalecture,theyareforcedtofocusonthegistofwhatisbeingsaid,notthedetails.Buttobeabletonotedownthegistofalecture,youhavetounderstanditinthefirstplace.Soifyouarewritingbyhand,youareforcedtothinkaboutwhatyouhear(orread)–otherwiseyouwouldn’tbeabletograsptheunderlyingprinciple,theidea,thestructureofanargument.

Handwritingmakespurecopyingimpossible,butinsteadfacilitatesthetranslationofwhatissaid(orwritten)intoone’sownwords.Thestudentswhotypedintotheirlaptopsweremuchquicker,whichenabledthemtocopythelecturemorecloselybutcircumventedactualunderstanding.Theyfocusedoncompleteness.Verbatimnotescanbetakenwithalmostno

Verbatimnotescanbetakenwithalmostnothinking,asifthewordsaretakingashortcutfromtheeartothehand,bypassingthebrain.

Ifyoudecidetowriteyournotesbyhand,justkeeptheminoneplaceandsortthem alphabetically in the usual way: “SurnameYear”. Then you can easilymatchthemwiththebibliographicdetailsinyourreferencesystem.Butwhetheryouwritethembyhandornot,keepinmindthatitisallabouttheessence,theunderstandingandpreparationforthenextstep–thetransferringofideasintothecontextofyourownlinesofthoughtsintheslip-box.

10.2KeepanOpenMindWhile selectivity is the key to smart note-taking, it is equally important to beselective in a smart way. Unfortunately, our brains are not very smart inselecting information by default. While we should seek out dis-confirmingargumentsandfactsthatchallengeourwayofthinking,wearenaturallydrawntoeverything thatmakesus feelgood,which is everything that confirmswhatwealreadybelieveweknow.The

verymomentwedecideonahypothesis,ourbrainsautomaticallygointosearchmode,scanningoursurroundingsforsupportingdata,whichisneitheragoodwaytolearnnorresearch.Worse,weareusuallynotevenawareofthisconfirmationbias(ormysidebias[28])thatsurreptitiouslymeddleswithourlife.

Somehow,wejustseemtohappentobesurroundedbypeoplewhoallthinkalike.(Notonpurpose,ofcourse.Wejustspendourtimewithpeoplewelike.

Andwhydowelikethem?Correct:Becausetheythinklikeus.)Wejustseemtohappentoreadthepublicationsthattendtoconfirmwhatwealreadyknow.(Notonpurpose,ofcourse.Wejusttrytostickwithgood,intelligenttexts.Andwhatmakesusthinkthesetextsaregoodandintelligent?Correct:becausetheymakesensetous.)Welookaroundandjustcutoutdis-confirmingfactswithoutevennoticingwhatwedon’tsee,verymuchlikethesamecitycanonedaybefullofhappypeopleandtheotherdayfullofmiserableones,dependingonourmood.

Confirmationbias isasubtlebutmajor force.As thepsychologistRaymondNickersonputsit:“Ifoneweretoattempttoidentifyasingleproblematicaspectof human reasoning that deserves attention above all others, the confirmationbiaswouldhavetobeamongthecandidatesforconsideration”(Nickerson1998,175).Even

thebestscientistsandthinkersarenotfreefromit.Whatsetsthemapartisthemerefactthattheyareawareoftheproblemanddosomethingaboutit.TheclassicrolemodelwouldbeCharlesDarwin.Heforcedhimselftowritedown(andthereforeelaborateon)theargumentsthatwerethemostcriticalofhistheories.“Ihad[...]duringmanyyearsfollowedagoldenrule,namely,thatwheneverapublishedfact,anewobservationorthoughtcameacrossme,whichwasopposedtomygeneralresults,tomakeamemorandumofitwithoutfailandatonce;forIhadfoundbyexperiencethatsuchfactsandthoughtswerefarmoreapttoescapefromthememorythanfavorableones.Owingtothishabit,veryfewobjectionswereraisedagainstmyviews,whichIhadnotatleastnoticedandattemptedtoanswer.”(Darwin1958,123)

This

isagood(primarilymental)techniquetodealwithconfirmationbias.Butwearelookingforwaystoimplementinsightintoour

waystoimplementinsightintoourpsychologicallimitationsinanexternalsystem.Wewanttomaketherightdecisionswithouttoomuchmentaleffort–verymuchlikeOdysseus,whomadeitimpossibleforhimselftofollowtheluringsingingoftheSirensbygettinghimselflashedtothemastofhisship.Withagoodsystem,themerenecessitiesoftheworkflowwillforceustoactmorevirtuouslywithoutactuallyhavingtobecomemorevirtuous.

Confirmationbiasistackledhereintwosteps:First,byturningthewholewritingprocessonitshead,andsecondly,bychangingtheincentivesfromfindingconfirmingfactstoanindiscriminategatheringofanyrelevantinformationregardlessofwhatargumentitwillsupport.

The

linearprocesspromotedbymoststudyguides,whichinsanelystartswiththedecisiononthehypothesisorthetopictowriteabout,isasure-firewaytoletconfirmationbiasrunrampant.

firewaytoletconfirmationbiasrunrampant.First,youbasicallyfixyourpresentunderstanding,astheoutcomeinsteadofusingitasthestartingpoint,primingyourselfforone-sidedperception.Thenyouartificiallycreateaconflictofinterestbetweengettingthingsdone(findingsupportforyourpreconceivedargument)andgeneratinginsight,turninganydeparturefromyourpreconceivedplanintoamutinyagainstthesuccessofyourownproject.Thisisagoodruleofthumb:Ifinsightbecomesathreattoyouracademicorwritingsuccess,youaredoingitwrong.

Developing arguments and ideas bottom-up instead of top-down is the firstandmostimportantsteptoopeningourselvesupforinsight.Weshouldbeableto focus on the most insightful ideas we encounter and welcome the mostsurprising turns of events without jeopardizing our progress or, even better,becauseitbringsourprojectforward.Wepostponethedecisiononwhattowriteabout specifically and focus on building a critical mass within the slip-box.Insteadofhavingthehypothesisinmindallthetime,wewantto: · Confirmthatwehaveseparatedtasksandfocusonunderstandingthetextweread,·Makesurewehavegivenatrueaccountofitscontent·Findtherelevanceofitandmakeconnections.

Only then do we take a step back to look at what developed, then make adecisiononwhatconclusionsaretobedrawnfromthat.The

slip-boxforcesustobeselectiveinreadingandnote-taking,buttheonlycriterionisthequestionofwhethersomethingaddstoadiscussionintheslip-box.Theonlythingthatmattersisthatitconnectsorisopentoconnections.Everythingcancontributetothedevelopmentofthoughtswithintheslip-box:anadditionaswellasacontradiction,thequestioningofaseeminglyobviousideaaswellasthedifferentiationofanargument.Whatwearelookingforarefactsandinformationthatcanaddsomethingandthereforeenrichtheslip-box.Oneofthemostimportanthabitualchangeswhenstartingtoworkwiththeslip-boxismovingtheattentionfromtheindividualprojectwithourpreconceivedideastowardstheopenconnectionswithintheslip-box.

After

aligningourinterests,wecangoastepfurtherandprimeourselvesforseekingoutdis-confirmingfacts.Collectingonlyone-sidedideaswouldn’tbeveryenriching.Yes,wehave

ideaswouldn’tbeveryenriching.Yes,wehavetobeselective,butnotintermsofprosandcons,butintermsofrelevantorirrelevant.Andassoonwefocusonthecontentoftheslip-box,dis-confirmingdatabecomessuddenlyveryattractive,becauseitopensupmorepossibleconnectionsanddiscussionswithintheslip-box,whilemereconfirmingdatadoesnot.Itbecomeseasiertoseekoutdis-confirmingdatawithpracticeandcanbecomequiteaddictive.Theexperienceofhowonepieceofinformationcanchangethewholeperspectiveonacertainproblemisexciting.Andthemorediversethecontentoftheslip-boxis,thefurtheritcanbringourthinkingforward–providedwehaven’tdecidedonthedirectionupfront.Contradictionswithintheslip-boxcanbediscussedonfollow-upnotesoreveninthefinalpaper.Itissomucheasiertodevelopaninterestingtextfromalivelydiscussionwithalotofprosandconsthanfromacollectionofone-sidednotesandseeminglyfittingquotes.Infact,itisalmostimpossibletowriteanythinginterestingandworthpublishing(andthereforemotivating)ifitisbasedon

(andthereforemotivating)ifitisbasedonnothingelsethananideawewereabletocomeupwithupfrontbeforeelaboratingontheproblem.

The

slip-boxisprettyagnosticaboutthecontentitisfed.Itjustprefersrelevantnotes.Itisafterreadingandcollectingrelevantdata,connectingthoughtsanddiscussinghowtheyfittogetherthatitistimetodrawconclusionsanddevelopalinearstructurefortheargument.

10.3GettheGistTheabilitytodistinguishrelevantfromlessrelevantinformationisanotherskillthatcanonlybe learnedbydoing. It is thepracticeof lookingfor thegistanddistinguishing it frommere supporting details.Aswe are forced tomake thisdistinctionwhenwereadwithapeninourhandandwritepermanentnoteafterpermanentnote, it ismore thanmerepractice: it isdeliberatepracticerepeatedmultiple times a day. Extracting the gist of a text or an idea and giving anaccount in writing is for academics what daily practice on the piano is forpianists:Themoreoftenwedoitandthemorefocusedweare,themorevirtuouswebecome.Patterns

thathelpusnavigatetextsanddiscoursesarenotonlytheories,conceptsortherespectiveterminology,butalsotypicalmistakeswe

terminology,butalsotypicalmistakesweautomaticallyscananargumentfor,generalcategoriesweapply,writingstylesthatindicateacertainschoolofthoughtormentalmodelswelearnordevelopfromdifferentinsightsandcancollectlikeagreatandever-increasingsetofthinkingtools.Withoutthesetoolsandreferencepoints,noprofessionalreadingorunderstandingwouldbepossible.Wewouldreadeverytextinthesameway:likeanovel.Butwiththelearnedabilityofspottingpatterns,wecanenterthecircleofvirtuosity:Readingbecomeseasier,wegraspthegistquicker,canreadmoreinlesstime,andcanmoreeasilyspotpatternsandimproveourunderstandingofthem.Andalongtheway,weincreaseoursetofthinkingtools,whichwillnotonlyhelpwithacademicwork,butwiththinkingandunderstandingingeneral.ThatiswhyBerkshireHathawayvicechairmanCharlieMungerdescribesasworldly-wisesomeonewhohasabroadsetofthesetoolsandknowshowtoapplythem.

But

thisdynamiccanonlystartifweourselvesdeliberatelydecidetotakeonthetaskofreadingandbeingselectiveaboutit,relyingonnothingotherthanourownjudgementofwhatisimportantandwhatisnot.Textbooksorsecondaryliteratureingeneralcannottakethisoffourhands,andstudentswhosolelyrelyonthemhavenochanceofbecoming“worldlywise.”ThisisnotfarofffromwhatphilosopherImmanuelKantdescribedinhisfamoustextabouttheEnlightenment:“Nonage[immaturity]istheinabilitytouseone’sownunderstandingwithoutanother’sguidance.Thisnonageisself-imposedifitscauseliesnotinlackofunderstandingbutinindecisionandlackofcouragetouseone’sownmindwithoutanother’sguidance.Daretoknow!(Sapereaude.)‘Havethecouragetouseyourownunderstanding,’isthereforethemottooftheEnlightenment.”(Kant1784)

I

suggesttakingthisliterally.Theabilitytouse

suggesttakingthisliterally.Theabilitytouseone’sownunderstandingisachallenge,notagiven.Luhmannstressestheimportanceofpermanentnotesinthisregard:

“The

problemwithreadingacademictextsseemstobethatweneednottheshort-termmemory,butthelong-termmemorytodevelopreferencepointsfordistinguishingtheimportantthingsfromthelessimportant,thenewinformationfromthemererepeated.Butitisofcourseimpossibletoremembereverything.Thatwouldberotelearning.Toputitdifferently:Onehastoreadextremelyselectivelyandextractwidespreadandconnectedreferences.Onehastobeabletofollowrecurrences.Buthowtolearnitifguidanceisimpossible?[…]Probablythebestmethodistotakenotes–notexcerpts,butcondensedreformulatedaccountsofatext.Rewritingwhatwasalreadywrittenalmostautomaticallytrainsonetoshifttheattentiontowardsframes,patternsandcategoriesintheobservations,ortheconditions/assumptions,

observations,ortheconditions/assumptions,whichenablecertain,butnototherdescriptions.Itmakessensetoalwaysaskthequestion:Whatisnotmeant,whatisexcludedifacertainclaimismade?Ifsomeonespeaksof‘humanrights:’Whatdistinctionismade?Adistinctiontowards‘non-humanrights?’

‘Humanduties?’Isitaculturalcomparisonoronewithsomehistoricpeoplewhodidn’thavetheconceptofhumanrights,butlivedokaytogetheranyway?

Often,thetextdoesnotgiveanansweroraclearanswertothisquestion.Butthenonehastoresorttoone’sownimagination.”(Luhmann2000,154f)Thebetteryoubecomeindoingthis,thequickeryoucanjotdownnotes,whicharestillhelpful.Luhmann’snotesareverycondensed(Schmidt2015).

Withpracticecomestheabilitytofindtherightwordstoexpresssomethinginthebestpossibleway,whichmeansinasimple,butnotsimplifiedway.Notonlywillthereadersofyourtext

way.Notonlywillthereadersofyourtextappreciateyourabilitytoexplainsomethingclearly,thoseyoutalktowillbenefitfromthisabilityaswell,asitisnotlimitedtowriting.Itspillsoverintospeakingandthinking.Itisproventhatreadersregardanauthorandanaudienceaspeakerasmoreintelligentthemoreclearandtothepointtheirexpressionsare(Oppenheimer2006).

The ability to spot patterns, to question the frames used and detect thedistinctionsmadebyothers,isthepreconditiontothinkingcriticallyandlookingbehind the assertions of a text or a talk. Being able to re-frame questions,assertions and information is even more important than having an extensiveknowledge, because without this ability, we wouldn’t be able to put ourknowledge to use. The good news is that these skills can be learned. But itrequiresdeliberatepractice(Ericsson,Krampe,andTesch-Römer1993;AndersEricsson2008).Takingsmartnotesisthedeliberatepracticeoftheseskills.

Merereading,underliningsentencesandhopingtorememberthecontentisnot.

10.4LearntoRead“Ifyoucan’t

sayitclearly,youdon’tunderstandityourself.”(JohnSearle)PhysicistandNobelPrizewinner

RichardFeynmanoncesaidthathecouldonlydeterminewhetherheunderstoodsomethingifhecouldgiveanintroductorylectureonit.Readingwithapeninyourhandisthesmall-scaleequivalentofalecture.Permanentnotes,too,aredirectedtowardsanaudienceignorantofthethoughtsbehindthetextandunawareoftheoriginalcontext,onlyequippedwithageneralknowledgeofthefield.Theonlydifferenceisthattheaudiencehereconsistsofourfutureselves,whichwillverysoonhavereachedthesamestateofignoranceassomeonewhoneverhadaccesstowhatwehavewrittenabout.Ofcourse,itwouldbehelpfultoinvolveotherpeopleatallstagesofthewritingprocess,becausethenwecanseeintheirfaceshowwellwehaveputsomethingorhowconvincingourargumentsare,butthatisratherimpractical.

Also,

weshouldn’tunderestimatetheadvantagesofwriting.Inoralpresentations,weeasilygetaway

withunfoundedclaims.Wecandistractfromargumentativegapswithconfidentgesturesordropacasual“youknowwhatImean”irrespectiveofwhetherweknowwhatwemeant.Inwriting,thesemanoeuvresarealittletooobvious.Itiseasytocheckastatementlike:“ButthatiswhatIsaid!”

Themostimportantadvantageofwritingisthatithelpsustoconfrontourselveswhenwedonotunderstandsomethingaswellaswewouldliketobelieve.

“The

principleisthatyoumustnotfoolyourself,andyouaretheeasiestpersontofool,”Feynmanstressedinaspeechtoyoungscientists(Feynman1985,342).

Reading,especiallyrereading,caneasilyfoolusintobelievingweunderstandatext.Rereadingisespeciallydangerousbecauseofthemere-exposureeffect:Themomentwebecomefamiliarwithsomething,westartbelievingwe

familiarwithsomething,westartbelievingwealsounderstandit.Ontopofthat,wealsotendtolikeitmore(Bornstein1989).

While

itisobviousthatfamiliarityisnotunderstanding,wehavenochanceofknowingwhetherweunderstandsomethingorjustbelieveweunderstandsomethinguntilwetestourselvesinsomeform.Ifwedon’ttrytoverifyourunderstandingduringourstudies,wewillhappilyenjoythefeelingofgettingsmarterandmoreknowledgeablewhileinrealitystayingasdumbaswewere.

Thiswarmfeelingdisappearsquicklywhenwetrytoexplainwhatwereadinourownwordsinwriting.Suddenly,weseetheproblem.Theattempttorephraseanargumentinourownwordsconfrontsuswithoutmercywithallthegapsinourunderstanding.Itcertainlyfeelslessgood,butthisstruggleistheonlychancewe

havetoimproveourunderstanding,tolearnandmoveforward(cf.below).This,again,isdeliberatepractice.Nowwearefacedwithaclearchoice:Wehavetochoosebetweenfeelingsmarterorbecomingsmarter.Andwhilewritingdownanideafeelslikeadetour,extratimespent,notwritingitdownistherealwasteoftime,asitrendersmostofwhatwereadasineffectual.

Understanding isnot just aprecondition to learning something.Toa certaindegree, learning is understanding. And the mechanisms are not so different,either:Wecanonly improveour learning ifwe testourselvesonourprogress.Here, too, rereading or reviewing does not confront us with the things wehaven’t learned yet, although it makes us feel like we have. Only the actualattempt to retrieve information will clearly show us if we have learnedsomethingornot.

Themere-exposureeffectwouldfoolushere,too:Seeingsomethingwehaveseenbeforecausesthesameemotionalreactionasifwehadbeenabletoretrievetheinformationfromourmemory.Rereading,therefore,makesusfeelwehavelearnedwhatweread:“Iknowthatalready!”Ourbrainsareterribleteachersinthisregard.Wefaceherethesamechoicebetween

methodsthatmakeusfeellikewelearnedsomethingandmethodsthattrulydomakeuslearnsomething.

If

younowthink:“That’sridiculous.Whowouldwanttoreadandpretendtolearnjustfortheillusionoflearningandunderstanding?”pleaselookupthestatistics:Themajorityofstudentschooseseverydaynottotestthemselvesinanyway.Instead,theyapplytheverymethodresearchhasshownagain(Karpicke,Butler,andRoediger2009)andagain(Brown2014,ch.1)tobealmostcompletelyuseless:rereadingandunderliningsentencesforlaterrereading.Andmostofthemchoosethatmethod,eveniftheyaretaughtthattheydon’twork.Consciously,weprobablywouldallchoosethesame,butwhatreallymattersarethemanysmall,implicitchoiceswehavetomakeeveryday,andtheyaremostoftenmadeunconsciously.

This iswhychoosinganexternalsystemthatforcesus todeliberatepractice

andconfrontsusasmuchaspossiblewithourlackofunderstandingornot-yet-learnedinformationissuchasmartmove.Weonlyhavetomaketheconsciouschoiceonce.

10.5LearnbyReadingLearningitselfrequiresdeliberatepractice,andImeanactuallearningthathelpsustoincreaseourunderstandingoftheworld,notjustthelearningthatmakesuspass a test.And deliberate practice is demanding; it requires effort. Trying toskip this stepwouldbe likegoing to thegymand trying toworkoutwith theleast effort possible. That just doesn’tmake sense, just like it wouldn’tmakesensetohireacoachtodotheheavylifting.Acoachisnottheretodothework,buttoshowushowtouseourtimeandeffortinthemosteffectiveway.Whatisself-evidentinsportsweareonlystartingtorealiseistrueforlearningaswell.“Theonewhodoes theworkdoes the learning,”writesDoyle(2008,63). It ishardtobelieve,butineducationthatisstillarevolutionaryidea.Learning

requireseffort,becausewehavetothinktounderstandandweneedtoactivelyretrieveoldknowledgetoconvinceourbrainstoconnectitwithnewideasascues.Tounderstandhowgroundbreakingthisideais,ithelpstorememberhowmucheffortteachersstillputintotheattempttomakelearningeasierfortheirstudentsbyprearranginginformation,sortingitintomodules,categoriesandthemes.Bydoingthat,theyachievetheoppositeofwhattheyintendtodo.

Theymakeitharderforthestudenttolearnbecausetheyseteverythingupforreviewing,takingawaytheopportunitytobuildmeaningfulconnectionsandtomakesenseofsomethingbytranslatingitintoone’sownlanguage.Itislikefastfood:Itisneithernutritiousnorveryenjoyable,itisjustconvenient.

It

wouldbesurprisingifteacherschangedthetopicinthemiddleofthelesson,movingontothenextchapterbeforeanyonehadthechancetoreallyunderstandthefirstone,onlytocomebacktotheprevioustopiclater.Itwouldalsobeunexpectedtotestthestudentsconstantly,halfofthetimeaboutthingsthatweren’tevenmentionedyet.Butasmuchasitwouldprobablyannoythestudents,whoareusedtohavingtheirmaterialpresentedinneatcategories,itwouldforcethemtomakesenseofwhattheyencounter–andthatwouldmakethemreallylearnit.

“Manipulations

suchasvariation,spacing,introducingcontextualinterference,andusingtests,ratherthanpresentations,aslearningevents,allsharethepropertythattheyappearduringthelearningprocesstoimpedelearning,buttheythenoftenenhancelearningasmeasuredbypost-trainingtestsofretentionandtransfer.Conversely,manipulationssuchaskeepingconditionsconstantandpredictableandmassingtrialsonagiventaskoftenappeartoenhancetherateoflearningduringinstructionortraining,butthentypicallyfailtosupportlong-termretentionandtransfer”(Bjork,2011,8).

When we try to answer a question before we know how to, we will laterremembertheanswerbetter,evenifourattemptfailed(ArnoldandMcDermott2013). Ifweputeffort into theattemptof retrieving information,wearemuchmorelikelytorememberitinthelongrun,evenifwefailtoretrieveitwithouthelpintheend(RoedigerandKarpicke2006).Evenwithoutanyfeedback,wewillbebetteroffifwetrytoremembersomethingourselves(Jangetal.2012).The empirical data is pretty unambiguous, but these learning strategies do notnecessarilyfeelright.Intuitively,moststudentsresorttocramming,whichisjustanothertermforreadingsomethingagainandagaininafailedattempttolearnit(Dunloskyetal.2013).Andasmuchasrereadingdoesn’thelpwithlearning,itcertainlydoesn’thelpwithunderstanding.

Admittedly,crammingdoesgetinformationinto

yourheadforashortwhile–usuallylongenoughtostayintheretopassatest.Butcrammingwon’thelpyoulearn.AsTerryDoyleandToddZakrajsekputit:“Iflearningisyourgoal,crammingisanirrationalact”(DoyleandZakrajsek2013).[29]

Instead

ofreviewingatext,youcouldjustaswellplayaroundofping-pong.Infact,chancesareitwouldhelpyoumorebecauseexercisehelpstotransferinformationintolong-termmemory(cf.Ratey2008).Plus,exercisereducesstress,whichisgood,becausestressfloodsourbrainswithhormonesthatsuppresslearningprocesses(Barametal.2008).

In

short:Purereviewingjustdoesn’tmakeanysense,neitherforunderstandingnorforlearning.Itisdebatableifweevencancallitlearning.

It

isnotsurprising,therefore,thatthebest-researchedandmostsuccessfullearningmethodiselaboration.Itisverysimilartowhatwedowhenwetakesmartnotesandcombinethemwithothers,whichistheoppositeofmerereviewing(Steinetal.1984)Elaborationmeansnothingotherthanreallythinkingaboutthemeaningofwhatweread,howitcouldinformdifferentquestionsandtopicsandhowitcouldbecombinedwithotherknowledge.Infact,“WritingforLearning”isthenameofan“elaborationmethod”(Gunel,Hand,andPrain2007).Butthereisacaveat.Eventhoughelaborationworksverifiablywellfordeepunderstanding,itmightnotbethebestchoiceifyoujustwanttolearnisolatedencyclopaedicfacts(Rivard1994).Butaslongasyouarenotstrivingforacareerasaquizshowcandidate,whywouldyouwantthat,anyway?Theslip-boxtakescareofstoringfactsandinformation.

Thinkingandunderstandingiswhatitcan’ttakeoffyourshoulders,whichiswhyitmakessensetofocusonthispartofthework.Thatitfacilitateslearningaswellisanicesideeffect.Luhmannalmostneverreadatexttwice(Hagen1997)andwasstillregardedasanimpressiveconversationpartnerwhoseemedtohaveallinformationreadytohand.[30]

Working

withtheslip-box,therefore,doesn’tmeanstoringinformationinthereinsteadofinyourhead,i.e.notlearning.Onthecontrary,itfacilitatesreal,long-termlearning.Itjustmeansnotcrammingisolatedfactsintoyourbrain–somethingyouprobablywouldn’twanttodoanyway.Theobjectionthatittakestoomuchtimetotakenotesandsortthemintotheslip-boxisthereforeshort-sighted.Writing,takingnotesandthinkingabouthowideasconnectisexactlythekindofelaborationthatisneededtolearn.Notlearningfromwhatwereadbecausewe

don’ttakethetimetoelaborateonitistherealwasteoftime.

There

isacleardivisionoflabourbetweenthebrainandtheslip-box:Theslip-boxtakescareofdetailsandreferencesandisalong-termmemoryresourcethatkeepsinformationobjectivelyunaltered.Thatallowsthebraintofocusonthegist,thedeeperunderstandingandthebiggerpicture,andfreesituptobecreative.Boththebrainandtheslip-boxcanfocusonwhattheyarebestat.

11TakeSmartNotesThe educational psychologist Kirsti Lonka compared the reading approach ofunusuallysuccessfuldoctoralcandidatesandstudentswiththosewhoweremuchlesssuccessful.Onedifferencestoodoutascritical:Theabilitytothinkbeyondthegivenframesofatext(Lonka2003,155f).Experiencedacademicreadersusuallyreadatextwithquestionsinmindand

trytorelateittootherpossibleapproaches,whileinexperiencedreaderstendtoadoptthequestionofatextandtheframesoftheargumentandtakeitasagiven.Whatgoodreaderscandoisspotthelimitationsofaparticularapproachandseewhatisnotmentionedinthetext.Even

moreproblematicthanstayingwithinthegivenframeofatextoranargumentistheinabilitytointerpretparticularinformationinthetextwithinthebiggerframeorargumentofthetext.Evendoctoralstudentssometimesjustcollectde-contextualisedquotesfromatext–probablytheworstpossibleapproachtoresearchimaginable.Thismakesitalmostimpossibletounderstandtheactualmeaningofinformation.Withoutunderstandinginformationwithinitscontext,itisalsoimpossibletogobeyondit,toreframeitandtothinkaboutwhatitcouldmeanforanotherquestion.

JeromeBruner, a psychologistLonka refers to, goes a step further and saysthatscientificthinkingisplainlyimpossibleifwecan’tmanagetothinkbeyondagivencontextandweonlyfocusontheinformationasitisgiventous(Bruner,1973,quotedafter ibid.)It isnotsurprising, therefore, thatLonkarecommendswhatLuhmannrecommends:Writingbriefaccountsonthemainideasofatextinsteadofcollectingquotes.Andshealsostressesthatitisnolessimportanttodosomethingwiththeseideas–tothinkhardabouthowtheyconnectwithotherideasfromdifferentcontextsandcouldinformquestionsthatarenotalreadythequestionsoftheauthoroftherespectivetext.Thisisexactlywhatwedowhenwetakethenextstep,inwhichwewriteand

addpermanentnotestotheslip-box.Wedon’tjustplaywithideasinourheads,butdosomethingwiththeminaveryconcreteway:Wethinkaboutwhattheymean for other lines of thoughts, then we write this explicitly on paper andconnectthemliterallywiththeothernotes.

11.1MakeaCareerOneNoteataTimeThefirsttimeonefacesthechallengeofwritingalongtext,sayadissertation,itisprettynormal tofeel intimidatedby theprospectiveof fillingafewhundredpageswithwell-conceived ideas, source-based research and correct referenceson every page. If you don’t feel some kind of respect for this task, there issomethingwrongwithyou.On theotherhand,mostpeople feel thatwritingapageaday(andhavingadayaweekoff)isquitemanageable,notrealisingthatthiswouldmeanfinishingadoctoralthesiswithinayear–somethingthatdoesnothappenveryofteninreality.The

techniqueofwritingacertainamounteverydaywasperfectedbyAnthonyTrollope,oneofthemostpopularandproductiveauthorsofthe19thcentury:Hewouldstarteverymorningat5:30a.m.withacupofcoffeeandaclockinfrontofhim.Thenhewouldwriteatleast250words

every15minutes.

This,hewritesinhisautobiography:“allowedmetoproduceovertenpagesofanordinarynovelvolumeaday,andifkeptupthroughtenmonths,wouldhavegivenasitsresultsthreenovelsofthreevolumeseachintheyear”(Trollope,2008,272).Andthat,mindyou,wasbeforebreakfast.

Academicornonfiction texts arenotwritten like thisbecause in addition tothewriting,thereisthereading,theresearch,thethinkingandthetinkeringwithideas.Andtheyalmostalwaystakesignificantlymoretimethanexpected:Ifyouaskacademicornonfictionwriters,studentsorprofessorshowmuchtimetheyexpectitwouldtakethemtofinishatext,theysystematicallyunderestimatethetimetheyneed–evenwhentheyareaskedtoestimatethetimeundertheworst-case scenario and if the real conditions turned out to be quite favourable(Kahneman 2013, 245ff). On top of that: half of all doctoral theses will stayunfinishedforever(Lonka,2003,113).

AcademicandnonfictionwritingisnotaspredictableasaTrollopenovelandtheworkitinvolvescertainlycan’tbebrokendowntosomethinglike“onepageaday.”

Itdoesmakesensetobreakdowntheworkintomanageableandmeasurablesteps,butpagesperdaydon’twork thatwell asaunitwhenyoualsohave toread, do research and think.But even though academic andnonfictionwriting

involvemoreofothertypesofworkthanfictionwriting,LuhmannmanagedtobeatTrollopeinproductivityifyoucounthisarticlesaswellashisbooks.

Luhmannwrote58booksandhundredsofarticles,whileTrollopewrote47novelsplus16otherbooks.Granted,itmighthavesomethingtodowiththefactthatLuhmanndidsomeworkafterbreakfastaswell.Butthemainreasonistheslip-box,whichcomparestoTrollope’stechniqueasinvestingwithcompoundedinterestcomparestoapiggy-bank.Trollopeislikeadiligentsaverwhoputsalittlesumtothesideeveryday,whichaddsupovertimetowardsomethingimpressive.Threedollarsputasideeachday(say,onetakeoutcoffee)addupovertheyeartoasmallvacation($1,000)andoveraworkinglifetoadepositonaflatasapermanentholidayretreat.[31]Puttingnotesintotheslip-box,however,islikeinvestingandreapingtherewardsofcompoundedinterest(whichwouldinthisexamplealmostpayforthewholeflat).[32]

And likewise, the sumof the slip-box content isworthmuchmore than thesumofthenotes.Morenotesmeanmorepossibleconnections,moreideas,more

synergy between different projects and therefore a much higher degree ofproductivity. Luhmann’s slip-box contains about 90,000 notes, which soundslikeanincrediblylargenumber.Butitonlymeansthathewrotesixnotesadayfromthedayhestartedtoworkwithhisslip-boxuntilhedied.Ifyou,byanychance,don’thavetheambitiontocompetewithhiminterms

of books per year, you could settle for three notes a day and still build up asignificantcriticalmassofideasinaveryreasonabletime.Andyoucouldsettleforlessthanonebookeverytwelvemonths.Incontrasttomanuscriptpagesperday,acertainnumberofnotesadayisareasonablegoalforacademicwriting.Andthatisbecausetakinganoteandsortingitintotheslip-boxcanbedoneinone go, while writing a manuscript page could involve weeks andmonths ofpreparation involving other tasks as well. You could therefore measure yourdailyproductivitybythenumberofnoteswritten.

11.2ThinkOutsidetheBrainTakingliteraturenotesisaformofdeliberatepracticeasitgivesusfeedbackonourunderstandingor lackof it,while theeffort toput intoourownwords thegistofsomethingisatthesametimethebestapproachtounderstandingwhatweread.Takingpermanentnotesofourownthoughtsisaformofself-testingaswell:

do they still make sense in writing? Are we even able to get the thought onpaper?Dowehavethereferences,factsandsupportingsourcesathand?Andatthe same time,writing it is thebestway toget our thoughts inorder.Writinghere,too,isnotcopying,buttranslating(fromonecontextandfromonemediumintoanother).Nowrittenpieceiseveracopyofathoughtinourmind.When

wetakepermanentnotes,itismuchmoreaformofthinkingwithinthemediumofwritingandindialoguewiththealreadyexistingnoteswithintheslip-boxthanaprotocolofpreconceivedideas.Anythoughtofacertaincomplexity

requireswriting.Coherentargumentsrequirethelanguagetobefixed,andonlyifsomethingiswrittendownisitfixedenoughtobediscussedindependentlyfromtheauthor.Thebrainaloneistooeagertomakeusfeelgood–evenifitisbypolitelyignoringinconsistenciesinourthinking.Onlyinthewrittenformcananargumentbelookedatwithacertaindistance–literally.Weneedthisdistancetothinkaboutanargument–otherwisetheargumentitselfwouldoccupytheverymentalresourcesweneedforscrutinizingit.

As

wewritenoteswithaneyetowardsexistingnotes,wetakemoreintoaccountthantheinformationthatisalreadyavailableinourinternalmemory.Thatisextremelyimportant,becausetheinternalmemoryretrievesinformationnotinarationalorlogicalway,butaccordingtopsycho-logicalrules.Thebrainalsodoesn’tstoreinformationneurallyandobjectively.Wereinventandrewriteour

objectively.Wereinventandrewriteourmemoryeverytimewetrytoretrieveinformation.Thebrainworkswithrulesofthumbandmakesthingslookasiftheyfit,eveniftheydon’t.Itrememberseventsthatneverhappened,connectsunrelatedepisodestoconvincingnarrativesandcompletesincompleteimages.Itcannothelpbutseepatternsandmeaningeverywhere,eveninthemostrandomthings(cf.Byrne,2008).Thebrain,asKahnemanwrites,is“amachineforjumpingtoconclusions”(Kahneman,2013,79).Andamachinethatisdesignedforjumpingtoconclusionsisnotthekindofmachineyouwanttorelyonwhenitcomestofactsandrationality–atleast,youwouldwanttocounterbalanceit.Luhmannstatesasclearlyaspossible:itisnotpossibletothinksystematicallywithoutwriting(Luhmann1992,53).Mostpeoplestillthinkaboutthinkingasapurelyinternalprocess,andbelievethattheonlyfunctionofthepenistoputfinishedthoughtsonpaper.RichardFeynmanoncehadavisitorinhisoffice,ahistorianwhowantedtointerviewhim.Whenhespotted

wantedtointerviewhim.WhenhespottedFeynman’snotebooks,hesaidhowdelightedhewastoseesuch“wonderfulrecordsofFeynman’sthinking.”

“No,

no!”Feynmanprotested.“Theyaren’tarecordofmythinkingprocess.Theyaremythinkingprocess.Iactuallydidtheworkonthepaper.”

“Well,”

thehistoriansaid,“theworkwasdoneinyourhead,buttherecordofitisstillhere.”

“No,

it’snotarecord,notreally.It’sworking.Youhavetoworkonpaper,andthisisthepaper.”[33]

This, obviously, was a very important distinction to Feynman, much morethanjustalinguisticdifference–andforagoodreason:Itisthedistinctionthatmakesallthedifferencewhenitcomestothinking.Philosophers,neuroscientists,educatorsandpsychologists like todisagree in

many different aspects on how the brain works. But they no longer disagreewhenitcomesto theneedforexternalscaffolding.Almostallagreenowadays

thatrealthinkingrequiressomekindofexternalization,especiallyintheformofwriting.

“Notesonpaper,oronacomputerscreen[...]donotmakecontemporaryphysicsorotherkindsofintellectualendeavoureasier,theymakeitpossible”isoneofthekeytakeawaysinacontemporaryhandbookofneuroscientists(Levy2011,290)Concludingthediscussionsinthisbook,Levywrites:“Inanycase,nomatterhowinternalprocessesareimplemented,insofarasthinkersaregenuinelyconcernedwithwhatenableshumanbeingstoperformthespectacularintellectualfeatsexhibitedinscienceandotherareasofsystematicenquiry,aswellasinthearts,theyneedtounderstandtheextenttowhichthemindisreliantuponexternalscaffolding.”(Ibid.)Inoursystem,thescaffoldingisdoneexplicitlybyconnectingthethoughtswithintheexternalmemoryoftheslip-box.Luhmannwrites:“Somehowonehastomarkdifferences,keeptrackofdistinctions,eitherexplicitlyorimplicitlyinconcepts,”becauseonlyiftheconnectionsaresomehowfixedexternallycan

theyfunctionasmodelsortheoriestogivemeaningandcontinuityforfurtherthinking(Luhmann,1992,53).

A

commonwaytoembedanideaintothecontextoftheslip-boxisbywritingoutthereasonsofitsimportanceforyourownlinesofthought.Forexample,Irecentlyreadthebook“Scarcity:WhyHavingTooLittleMeansSoMuch”(2013)byMullainathanandShafir.Theyinvestigatehowtheexperienceofscarcityhascognitiveeffectsandcauseschangesindecision-makingprocesses.Theyhelpthereaderunderstandwhypeoplewithalmostnotimeormoneysometimesdothingsthatdon’tseemtomakeanysensetooutsideobservers.Peoplefacingdeadlinessometimesswitchfranticallybetweenallkindsoftasks.Peoplewithlittlemoneysometimesspenditonseemingluxuriesliketakeawayfood.Fromtheoutside,itwouldmakemoresensetodoonethingatatime,orbuyfoodinbulkandcookforyourself.Thebookisinteresting,

cookforyourself.Thebookisinteresting,becausetheauthorsdon’tquestionthisbehaviorrhetoricallyoreveninajudgementalway,butinvestigateitasauniversalhumanphenomenon.

I

tooksomeliteraturenotescollectingreasonshowandwhyhumansactsoverydifferentlywhentheyexperiencescarcity.Thiswasstepone,donewithaneyetowardstheargumentofthebook.Ihadquestionsinmindlike:Isthisconvincing?Whatmethodsdotheyuse?Whichofthereferencesarefamiliar?

But

thefirstquestionIaskedmyselfwhenitcametowritingthefirstpermanentnotefortheslip-boxwas:WhatdoesthisallmeanformyownresearchandthequestionsIthinkaboutinmyslip-box?Thisisjustanotherwayofasking:WhydidtheaspectsIwrotedowncatchmyinterest?

If

Iwereapsychologist,thisbookwouldinterestmeforcompletelydifferentreasonsthanifIwereapoliticianoradebtadviser,orifIhadboughtitoutofpersonalinterest.Assomeonewithasociologicalperspectiveonpoliticalquestionsandaninterestintheprojectofatheoryofsociety,myfirstnotereadsplainly:“Anycomprehensiveanalysisofsocialinequalitymustincludethecognitiveeffectsofscarcity.Cf.MullainathanandShafir2013.”

Thisimmediatelytriggersfurtherquestions,whichIcandiscussonfollowingnotes,startingwith:“Why?”

Now,

Ialreadyhavetwonotesinmyslip-box,basedontheliteraturenotesItookwhilereadingthebook,butwrittenalongthelinesofmyownthinking.Onenotestatestherelevanceofthebookformyownthinkingandoneexplainsmy

ideainmoredetail.HereIcoulddrawfrommyliteraturenotesasasourceofvaluablefactsandinsight.Eventhoughtheanswerstothequestionofwhyscarcityisrelevanttothestudyofsocialinequalityareallinthebook,theyarenotjusttheretobecopied.Theyneedtobemadeexplicit.Thatmeanstothinkabouthowtheinsightintocognitiveeffectsofscarcityaffectstheanalysisofsocialinequality.

While I am writing these notes, it becomes obvious that the answer to thequestion“why”hasalready triggeredmore follow-upquestions, like: Isn’t thisalreadydiscussed in theoriesof social inequality? If yes:Whodiscussed it? Ifnot: Why not? And where do I turn to, to find answers to these questions?Correct: The first choice for further inquiry is the slip-box. Maybe there isalreadysomethingonsocialinequalitythathelpsmetoanswerthesequestions,oratleastanindicationofwheretolook.By

skimmingthroughtheslip-box,ImightdiscoverthattheseideascouldalsobehelpfulforanothertopicIhaven’tthoughtabout.Oneexampleisthequestionofpersonalresponsibility,whichisdiscussedontheexampleofobesityandtheinfluenceofhormonesasasub-topictoaphilosophicaldiscussiononfreewill.Noneofitneedstobediscussedrightaway,especiallyas

needstobediscussedrightaway,especiallyasmostoftheseideaswouldrequiremoreresearchandreading.Butthereisalsonoreasonnottowritedownthesepossibleconnectionsandcomebacktothemlater,ifmyresearchpointsmebacktothem.Themorenotestheslip-boxcontains,themoreinterestingandprolificthisstepwillbecomeandthemoreresearchquestionswillbetriggered.

Justbywritingdownthesequestionsandmakingpossibleconnectionsexplicitin writing are the concepts and theories being investigated. Their limitationsbecomeasvisibleas theirparticular angleonaproblem.Byexplicitlywritingdownhowsomethingconnectsorleadstosomethingelse,weforceourselvestoclarifyanddistinguishideasfromeachother.

11.3LearnbynotTrying“Selection

istheverykeelonwhichourmentalshipisbuilt.Andinthiscaseofmemoryitsutilityisobvious.Ifwerememberedeverything,weshouldonmostoccasionsbeasilloffasifwerememberednothing.Itwouldtakeaslongforustorecallaspaceoftimeasittooktheoriginaltimetoelapse,andweshouldnevergetaheadwithourthinking.”(WilliamJames1890,680).

withourthinking.”(WilliamJames1890,680).

Wehave seen in the first step that elaboration through taking smart literaturenotes increases the likelihood thatwewill rememberwhatweread in the longterm.Butthiswasonlythefirststep.Transferringtheseideasintothenetworkofourownthoughts,ourlatticeworkoftheories,conceptsandmentalmodelsintheslip-box brings our thinking to the next level. Now we elaborate these ideaswithindifferentcontextsandconnectthemwithotherideasinadurablefashion.The literaturenotesaregoing tobearchived,whichmeans the ideaswouldbelostinthereferencesystemifwedidn’tdosomethingwiththem.Thatiswhywetransfer them into our externalmemory, the slip-box,withwhichwe have anongoingdialogueandwheretheycanbecomepartofouractivesetofideas.Transferring ideas into the external memory also allows us to forget them.

Andeventhoughitsoundsparadoxical,forgettingactuallyfacilitateslong-termlearning.Itisimportanttounderstandwhy,becausetherearestillmanystudentswhoshyawayfromusinganexternalmemory.Theyfearthattheywouldhavetochoosebetweenrememberingthingsintheirheads(whichwouldn’trequireanexternalmemory)orintheexternalmemory(whichthenwouldbeforgottenintheinternalmemory).Thatthisisafalsechoicebecomesobviousassoonasweunderstandhowourmemorytrulyworks.To

beabletoremembereverythingandnothavingtoresorttoanyexternalmemorysoundsgreatinitially.Butyoumightthinkdifferentlyifyouarefamiliarwiththestoryofamanwhowasreallyabletorememberalmosteverything.ThereporterSolomonShereshevsky(Lurija1987)isoneofthemostfamousfiguresinthehistoryofpsychology.Whenhissupervisorsawthathedidn’ttakeanynotesduringtheirmeetings,hefirstdoubtedShereshevsky’sdedicationtothe

firstdoubtedShereshevsky’sdedicationtothejob,butshortlyafter,itwasratherhisownsanitythathedoubted.

When

heconfrontedShereshevskywithwhatseemedtohimlikelazybehaviour,Shereshevskystartedtorecounteverysinglewordthatwasspokenduringthemeetingandcontinuedtorecountverbatimallthemeetingstheyhadeverhad.

Hiscolleagueswereastonished,butthepersonmostastonishedwasShereshevskyhimself.Itwasthefirsttimeherealisedthateveryoneelseseemedtohaveforgottenalmosteverything.Eventhosewhohadtakennotescouldn’trememberevenafractionofwhatseemednormalforhim.

AleksandrRomanovichLuria, thepsychologistwhosubsequently testedhimin all conceivable ways, couldn’t find any of the usual restrictions peoplenormally have in theirmemories.But it also became clear that this advantagecameatahugecost:Itwasn’t just thatShereshevskywasabletoremembersomuch,hehadtroubleforgettinganything.Theimportantthingsgotlostunderapileof irrelevantdetails that involuntarily came tohismind.Althoughhewas

verygoodatrememberingfacts,Shereshevskywasalmost incapableofgettingthegistofsomething,theconceptsbehindtheparticularsanddistinguishingtherelevant facts fromminor details.Hehadgreat trouble relating to literatureorpoetry.Hecouldrepeatanovelwordbyword,butthegreatermeaningwouldbelost on him. While Romeo and Juliet is for most of us a story of love andtragedy,forhimitwouldbethestoryof“Twohouseholds,bothalikeindignity,In fair Verona where we lay our scene, From ancient grudge break to newmutiny,Where civil bloodmakes civil hands unclean...” It should be obviousthat for academic thinking and writing, the gift of being able to remembereverythingisaseriousliability.The

scienceoflearningisstillundecidedonthequestionofwhetherweallshareShereshevsky’sabilitytomemorisevirtuallyeverythingweeverhaveencountered,butareonlybetteratsuppressingit.Afterall,sometimeswesuddenlyrememberscenesfromthepastingreatdetail,triggeredbyacuelikethescentofamadeleineinProust’srecherche.Thesemomentsofinvoluntarymemorymightbelikesmallcracksinthementalbarrierthroughwhichwecancatchaglimpseofallthememorieswehavecollectedoverourlifetimes,butmightneveragainhaveaccessto.

Forgetting, then, would not be the loss of a memory, but the erection of amental barrier between the conscious mind and our long-term memory.

Psychologists call thismechanism active inhibition (cf.MacLeod, 2007). It iseasytounderstandwhatitisgoodfor:Withoutaverythoroughfilter,ourbrainswould constantly be flooded by memories, making it impossible to focus onanythinginoursurroundings.

ThatiswhatShereshevskystruggledwithinhislife:Thereweremomentwherehetriedtobuyanicecream,butsomerandomwordofthevendortriggeredsuchanenormousamountofassociationsandmemoriesthathewouldhavetoleavetheshop,sooverwhelmingwasthisexperience.

We

areverydependentonasubconsciousmechanismthatreliablyinhibitsalmosteverymemoryeverymomentexceptthevery,veryfewthataretrulyhelpfulinasituation.Unfortunately,wecannotjustconsciouslypluckfromourmemorywhatweneedlikefromafolderinanarchive.Thatwouldrequirethememorywecanchoosefromtobealreadyinourconsciousmind,whichwouldrenderthemechanismofrememberingredundant.

Rememberingistheverymechanismtobringamemorybackintoourconsciousmind.Therefore,Shereshevskymightnothavehadanabilitymostofusdonotposses,butlackedanabilityweallposses:Theabilitytoforgetsystematically–toinhibitmostirrelevantinformationfrombeingremembered.

Shereshevskywasstillcapableofinhibitinginformation,butevenbeingmuchlessfine-tunedcanhaveseriousconsequences.Beingtoooftenoverwhelmedbymemories,associationsandsynestheticexperiencesmadeitdifficult forhimtostayinajobandenjoymanyofthethingswehighlyvalue.Aboveall,itmadeitalmostimpossibleforhimtothinkinabstractterms.Robert andElizabethLigonBjork from theUniversityofCalifornia suggest

distinguishingbetween twodifferentmeasurementswhen itcomes tomemory:Storagestrengthandretrievalstrength(Bjork2011).Theyspeculatethatstoragestrength,theabilitytostorememories,onlybecomesgreateroverone’slifetime.Weaddmoreandmoreinformationtoourlong-termmemory.Justbylookingatthephysical capacityofourbrains,we can see thatwecould indeedprobablystorealifetimeandabitofdetailedexperiencesinit(Carey2014,42).It

isdifficult,ifnotimpossible,toverifythisclaim,butitdoesmakesensetoshifttheattentionfromstoragestrengthtoretrievalstrength.Learningwouldbenotsomuchaboutsavinginformation,likeonaharddisk,butaboutbuildingconnectionsandbridgesbetweenpiecesofinformationtocircumventtheinhibition

informationtocircumventtheinhibitionmechanismintherightmoment.Itisaboutmakingsurethattheright“cues”triggertherightmemory,abouthowwecanthinkstrategicallytorememberthemostusefulinformationwhenweneedit.

This

isfarfromself-evident.Ifwelookatthecurrentstateofeducation,especiallythelearningstrategiesmoststudentsemploy,weseethatthevastmajorityofalllearningstillaimstoimprove“storagestrength,”eventhoughitcannotbeimproved.Itisstillmostlyaboutrememberingisolatedfactsandnotsomuchaboutbuildingconnections.Thisiswhatlearningpsychologistshaverightfullygiventhederogativeterm“cramming:”theattempttoreinforceandsolidifyinformationinthebrainbyrepetition.Itisbasicallyhammeringfactsintothebrainasiftheywerecarvingsonanancientstonetablet.Usingfancywordsanddescribingitasa“strengtheningoftheconnectionsbetweenneurons”doesnotchangethefactthatthis

neurons”doesnotchangethefactthatthisattemptisfutile.

If

weinsteadfocuson“retrievalstrength,”weinstantlystarttothinkstrategicallyaboutwhatkindofcuesshouldtriggertheretrievalofamemory.Therearenonaturalcues:Everypieceofinformationcanbecomethetriggerforanotherpieceofinformation.Thesecanbeassociationslikethescentofasweet,asthemadeleinetriggeredchildhoodmemoriesforProust,butthiskindofflashbackiscalled“involuntarymemory”forareason:wecan’tretrieveitonpurpose.Thentherearetheaccidentalcuesthatbecomeattachedtoinformationwhenwelearnsomethinginaparticularenvironment.Itis,forexample,easiertoremembersomethingwehavelearnedinschoolifwearetestedforitinthesameroomwiththesamenoiseinthebackground(Bjork2011,14).Likewise,sometimesitisdifficulttoremembersomethingfromschoolwhenweare

remembersomethingfromschoolwhenwearenotsittingintheclassroomwherewelearnedit.

Obviously,wedon’twanttohavetorelyoncuesintheenvironment.Thisisnotonlyimpractical,buthighlymisleading:Ifwetestourselvesrepeatedlyinthesame context and environment inwhichwe have learned something, itwouldmakeusoverconfident in termsof learning success, becausewewouldnot beabletodiscounttheenvironmentalcuesthatprobablywon’texistinthecontextinwhichwewanttorememberwhatwelearned.What

doeshelpfortrue,usefullearningistoconnectapieceofinformationtoasmanymeaningfulcontextsaspossible,whichiswhatwedowhenweconnectournotesintheslip-boxwithothernotes.Makingtheseconnectionsdeliberatelymeansbuildingupaself-supportingnetworkofinterconnectedideasandfactsthatworkreciprocallyascuesforeachother.

Mistaking learning with cramming is still very much ingrained in oureducationalculture.

WhenHermannEbbinghaus,thegodfatheroflearningtheory,triedtounderstandthebasicsoflearningandmeasuringlearningprogress,hedeliberatelyusedmeaninglessbitsof

informationlikerandomlettercombinationsandmadesuretheyborenoaccidentalmeaning.Fromhisunderstanding,meaningwoulddistractfromtheactuallearningprocess.Buthedidn’trealisethathewasstrippingthelearningprocessfromtheverythingthatislearning,whichismakingmeaningfulconnections.

From

thestandpointofevolution,itmakessensethatourbrainshaveabuilt-inpreferencetolearnmeaningfulinformationandadisregardformeaninglesslettercombinations.ButEbbinghauslaidthefoundationforalong-lastingandinfluentialtraditionoflearningtheoriesthatseparatesunderstandingfromlearning.

Our

fascinationwithmemoryartistscanalsobeexplainedbythistradition.Thereisnothinginterestingaboutthecapabilityofanormalpersontorememberthousandsofwords,countlessfacts,numeroussubjects,thenamesof

countlessfacts,numeroussubjects,thenamesofcelebrities,friends,familymembersandcolleaguesoveralongperiodoftime.

Butwhensomeoneisabletorememberaseriesoftwentyorthirtyseeminglymeaninglessbitsofinformationalmostinstantly,itfascinatesusandremindsusofourstrugglesatschool.

The

trick,ofcourse,isnottolearnlikeEbbinghausthoughtwewouldlearn:bybangingtheinformationintoourheads.Memoryartistsinsteadattachmeaningtoinformationandconnectittoalreadyknownnetworksofconnectionsinameaningfulway.Onepieceofinformationcanbecomethecueforanotherandstringsornetworksofcuescanbebuilt.Thosekindsofmemorytechniquesaregreatincaseyouneedtolearninformationthatbearsnomeaninginitselforhasnologicalormeaningfulconnectiontootherthingsyoualreadyknow.Butwhywouldyouwanttolearnsomethinglikethat–exceptwhenyouhappentobeamemory

that–exceptwhenyouhappentobeamemoryartist?

Memorytechniquesarethefixforaratherartificialsituation.Whenitcomestoacademicwriting,wedon'thavetheneedforthistrick,aswecanchoosetobuild and think exclusively within meaningful contexts. Abstract informationlike bibliographic references can be stored externally – there is no benefit inknowingthembyheart.Everythingelsebetterbearmeaning.The

challengeofwritingaswellaslearningisthereforenotsomuchtolearn,buttounderstand,aswewillalreadyhavelearnedwhatweunderstand.Theproblemisthatthemeaningofsomethingisnotalwaysobviousandneedstobeexplored.Thatiswhyweneedtoelaborateonit.Butelaborationisnothingmorethanconnectinginformationtootherinformationinameaningfulway.Thefirststepofelaborationistothinkenoughaboutapieceofinformationsoweareabletowriteaboutit.Thesecondstepistothinkaboutwhatitmeansforothercontextsaswell.

This

isnotsodifferentfromwhenelaborationisrecommendedasa“learningmethod.”Asamethod,ithasbeenproventobemoresuccessfulthananyotherapproach(McDanielandDonnelly1996).Thisisnotanewinsight,either.Afterlookingatvariousstudiesfromthe1960suntiltheearly1980s,BarryS.Steinetal.summarises:“Theresultsofseveralrecentstudiessupportthehypothesisthatretentionisfacilitatedbyacquisitionconditionsthatpromptpeopletoelaborateinformationinawaythatincreasesthedistinctivenessoftheirmemoryrepresentations.”(Steinetal.1984,522)Steinetal.illustratehowcommonsensicalthisisontheexampleofabiologynovicewholearnsthedifferencebetweenveinsandarteries:“[he]mayfinditdifficultatfirsttounderstandandrememberthatarterieshavethickwalls,areelastic,anddonothavevalves,whereasveinsarelesselastic,havethinnerwalls,andhavevalves”(ibid.).Butbyelaboratingalittlebitonthisdifferenceandaskingtherightquestions,like“why?”thestudentscanconnectthis

knowledgewithpriorknowledge,liketheirunderstandingofpressureandthefunctionoftheheart.Justbymakingtheconnectiontothecommonknowledgethattheheartpressesthebloodintothearteries,theyimmediatelyknowthatthesewallsneedtosustainmorepressure,whichmeanstheyneedtobethickerthanveins,inwhichthebloodflowsbacktotheheartwithlesspressure.And,ofcourse,thismakesvalvesnecessarytokeepthebloodfromflowingback.Onceunderstood,theattributesanddifferencesarealmostimpossibletodisentanglefromtheknowledgeofveinsandarteries.

Learned right, which means understanding, which means connecting in ameaningfulwaytopreviousknowledge,informationalmostcannotbeforgottenanymoreandwillbereliablyretrievediftriggeredbytherightcues.Moreover,this new learned knowledge can provide more possible connections for newinformation. If you focus your time and energy on understanding, you cannothelpbutlearn.Butifyoufocusyourtimeandenergyonlearningwithouttryingtounderstand,youwillnotonlynotunderstand,butalsoprobablynotlearn.Andtheeffectsarecumulative.Thereisareasonwhythebestscientistsarealsooftenverygoodteachers.For

someonelikeRichardFeynman,everythingwasaboutunderstanding,regardlessofwhether hewas doing researchor teaching.His famousFeynmandiagramsare primarily tools to make understanding easier and his lectures are famousbecause they help students to really understand physics. It is not surprising,therefore, that he was passionate about challenging traditional education

methods. He couldn’t stand textbooks full of pseudo-explanations (Feynman1985) and teachers who tried to make learning easier for students by usingartificial“real-life”examplesinsteadofusingtheiractualpriorunderstandingasaconnectionpoint(Feynman1963).Writing notes and sorting them into the slip-box is nothing other than an

attempttounderstandthewidermeaningofsomething.Theslip-boxforcesustoasknumerouselaboratingquestions:Whatdoesitmean?Howdoesitconnectto…?

Whatisthedifferencebetween…?Whatisitsimilarto?Thattheslip-boxisnotsortedbytopicsisthepreconditionforactivelybuildingconnectionsbetweennotes.Connectionscanbemadebetweenheterogeneousnotes–aslongastheconnectionmakessense.Thisisthebestantidotetotheimpedingwaymostinformationisgiventousinourlearninginstitutions.Mostoften,itcomesinmodularform,sortedbytopic,separatedbydisciplinesandgenerallyisolatedfromotherinformation.Theslip-boxisforcingustodotheexactopposite:Toelaborate,tounderstand,toconnectandthereforetolearnseriously.

Thefactthattoomuchordercanimpedelearninghasbecomemoreandmoreknown (Carey 2014). Conversely, we know that the deliberate creation ofvariationsandcontrastscanfacilitate learning.NateKornellandBjorkshowed

this when they experimentally taught students different art styles. First, theyused the traditionalapproachof showingstudentsoneart styleat a timeusingdifferentpaintings.Then,theydeliberatelymixedupthestylesandshuffledthepaintings around. The students who were presented paintings from differentstyles in no particular order learned to distinguish styles faster andwere alsomuchmoresuccessfulatmatchingpaintingstostylesandartiststheyhadneverseen before. This shows that elaborating on the differences and similarities ofnotesinsteadofsortingthembytopicnotonlyfacilitateslearning,butfacilitatestheabilitytocategoriseandcreatesensibleclassifications!

11.4AddingPermanentNotestotheSlip-BoxThenextstepafterwritingthepermanentnotesistoaddthemtotheslip-box.1. Addanotetotheslip-boxeitherbehindthenoteyoudirectlyrefertoor,ifyoudonotfollowuponaspecificnote, justbehindthelastnoteintheslip-box. Number it consecutively. The Zettelkasten numbers the notesautomatically. “New note” will just add a note with a new number. If youclick“Newnotesequence,”thenewnotewillberegisteredatthesametimeasthe note that follows the note currently active on the screen. But you canalways add notes “behind” other notes anytime later. Each note can followmultipleothernotesandthereforebepartofdifferentnotesequences.

2.Addlinkstoothernotesorlinksonothernotestoyournewnote.3. Make sure it can be found from the index; add an entry in the index ifnecessaryorrefertoitfromanotethatisconnectedtotheindex.

4.BuildaLatticeworkofMentalModels

12DevelopIdeas“Every

noteisjustanelementinthenetworkofreferencesandbackreferencesinthesystem,fromwhichitgainsitsquality.”(Luhmann1992)Ideally,newnotesarewrittenwithexplicitreferencetoalreadyexistingnotes.Obviously,thisisnotalwayspossible,especiallyinthebeginningwhentheslip-boxisstillinitsinfancy,butitwillverysoonbecomethefirstoptionmostofthetime.Thenyoucanputthenewnote“behind”anexisting,relatednotestraightaway.Luhmann,workingwithpenandpaper,wouldputanotebehindanexistingoneandnumberitaccordingly.Iftheexistingnoteborethenumber21,henumberedthenewnote22.Ifnotenumber22alreadyexisted,hewouldstilladditbehind21,butnumberit21a.

Byalternatingnumbersandletters,hewasabletobranchoutintoaninfinitenumberofsequencesandsubsequencesinternallywithno

sequencesandsubsequencesinternallywithnohierarchicalorder.

An

initialsubsequencethatattractsmoreandmorefollow-upnotescaneasilybecomeamaintopicwithmanysubtopicsovertime(Schmidt2013,172).ThedigitalZettelkastenmakesthingseasier:numbersareassignedautomatically,notesequencescanbeconstructedanytimelaterandonenotecanbecomethefollow-upnotetodifferentnotesatthesametime.

These

notesequencesarethebackboneoftextdevelopment.Theycombinetheadvantagesofanabstractwithatopic-relatedorder.Apuretopic-relatedorderwouldhavetobeorganisedtopdownandrequiresahierarchicalorderupfront.Apureabstractorderwouldnotallowideaclustersandtopicstobebuiltbottomup.Theindividualnoteswouldstaymostlyindependentandisolatedwithonlyone-dimensionalreferences–prettymuchlikeaone-person

references–prettymuchlikeaone-personWikipediastrippedoftheknowledgeandfact-checkingabilitiesofthecommunity.

But

alooseorderofsequencesallowsfreedomtochangecoursewhennecessaryandprovidesenoughstructuretobuildupcomplexity.Notesareonlyasvaluableasthenoteandreferencenetworkstheyareembeddedin.

Becausetheslip-boxisnotintendedtobeanencyclopaedia,butatooltothinkwith, we don’t need to worry about completeness. We don’t need to writeanythingdownjusttobridgeagapinanotesequence.Weonlywriteifithelpsuswithourownthinking.Thegapswedoneedtoconcernourselveswitharethegapsintheargumentsinthefinalmanuscript–butthesegapswillonlybecomeobviousinthenextstep,whenwetaketherelevantnotesforanargumentoutofthe network of the slip-box and sort them into the linear order for the roughdraft.

As

theslip-boxisnotabookwithjustonetopic,wedon’tneedtohaveanoverviewofit.Onthecontrary,wearemuchbetteroffacceptingasearlyaspossiblethatanoverviewoftheslip-box

isasimpossibleashavinganoverviewofourownthinkingwhilewearethinking.Asanextensionofourownmemory,theslip-boxisthemediumwethinkin,notsomethingwethinkabout.Thenotesequencesaretheclusterswhereorderemergesfromcomplexity.Weextractinformationfromdifferentlinearsourcesandmixitallupandshakeituntilnewpatternsemerge.Then,weformthesepatternsintonewlineartexts.

12.1DevelopTopicsAfteraddinganotetotheslip-box,weneedtomakesureitcanbefoundagain.Thisiswhattheindexisfor.Luhmannwroteanindexwithatypewriteronindexcards.IntheZettelkasten,keywordscaneasilybeaddedtoanoteliketagsandwill thenshowup in the index.Theyshouldbechosencarefullyandsparsely.Luhmannwould add the number of one or two (rarelymore) notes next to akeyword in the index (Schmidt 2013, 171). The reason hewas so economicalwithnotesperkeywordandwhywetooshouldbeveryselectiveliesinthewaytheslip-boxisused.Becauseitshouldnotbeusedasanarchive,wherewejusttakeoutwhatweputin,butasasystemtothinkwith,thereferencesbetweenthenotes aremuchmore important than the references from the index to a singlenote. Focusing exclusively on the indexwould basicallymean thatwe alwaysknow upfront what we are looking for – we would have to have a fullydeveloped plan in our heads. But liberating our brains from the task oforganizingthenotesisthemainreasonweusetheslip-boxinthefirstplace.The

file-boxcandomuchmorethanjusthandoutwhatwerequest.Itcansurpriseandremindusoflong-forgottenideasandtriggernewones.Thiscrucialelementofsurprisecomesintoplayontheleveloftheinterconnectednotes,notwhenwearelookingforparticularentriesintheindex.Mostnoteswillbefoundthroughothernotes.Theorganisationofthenotesisinthenetworkofreferencesintheslip-box,soallweneedfromtheindexareentrypoints.Afewwiselychosennotesaresufficientforeachentrypoint.Thequickerwegetfromtheindextotheconcretenotes,thequickerwemoveourattentionfrommentallypreconceivedideastowardsthefact-richlevelofinterconnectedcontent,wherewecanconductafact-baseddialoguewiththeslip-box.

Even

thoughwewillnotgetanoverviewofthewholeslip-box(aswecertainlywillnevergetanoverviewofourwholeinternalmemory),wecangetanoverviewofaspecifictopic.Butbecause

getanoverviewofaspecifictopic.Butbecausethestructureoftopicsandsubtopicsisnotagiven,buttheoutcomeofourthinking,theytooaresubjecttoongoingconsiderationsandalteration.Theconsiderationofhowtostructureatopic,therefore,belongsonnotesaswell–andnotonameta-hierarchicallevel.Wecanprovideourselveswitha(temporarilyvalid)overviewoveratopicorsubtopicjustbymakinganothernote.Ifwethenlinkfromtheindextosuchanote,wehaveagoodentrypoint.Iftheoverviewonthisnoteceasestocorrectlyrepresentthestateofaclusterortopic,orwedecideitshouldbestructureddifferently,wecanwriteanewnotewithabetterstructureandupdatetherespectivelinkfromtheindex.Thisisimportant:Everyconsiderationonthestructureofatopicisjustanotherconsiderationonanote–boundtochangeanddependentonthedevelopmentofourunderstanding.

The

waypeoplechoosetheirkeywordsshowsclearly

iftheythinklikeanarchivistorawriter.Dotheywonderwheretostoreanoteorhowtoretrieveit?Thearchivistasks:Whichkeywordisthemostfitting?Awriterasks:InwhichcircumstanceswillIwanttostumbleuponthisnote,evenifIforgetaboutit?Itisacrucialdifference.

Let’s

assumeIwanttoaddashortnotethatsays:“Tversky/Kahneman(1973)showedinanexperimentthatpeoplearemorelikelytooverestimatethelikelihoodofaneventtohappeniftheyareabletoconceiveitwellandindetailthanifitwereabstract.”Ifyouthinkintermsofarchiving,youmightfeelkeywordslike“misjudgements,”“experimentalpsychology”or“experiment”wouldbefitting.Inthiscase,youwouldthinkingeneralcategorieslike“subject,”

“discipline”or“method.”Itisratherunlikelythatyouwilleverthinkofwritinganarticlebasedonallnotesto“experimentalpsychology”

basedonallnotesto“experimentalpsychology”orseetheneedforretrievingallnotesfiledunder“experiment.”Maybeyouwillthinkaboutabookthatcollects“misjudgements,”butitisunlikelythatyoucouldturnanyofthesepilesofnotesintoastructuredargument.

As

writers,weapproachthequestionofkeywordsdifferently.Welookatourslip-boxforalreadyexistinglinesofthoughtandthinkaboutthequestionsandproblemsalreadyonourmindstowhichanewnotemightcontribute.

If

youareaneconomistworkingondecision-making,youmightthinkofthepreferencesmanagementoftenshowsforprojectswithaneasy-to-visualiseoutcomeovermoreprofitableones.Afittingkeywordwouldthenbe“capitalallocationproblems.”Byassigningthekeywordalone,thenoteisalreadyputintoaspecificcontext,whichgivesitaparticularmeaningandtriggerscontext-specificquestionslike:Ifthisis

triggerscontext-specificquestionslike:Ifthisisasystematiceffect,canitbemeasured?Hassomeonealreadymeasuredit?Doestheeffectshowupinavailabledata,likethemarketvalueofpubliclylistedcompanies,andifso,isitthatcompanieswithproductsthatareeasytovisualisehaverichervaluationsthanthosewhoofferservicesorproductsthatareratherdifficulttograsp?Andifnot:Isitbecausetheexperimentalfindingscannotbeextrapolatedorisitbecausetheknowledgeisalreadypubliclyavailableandthereforepricedin?Ifnot,isitanotherargumentagainsttheEfficientMarkethypothesisorjustagoodwaytostacktheoddsinthestockmarketinyourfavour?

By

assigningthiskeyword,youmightstumbleuponalreadyexistingnotesoncapitalallocation,whicheitherhelptoanswerthesequestionsortriggernewones.Butmaybeyouareapoliticalscientistandreadthisnoteasananswertothequestionofwhycertaintopicsarediscussedduringanelectionandothersnot,orwhyit

duringanelectionandothersnot,orwhyitcouldbepoliticallymoresensibletopromoteeasy-to-visualisesolutionsoversolutionsthatreallywork.Fittingkeywordsheremightbe“politicalstrategies,”“elections”or“dysfunctionalities,political.”

Keywordsshouldalwaysbeassignedwithaneyetowardsthetopicsyouareworkingonorinterestedin,neverbylookingatthenoteinisolation.Thisisalsowhythisprocesscannotbeautomatedordelegatedtoamachineorprogram–itrequires thinking. The Zettelkasten does make suggestions based on existingkeywordsandscans forkeywords in the textyouwrote.But itmakessense tosee these suggestionsmore as a warning sign than an invitation to use them:thesearethemostobviousideasandprobablynotthebestones.Goodkeywordsareusuallynotalreadymentionedaswordsinthenote.AssumeIhavethenote“Asuddenincreaseofad-hoctheoriesisforKuhnasignthatanormal-sciencephase might be in crisis (Kuhn 1967, 96).” A fitting keyword might be“paradigmchange,”butthatphraseisnotinthenoteandthereforewouldnotbesuggestedbytheprogram.Assigningkeywordsismuchmorethanjustabureaucraticact.Itisacrucial

partofthethinkingprocess,whichoftenleadstoadeeperelaborationofthenoteitselfandtheconnectiontoothernotes.

12.2MakeSmartConnectionsInthedigitalversionoftheZettelkasten,allweneedtodoistoclickon“Links”andaddthenumberofthenotewewanttoreferto.Itthenautomaticallyaddsabacklink to the note we refer from. Even though the Zettelkasten makessuggestionshere, too, for examplebasedon joint literature references,makinggood cross-references is amatter of serious thinking and a crucial part of the

developmentofthoughts.Luhmann used four basic types of cross-references in his file-box (Schmidt

2013, 173f; Schmidt 2015, 165f). Only the first and last are relevant for thedigitalZettelkasten,theothertwoaremerelycompensatingforrestrictionsoftheanaloguepenandpaperversion.Youdon’tneedtoconcernyourselfwiththemifyouusethedigitalprogram.1.Thefirsttypeoflinksarethoseonnotesthataregivingyoutheoverviewofatopic.Thesearenotesdirectlyreferredtofromtheindexandusuallyusedasanentrypointintoatopicthathasalreadydevelopedtosuchadegreethatanoverviewisneededorat leastbecomeshelpful.Onanote like this,youcancollectlinkstootherrelevantnotestothistopicorquestion,preferablywithashort indicationofwhat to findon thesenotes (oneor twowordsora shortsentenceissufficient).Thiskindofnotehelpstostructurethoughtsandcanbeseenasanin-betweensteptowards thedevelopmentofamanuscript.Aboveall, theyhelporientateoneselfwithintheslip-box.Youwillknowwhenyouneed towriteone.Luhmanncollectedup to25 links toothernoteson thesekindofentrynotes.Theydon’thave tobewritten inonegoas linkscanbeaddedover time,whichagainshowshowtopicscangroworganically.Whatwe think is relevant for a topic and what is not depends on our currentunderstandingandshouldbetakenquiteseriously:Itdefinesanideaasmuchas the facts it isbasedon.Whatweregardasbeing relevant fora topicandhowwestructureitwillchangeovertime.Thischangemightleadtoanothernotewithadifferent,moreadequatetopicstructure,whichthencanbeseenasacommentonthepreviousnote.Thankfully,itwon’tmakealltheothernotesredundant.Asmentionedbefore:Allwehavetodoistochangetheentryintheindextothisnewnoteand/orindicateontheoldnotethatwenowconsideranewstructuremorefitting.

2. Asimilar though lesscrucialkindof linkcollection ison thosenotes thatgive an overview of a local, physical cluster of the slip-box. This is onlynecessaryifyouworkwithpenandpaperlikeLuhmann.Whilethefirsttypeofnotegivesanoverviewofatopic,regardlessofwherethenotesarelocatedwithintheslip-box,thistypeofnoteisapragmaticwayofkeepingtrackofallthedifferent topicsdiscussedon thenotes thatarephysicallyclose together.AsLuhmannputnotesbetweennotes to internallybranchout subtopicsandsub-subtopics,originallinesofthoughtswereofteninterruptedbyhundredsofdifferentnotes.This second typeofnotekeeps trackof theoriginal linesof

thought.Obviously,we don’t need toworry about this ifweworkwith thedigitalversion.

3. Equallylessrelevantforthedigitalversionarethoselinksthatindicatethenotetowhichthecurrentnoteisafollow-upandthoselinksthatindicatethenotethatfollowsonthecurrentnote.Again,thisisonlyrelevanttoseewhichnotesfolloweachother,eveniftheydon’tphysicallystandbehindeachotheranymore.ThedigitalZettelkastenautomaticallyaddsthesekindsofbacklinksandpresentsyoutherelevantnotesinanotesequence.

4. Themostcommonformofreferenceisplainnote-to-notelinks.Theyhavenofunctionotherthanindicatingarelevantconnectionbetweentwoindividualnotes. By linking two related notes regardless ofwhere they arewithin theslip-boxorwithindifferent contexts, surprisingnew linesof thought canbeestablished. These note-to-note links are like the “weak links” (Granovetter1973) of social relationshipswe havewith acquaintances: even though theyareusuallynottheonesweturntofirst,theyoftencanoffernewanddifferentperspectives.

These linkscanhelpus tofindsurprisingconnectionsandsimilaritiesbetweenseemingly unrelated topics. Patternsmight not become visible right away, butthey might emerge after multiple note-to-note links between two topics havebeenestablished.ItisnocoincidencethatoneofthemainfeaturesofLuhmann’stheoryofsocialsystemsisitsdiscoveryofstructuralpatternsthatcouldbefoundinverydifferentpartsofsociety.Forexample,hewasabletoshowhowvastlydifferentthingslikemoney,power,love,truthandjusticecanbeseenassocialinventionsthatsolvestructurallysimilarproblems(theyallcanbeseenasmediathat make the acceptance of certain communication offers more likely, cf.Luhmann1997,chapter9–12).Observationslikethesecouldneverbedonenorexplained by someonewho isworkingwith a system that keeps things neatlyseparatedbypreconceivedthemesandtopics.It

isimportanttoalwayskeepinmindthatmakingtheselinksisnotachore,akindoffile-boxmaintenance.Thesearchformeaningfulconnectionsisacrucialpartofthethinking

connectionsisacrucialpartofthethinkingprocesstowardsthefinishedmanuscript.Buthere,itisdealtwithinaveryconcreteway.Insteadoffigurativelysearchingourinternalmemory,weliterallygothroughthefile-boxandlookforconnections.

Bydealingwithactualnotes,wearealsolesspronetoimagineconnectionswheretherearen’tany,aswecanseeinblackandwhiteifsomethingmakessenseornot.

Aswearemakingtheseconnections,webuildupaninternalstructureoftheslip-box, which is shaped by our thinking. While this structure builds upexternallyandindependentlyofourlimitedmemory,itwill,inreturn,shapeourthinkingaswellandhelpustothinkinamorestructuredway.Ourideaswillberootedinanetworkoffacts,thought-throughideasandverifiablereferences.

Theslip-boxislikeawell-informedbutdown-to-earthcommunicationpartnerwhokeepsusgrounded.Ifwetrytofeeditsomeloftyideas,itwillforceustocheckfirst:Whatisthereference?Howdoesthatconnecttothefactsandtheideasyoualreadyhave?

12.3Compare,CorrectandDifferentiateIf you use the slip-box for a while, you will inevitably make a soberingdiscovery:Thegreatnewideayouareabouttoaddtotheslip-boxturnsouttobealready in there. Even worse, chances are this idea wasn’t even yours, butsomeone else’s.Having the same thought twice ormistaking another person’sideawithourownisfarfromunusual.Unfortunately,mostpeoplenevernoticethishumblingfactbecausetheyhavenosystemthatconfrontsthemwithalreadythoughtthoughts.Ifweforgetaboutanideaandhaveitagain,ourbrainsgetasexcitedasifwearehavingitthefirsttime.Therefore,workingwiththeslip-boxis disillusioning, but at the same time it increases the chance thatwe actuallymoveforwardinourthinkingtowardsunchartedterritory,insteadofjustfeelinglikewearemovingforward.Sometimes, the confrontation with old notes helps to detect differences we

wouldn’t have noticed otherwise.What seems to be the same idea sometimesturnsout tobe slightly,but crucially,different.We thencanexplicitlydiscussthisdifferenceonanothernote.Thisisespeciallyhelpfulwhentwoauthorsusethe same concept in slightly differentways.The clarification of differences intheuseofwordsandconcepts isamajorpartofeveryseriousacademicworkanyway–butitissomucheasierifyouhaveanit-pickingpartnerliketheslip-box.

Ifwehadwrittenjustexcerptsornotesthatwehadkeptinseparateplaces,thesedifferenceswouldonlybecomeobviousifwehadalltherelevantnotesonourmindsatthesametime.Itismucheasiertodetectthesesmallbutcrucialdifferenceswhenweliterallyhaveournotesinfrontofoureyes,comparingthemduringourattemptstoconnectthem.Thebrainisverygoodatmakingassociationsandspottingpatternsand

similaritiesbetweenseeminglydifferentthingsandalsoverygoodinspottingdifferencesbetweenseeminglysimilarthings,butitneedstohavethempresentedobjectivelyandexternally.Itismucheasiertoseedifferencesandsimilaritiesthantodetectthembymerethinking.

Comparing notes also helps us to detect contradictions, paradoxes oroppositions–importantfacilitatorsforinsight.Whenwerealisethatweusedtoaccepttwocontradictingideasasequallytrue,weknowthatwehaveaproblem–andproblemsaregoodbecausewenowhavesomethingtosolve.Aparadoxcanbe a sign thatwehaven’t thought thoroughly enough about a problemor,conversely, that we exhausted the possibilities of a certain paradigm. Finally,oppositions help to shape ideas by providing contrast. Albert Rothenbergsuggests that the construction of oppositions is the most reliable way ofgeneratingnewideas(Rothenberg1971;1996;2015).The

constantcomparingofnotesalsoservesasanongoingexaminationofoldnotesinanewlight.Iamsurprisedhowoftentheadditionofonenoteleadstoacorrection,acomplementationoranimprovementofoldideas.Sometimes,wediscoverthatthesourcegiveninatextisnottheactualsource.Sometimes,wediscoverthattheinterpretationofastudyconflictswithanotherinterpretation,makingusrealisethatthestudyis

sovaguethatitcanbeusedasprooffortwocontradictinginterpretations.Sometimes,wefindtwounrelatedstudiesthatgiveprooftothesamepoint,whichisnotacorrection,butanindicationthatweareontosomething.Addingnewnotestooldnotesandbeingforcedtocomparethemleadsnotonlytoaconstantimprovementofone’sownwork,butoftendisclosesweaknessesinthetextsweread.Wehavetocompensateforthatbybeingextracriticalasreadersandcarefulwithextractinginformationfromtexts,andwealwayshavetochecktheoriginalsourceofaclaim.[34]

The

slip-boxnotonlyconfrontsuswithdis-confirminginformation,butalsohelpswithwhatisknownasthefeature-positiveeffect(AllisonandMessick1988;Newman,Wolff,andHearst1980;Sainsbury1971).Thisisthephenomenoninwhichwetendtooverstatetheimportanceofinformationthatis(mentally)easilyavailableto

usandtiltsourthinkingtowardsthemostrecentlyacquiredfacts,notnecessarilythemostrelevantones.Withoutexternalhelp,wewouldnotonlytakeexclusivelyintoaccountwhatweknow,butwhatisontopofourheads.[35]Theslip-boxconstantlyremindsusofinformationwehavelongforgottenandwouldn’trememberotherwise–somuchso,wewouldn’tevenlookforit.

12.4AssembleaToolboxforThinkingJustbyworkingwiththeslip-box,weretrieveoldideasandfactsonanirregularbasisandconnectthemwithotherbitsofinformation–verymuchhowexpertsrecommendwelearn(Bjork2011,8;KornellandBjork2008).Thisisalsotheideabehindflashcards.Buteventhoughflashcardsaremuchmoreeffectivethancrammingor reviewing informationwithin thecontextofa textbook, theyalsohave a downside: The information on flashcards is neither elaborated on norembedded in some form of context. Each flashcard stays isolated instead ofbeingconnectedwiththenetworkoftheoreticalframes,ourexperiencesorourlatticework of mental models. This not only makes it much more difficult tolearn, but also difficult to understand the implications and the meaning ofinformation (cf. Birnbaum et al., 2013). A scientific term or concept onlybecomesmeaningfulwithinthecontextofatheory–otherwiseitwouldjustbeaword.The

sameistrueforeverydaysituations.Ourability

sameistrueforeverydaysituations.Ourabilitytoreadasituationortointerpretinformationdependsonourbroaderknowledgeandhowwemakesenseofit.Scienceandeverydaylifeareinthisregardnotsodifferent;bothareintertwined.Scientificworkismuchmorepragmaticandlessdeterminedbytheorythanoutsiderswouldexpect(LatourandWoolgar1979).Atthesametime,weusescientificknowledgeandtheoriestomakesenseofoursurroundingseveryday.Andsometheoriesortheoreticalmodelsaresurprisinglyversatile,whichiswhyitmakessensetoassembleatoolboxofusefulmentalmodels(ManktelowandCraik2004)thatcouldhelpwithourdailychallengesandmakesenseofthethingswelearnandencounter.

Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett’s partner and vice chairman of BerkshireHathaway,stressestheimportanceofhavingabroadtheoreticaltoolbox–nottobeagoodacademic,buttohaveagood,pragmaticgriponreality.Heregularlyexplainstostudentswhichmentalmodelshaveprovenmostusefultohelphimunderstandmarketsandhumanbehaviour.Headvocateslookingoutforthemostpowerful concepts in every discipline and to try to understand them sothoroughly that they become part of our thinking. The moment one starts tocombinethesementalmodelsandattachone’sexperiencestothem,onecannothelpbutgainwhathecalls“worldlywisdom.”Theimportanceistohavenotjust

a few, but a broad range ofmentalmodels in your head.Otherwise, you riskbecoming too attached tooneor twoand seeonlywhat fits them.Youwouldbecomethemanwithahammerwhoseesnailseverywhere(cf.Maslow,1966,15).Mungerwrites:“Well, thefirstruleisthatyoucan’treallyknowanythingif

you just remember isolated factsand tryandbang ’emback. If the factsdon’thangtogetheronalatticeworkoftheory,youdon’thavetheminausableform.

You’vegottohavemodelsinyourhead.Andyou’vegottoarrayyourexperience,bothvicariousanddirect,onthislatticeworkofmodels.Youmayhavenoticedstudentswhojusttrytorememberandpoundbackwhatisremembered.Well,theyfailinschoolandinlife.You’vegottohangexperienceonalatticeworkofmodelsinyourhead.”(Munger1994).

A

trulywisepersonisnotsomeonewhoknowseverything,butsomeonewhoisabletomakesenseofthingsbydrawingfromanextendedresourceofinterpretationschemes.Thisstandsinharshcontrasttothecommonbutnot-so-wisebeliefthatweneedtolearnfromexperience.Itismuchbettertolearnfromtheexperiencesofothers–especiallywhenthisexperienceis

others–especiallywhenthisexperienceisreflectedonandturnedintoversatile“mentalmodels”thatcanbeusedindifferentsituations.

When

wedelegatethestorageofknowledgetotheslip-boxandatthesametimefocusontheprinciplesbehindanideawhilewewrite,addandconnectnotes,whenwelookforpatternsandthinkbeyondthemostobviousinterpretationofanote,whenwetrytomakesenseofsomething,combinedifferentideasanddeveloplinesofthought,wedoexactlythat:webuildupa“latticeworkofmentalmodels”insteadofjust“rememberingisolatedfactsandtryandbang’emback.”

The

beautyofthisapproachisthatweco-evolvewithourslip-boxes:webuildthesameconnectionsinourheadswhilewedeliberatelydeveloptheminourslip-box–andmakeiteasiertorememberthefactsastheynowhavealatticeworkwecanattachthemto.Ifwepracticelearningnotasa

attachthemto.Ifwepracticelearningnotasapureaccumulationofknowledge,butasanattempttobuildupalatticeworkoftheoriesandmentalmodelstowhichinformationcanstick,weenteravirtuouscirclewherelearningfacilitateslearning.

HelmutD.Sachsputsitlikethis:“By

learning,retaining,andbuildingontheretainedbasics,wearecreatingarichwebofassociatedinformation.Themoreweknow,themoreinformation(hooks)wehavetoconnectnewinformationto,theeasierwecanformlong-termmemories.[…]Learningbecomesfun.Wehaveenteredavirtuouscircleoflearning,anditseemsasifourlong-termmemorycapacityandspeedareactuallygrowing.Ontheotherhand,ifwefailtoretainwhatwehavelearned,forexample,bynotusingeffectivestrategies,itbecomesincreasinglydifficulttolearninformationthatbuildsonearlierlearning.Moreandmoreknowledgegapsbecomeapparent.Sincewe

can’treallyconnectnewinformationtogaps,learningbecomesanuphillbattlethatexhaustsusandtakesthefunoutoflearning.Itseemsasifwehavereachedthecapacitylimitofourbrainandmemory.Welcometoaviciouscircle.Certainly,youwouldmuchratherbeinavirtuouslearningcircle,sotorememberwhatyouhavelearned,youneedtobuildeffectivelong-termmemorystructures.”(Sachs2013,26)Hisrecommendationsforlearningreadalmostlikeinstructionsfortheslip-box:

1.Payattentiontowhatyouwanttoremember.2. Properlyencodetheinformationyouwanttokeep.(Thisincludesthinkingaboutsuitablecues.)

3. Practicerecall.(Ibid.,31)Welearnsomethingnotonlywhenweconnectitto prior knowledge and try to understand its broader implications(elaboration),butalsowhenwetrytoretrieveitatdifferenttimes(spacing)indifferent contexts (variation), ideally with the help of chance (contextualinterference) and with a deliberate effort (retrieval). The slip-box not onlyprovidesuswiththeopportunitytolearninthisprovenway,itforcesustodoexactlywhatisrecommendedjustbyusingit.Wehavetoelaborateonwhatwereadjusttobeabletowriteitdownandtranslateitintodifferentcontexts.We retrieve information from the slip-boxwheneverwe try to connect newnoteswitholdnotes.Justbydoingthis,wemixupcontexts,shufflenotesandretrievetheinformationinirregularintervals.Andalongtheway,wefurtherelaborateontheinformation,whichwealwaysretrievedeliberately.

12.5UsetheSlip-BoxasaCreativityMachine“Creativity

isjustconnectingthings.Whenyouaskcreativepeoplehowtheydidsomething,theyfeelalittleguiltybecausetheydidn’treallydoit,theyjustsawsomething.”(SteveJobs)

Manyexcitingstoriesfromscientifichistorymakeusbelieve thatgreat insightcomes in a flash. There is the sudden insight ofWatson andCrick thatDNAwouldhavetohavetheformofadoublehelixorthestoryofFriedrichAugustKekulé,whoallegedlydreamedofasnakebitingitsowntailandsuddenlysawthestructureofbenzeneinfrontofhiseyes.But

thereasonwhyWatsonandCrickorKekuléhadtheseinsightsandnotarandompersononthestreetisthattheyalreadyhadspentaverylongtimethinkinghardabouttheproblems,tinkeredwithotherpossiblesolutionsandtriedcountlessotherwaysoflookingattheproblem.Ourfascinationwiththesestoriescloudsthefactthatallgoodideasneedtime.Evensuddenbreakthroughsareusuallyprecededbyalong,intenseprocessofpreparation.

intenseprocessofpreparation.

Being

experiencedwithaproblemandintimatelyfamiliarwiththetoolsanddevicesweworkwith,ideallytothepointofvirtuosity,isthepreconditionfordiscoveringtheirinherentpossibilities,writesLudwikFleck,ahistorianofscience(Fleck2012,126).Thisistrueevenforpurelytheoreticalwork.Here,too,weneedexperienceuntilwecan“feelourway”aroundtheproblemsandquestionswedealwith,evenifthesethingsarewords,conceptsandnotesinafilesystem.Whatwelearninpracticeisalwaysmuchmorethoroughandcomplexthanwhatwecouldputintowords.Thatiswhyevenpurelytheoreticalworkcannotbereducedtoexplicitknowledge,whichisconsciouslyavailable.Thisisespeciallytruefortheuseofaslip-box.Itistheintuitionthatcomesfromtheintimateknowledgeofapracticethatcanleadustonewinsights.Wemightnotbeabletoexplicitlystatewhyitismorepromisingtofollowoneidea

insteadofanother,butbeingexperienced,wesomehowknow–whichisenough.Experimentalscientistsregularlydescribetheirdecision-makingprocessasbeingbasedonintuition(Rheinberger1997),andthereisnoreasonwhyitshouldbedifferentinthesocialsciences.Maybeitisjusthardertoacceptinthesocialsciencesaswetrysohardtobemorelikenaturalscientists,whoseemtodowithoutsomethingasvagueasintuition.Butintuitionisnottheoppositiontorationalityandknowledge,itisrathertheincorporated,practicalsideofourintellectualendeavours,thesedimentedexperienceonwhichwebuildourconscious,explicitknowledge(cf.Ahrens2014).

Steven Johnson,whowrote an insightful book about howpeople in scienceandingeneralcomeupwithgenuinenewideas,callsitthe“slowhunch.”Asaprecondition to make use of this intuition, he emphasises the importance ofexperimentalspaceswhereideascanfreelymingle(Johnson2011).Alaboratorywith open-minded colleagues can be such a space, much as intellectuals andartistsfreelydiscussedideasinthecafésofoldParis.Iwouldaddtheslip-boxassuch a space inwhich ideas canmingle freely, so they can give birth to newones.Most

often,innovationisnottheresultofasudden

often,innovationisnottheresultofasuddenmomentofrealization,anyway,butincrementalstepstowardimprovement.Evengroundbreakingparadigmshiftsaremostoftentheconsequenceofmanysmallmovesintherightdirectioninsteadofonebigidea.Thisiswhythesearchforsmalldifferencesiskey.

Itissuchanimportantskilltoseedifferencesbetweenseeminglysimilarconcepts,orconnectionsbetweenseeminglydifferentideas.Thisevenusedtobethemeaningoftheword“new.”“Novus,”inLatin,usedtomean“different,”

“unusual,”notsomuch“genuinelynew”inthemeaningof“unheard”(Luhmann,2005,210).Tohaveconcretenotesinfrontofoureyesandbeabletocomparethemdirectlymakesdifferences,evensmallones,mucheasiertospot.(Thisisanadvantageoftheoriginalpaperslip-box,asyoucanspreadoutmultiplenotesonadeskinsteadofjustseeingthemonacomputerscreen.)TheneurobiologistJamesZullpoints

outthatcomparingisournaturalformofperception,whereourcognitiveinterpretationisinlockstepwithouractualeyemovements.Therefore,comparingshouldbeunderstoodquiteliterally.

We even comparewhenwe focus on one thing: “Paying attention does notmean unrelenting attention on one focal point. Our brains evolved to noticedetails by shifting focus fromone area to another, by repeatedly scanning thesurroundings. [...]Thebrain ismore likely tonoticedetailswhen it scans thanwhen it focuses.” (Zull 2002, 142f) This is one of the reasons why thinkingworkssomuchbetterwhenwehavetheverythingswethinkaboutinfrontofoureyes.Itisinournature.

12.6ThinkInsidetheBox“[C]reative

peoplearebetteratrecognizingrelationships,makingassociationsandconnectionsandseeingthingsinanoriginalway—seeingthingsthatotherscannotsee“(Andreasen2014).

Comparing,differentiatingandconnectingnotesarethebasisofgoodacademicwriting, but playing and tinkering with ideas is what leads to insight andexceptionaltexts.To

beabletoplaywithideas,wefirsthavetoliberatethemfromtheiroriginalcontextbymeansofabstractionandre-specification.Wedidthiswhenwetookliteraturenotesandtranslatedthemintothedifferentcontextswithintheslip-box.Abstractiondoesnothaveagoodreputationatthemoment.Itisthetangible,theconcretethatischeeredfor.Abstractionshouldindeednotbethefinalgoalofthinking,butitisanecessaryin-betweensteptomakeheterogeneousideascompatible.IfDarwinhadneverabstractedfromhisconcreteobservationsofsparrows,hewouldneverhavefoundanabstract,ageneralprincipleofevolutionacrossdifferentspecies,andhewouldneverhavebeenabletoseehowevolutionworksinotherspeciesaswell.Abstractionisalsonotfortheoretical-academicprocessesofinsightonly.Weneedtoabstractfromconcretesituationseveryday.Onlybyabstractionandre-specificationcanweapplyideasinthesingularandalwaysdifferentsituationsinreality(Loewenstein,2010).

Even

verypersonal,intimateexperiences,likeencounterswithart,requireabstraction.IfthestoryofRomeoandJuliettouchesus,itiscertainlynotbecauseweareallmembersofoneoftwofeudingfamiliesinVerona.Weabstractfromtimeandplace,fromtheparticularcircumstancesuntilwecanmeettheprotagonistsofthisstoryonagenerallevelwhereourownemotionallifecanresonatewithwhatweseeonstage.Thetendencytojuxtaposeabstractionwithbeingworldlyortoassociateitwithintellectualismandjuxtaposeitwithbeingsolution-orientatedisverymisleadingindeed.

Studies on creativity with engineers show that the ability to find not onlycreative,butfunctionalandworkingsolutionsfortechnicalproblemsisequaltotheabilitytomakeabstractions.Thebetteranengineerisatabstractingfromaspecificproblem,thebetterandmorepragmatichissolutionswillbe–evenfortheveryproblemheabstractedfrom(GassmannandZeschky,2008,103).

Abstractionisalsothekeytoanalyseandcompareconcepts,tomakeanalogiesandtocombineideas;thisisespeciallytruewhenitcomestointerdisciplinarywork(Goldstoneand

comestointerdisciplinarywork(GoldstoneandWilensky2008).

Being

abletoabstractandre-specifyideasis,again,onlyonesideoftheequation.

Itisnotgoodforanythingifwedon’thaveasysteminplacethatallowsustoputthisintopractice.Here,itistheconcretestandardizationofnotesinjustoneformatthatenablesustoliterallyshufflethemaround,toaddoneideatomultiplecontextsandtocompareandcombinetheminacreativewaywithoutlosingsightofwhattheytrulycontain.

Creativitycannotbetaughtlikearuleorapproachedlikeaplan.Butwecanmakesurethatourworkingenvironmentallowsustobecreativewithideas.Italsohelpstokeepinmindsomecreativity-inducingideasaboutproblem-solvingthatmightbecounterintuitive. It isworth it todwellon this subjecta littlebitbeforewemove on to the next step: the preparation of the rough draft of themanuscript.The

realenemyofindependentthinkingisnotanexternalauthority,butourowninertia.Theabilitytogeneratenewideashasmoretodowith

abilitytogeneratenewideashasmoretodowithbreakingwitholdhabitsofthinkingthanwithcomingupwithasmanyideasaspossible.Forobviousreasons,Idonotrecommend“thinkingoutsidethebox”.Onthecontrary,wecanturntheslip-boxintoatoolforbreakingoutofourownthinkinghabits.

Our

brainsjustloveroutines.Beforenewinformationpromptsourbrainstothinkdifferentlyaboutsomething,theymakethenewinformationfitintotheknownorletitdisappearcompletelyfromourperception.Usually,wedon’tevennoticewhenourbrainsmodifyoursurroundingstomakeitfititsexpectations.

Weneedthereforeabitofarusetobreakthepowerofthinkingroutines.Intheirbookwiththeshowytitle“The5ElementsofEffectiveThinking”,themathematiciansEdwardB.BurgerandMichaelStarbirdcollecteddifferentstrategiestodothat(2012).Somearealreadytechnicallyimplementedintheslip-box,others

technicallyimplementedintheslip-box,othersaregoodtokeepinmind.

For

example,theyemphasisetheimportanceoffeedbackloopsandtheneedtofindwaystoconfrontourselveswithourerrors,mistakesandmisunderstandings.

Thisisabuilt-infeatureoftheslip-box.Anotherhabitoftheeffectivethinkerstheyhighlightistheirabilitytofocusonthemainideasbehindthedetails,tograspthegistofsomething.This,too,issomethingtheslip-boxnudgesustodo.

Anotherpieceofadviceisnotafeatureoftheslip-boxandmightsoundbanal,but it is crucial: Make sure that you really see what you think you see anddescribeitasplainlyandfactuallyaspossible.Double-checkifnecessary.Thatthisisn’tasobviousasitsoundswillbecomeclearerbythefactthattheabilitytotrulyseewhatisinfrontofone’seyesisoftenlistedasatraitofexperts.Andthatiseasilyexplainedbythefactthatourperceptiondoesnotfollowtheorderofseeingfirstandinterpretingsecond.Itdoesbothatthesametime:Wealwaysperceive something as something – our interpretation is instantaneous. This iswhywehavesomuchtroublenotfallingforanopticalillusion:Ifwelookatathree-dimensionaldrawing,wecannotseeitjustasanarrangementoflinesandshapes–unlesswearehighlytrainedtodoso.Wedon’tevennoticeobjectivelymissingparts inourperception, like theblindspot in themiddleofeverythingwesee.Weneedatricktoseewhatwedon’tsee.Aswealwaysimmediatelyseeawholepictureofsomething,everythingelse,includingthereinterpretationofit

orthedetectionofmissingbits,isastepthatfollows.The

sameistruewhenweread:Wedon’tseelinesonapaperfirst,thenrealisethatthesearewords,thenusethemtobuildsentencesandfinallydecipherthemeaning.Weimmediatelyreadonthelevelofmeaningfulunderstanding.Toreallyunderstandatextisthereforeaconstantrevisionofourfirstinterpretation.Wehavetotrainourselvestogetusedtoseeingthisdifferenceandtoholdbackouringrainedurgetojumptoconclusions.Tobeabletoseewhatweseeinsteadofwhatweexpecttoseeisindeedaskillinitself,notlikeacharactertraitofbeing“open-minded.”Thosewhothinkofthemselvesasbeingopen-mindedareoftenevenmorepronetosticktotheirfirstunderstandingastheybelievetobewithoutnaturalprejudicesandthereforedon’tseetheneedtocounterbalancethem.Ifwethinkwecan“holdback”aninterpretation,wearefoolingourselves.

While

theconstantcomparisonofnotescanhelpustodetectdifferences,notechniquecanhelpusseewhatismissing.Butwecanmakeitahabittoalwaysaskwhatisnotinthepicture,butcouldberelevant.This,too,doesnotcomenaturallytous.

One

ofthemostfamousfigurestoillustratethisskillisthemathematicianAbrahamWald(MangelandSamaniego1984).DuringWorldWarII,hewasaskedtohelptheRoyalAirForcefindtheareasontheirplanesthatweremostoftenhitbybulletssotheycouldcoverthemwithmorearmour.Butinsteadofcountingthebulletholesonthereturnedplanes,herecommendedarmouringthespotswherenoneoftheplaneshadtakenanyhits.TheRAFforgottotakeintoaccountwhatwasnottheretosee:Alltheplanesthatdidn’tmakeitback.

The

RAFfellforacommonerrorinthinkingcalled

RAFfellforacommonerrorinthinkingcalledsurvivorshipbias(Taleb2005).

Theotherplanesdidn’tmakeitbackbecausetheywerehitwheretheyshouldhavehadextraprotection,likethefueltank.Thereturningplanescouldonlyshowwhatwaslessrelevant.

Productdevelopersmakethesamemistakeonsucharegularbasis,onehastowonderiftheydoitonpurpose.AsmarketingexpertRobertMcMathassembledthebiggest-evercollectionofsupermarketproducts,he realisedmidway itwasbecomingalmostexclusivelyacollectionoffailedproductsbecausetheymakeupthevastmajorityofallproductseverproduced.Hethoughtamuseumwouldbeagreatplaceforproductdeveloperstoseewhatalreadyprovednottoworkso they didn’t have to repeat the same mistake. Alas, rarely does a productdeveloper show any interest in learning from the experience of others. Often,companies don’t even keep track of their own failed attempts, providingMcMathwithwholeseriesinwhichonekindofmistakewasmadeinmultiplevariations,sometimesfromeachgenerationofdevelopersinthesamecompany(McMathandForbes1999).In

hisbeautifullytitledbook“TheAntidote:HappinessforPeopleWhoCan’tStandPositiveThinking,”OliverBurkemandescribeshowmuchourcultureisfocusedonsuccessandhowweneglecttheimportantlessonsfromfailure(Burkeman2013).Managerbiographiesareagoodexample:Eventhoughallofthemcontain

goodexample:Eventhoughallofthemcontainsomeanecdotesaboutsetbacks,thesearealwaysembeddedinabiggerstoryaboutsuccess(failedmanagersunfortunatelyrarelywritebiographies).Ifwetrytoextractalessonfromallthesebooks,wemightendupbelievingthatpersistenceandcharismaareparamountforsuccess,eventhoughtheseareexactlythesameingredientsneededtoscrewaprojectupbigtime(BurkemanisreferringtoJerkerDenrellhere).Obviously,thesameistrueinresearch:Itisverygoodtoknowwhathasalreadyproventonotworkifwetrytocomeupwithnewideasthatdowork.

One

possibilitytodealwiththistendencyistoaskcounterfactualquestions,like“whatif?”(Markman,Lindberg,KrayandGalinsky,2007).Itiseasiertolearnaboutthefunctionofmoneyinasocietyifwewonderhowstrangerswouldexchangegoodswithoutusingmoneythanifwejustfocusontheobviousproblemswehaveinasocietybasedonmoneyexchange.Sometimes,it

societybasedonmoneyexchange.Sometimes,itismoreimportanttorediscovertheproblemsforwhichwealreadyhaveasolutionthantothinksolelyabouttheproblemsthatarepresenttous.

Problems rarely get solved directly, anyway. Most often, the crucial stepforwardistoredefinetheprobleminsuchawaythatanalreadyexistingsolutioncan be employed. The first question should always be directed towards thequestion itself:Whatkindofanswercanyouexpect fromaskingaquestion inthisparticularway?Whatismissing?Another seemingly banal tip relates to a distinguishing feature of

extraordinarythinkers:Takingsimpleideasseriously.Consider,forexample,theideaofbuyingstockslowandsellingthemhigh.Iamsureeveryonecangraspthatidea.Butgraspinganideaisnotthesameasunderstandingit.Ifyougoandbuystocksonthat“insight,”allyoucandoistohopethatastockgoesupafteryoubuy it,whichmakes thisknowledgeaboutasusefulas the tipon thenextcolourtochooseonaroulettetable.The

nextlevelofunderstandingisreachedwhenyourealisewhatyoubuyifyoubuyastock:apartofacompany.Nobodywouldsignacontractforahouseandbelieveitisthecontractheownsnow.Butmanypeopletreatastockexactlylikethis.Theydon’treallythinkaboutwhattheygetforthepricetheypay:theyjustassumetheymadeagooddealwhenthepriceislowerthanthedaybefore.ButtheonlythingWarrenBuffettthinksaboutitistherelationshipbetweenpriceand

value–hedoesn’tevenlookatthepricefromyesterday.Heunderstandsthatsimpleisnotthesameaseasy,andthattheworstthingyoucandoistomakeasimpletaskunnecessarilycomplicated.Astockisashareinacompany.Thepriceissetbythemarket,whichmeansbysupplyanddemand,whichtouchesontherationalityofmarketparticipantsaswellasthequestionofvaluation,whichmeansyouhavetounderstandsomethingaboutthebusinessyouareconsideringinvestingin,includingcompetition,competitiveadvantages,technologicaldevelopments,etc.

Making things more complicated than they are can be a way to avoid theunderlying complexity of simple ideas. This is what happened during thefinancialcrisisof2008:Economistsdevelopedhugelycomplicatedproducts,butdidnottakeintoaccountthesimplefactthatpriceandvaluearenotnecessarilythesame.

ThereisareasonwhyBuffettisnotonlyagreatinvestor,butalsoagreatteacher:Henotonlyhasavastknowledgeabouteverythingrelatedtobusiness,hecanalsoexplainitallinsimpleterms.

Sometimes the breakthrough in a scientific process is the discovery of asimple principle behind a seemingly very complicated process. Burger andStarbird remind us of the long history of human attempts to fly:We tried toemulatebirdsbyflappingwing-likeapparatuseswithfeathersandall,butintheend,itwasaboutnotgettingdistractedbydetailsanddiscoveringthatthesubtlebendingofthewingistheonlythingthatcounts.Simple ideas can be tied together into consistent theories and build up

enormouscomplexity.Thisjustdoesn’tworkwithcomplicatedideas.Byusingthe slip-box on a daily basis, we train these important intellectual skillsdeliberately:Wecheckifwhatweunderstoodfromatextisreallyinthetextbyhavingourunderstandinginwrittenforminfrontofoureyes.Welearntofocusonthegistofanideabyrestrictingourselvesintermsofspace.Wecanmakeitahabittoalwaysthinkaboutwhatismissingwhenwewritedownourownideas.Andwecanpracticeaskinggoodquestionswhenwesortournotesintotheslip-boxandconnectthemwithothernotes.

12.7FacilitateCreativitythroughRestrictionsTheslip-boximposesquiteafewrestrictionson itsuser. Insteadofhavingthechoicebetweenallkindsoffancynotebooks,papersorwritingformats,orbeingable toemploy thewhole rangeofproductivity toolsavailable fornote-taking,learning and academic or nonfictionwriting, everything is reduced to a singleplain-textformatandcollectedinasinglesimpleslip-boxsystemwithnofrillsor features.Even the computer programbasically just emulates awoodenboxfilled with plain, consecutively numbered paper. And even though the digitalprogram lifts the physical restrictions on the length of a note, I highlyrecommend treating a digital note as if the spacewere limited. By restrictingourselvestooneformat,wealsorestrictourselvestojustoneideapernoteandforceourselvestobeaspreciseandbriefaspossible.Therestrictiontooneideaper note is also the precondition to recombine them freely later. Luhmannchoose notes in the format A6. A good rule of thumb for working with theprogramis:Eachnoteshouldfitontothescreenandthereshouldbenoneedofscrolling.Standardisedisalsothewaywetreatliteratureandourownthoughts:Instead

of using different kinds of notes or techniques for different kinds of texts orideas,theapproachhereisalwaysthesame,simpleone.Literatureiscondensedonanotesaying,“Onpagex, itsaysy,”and laterstoredwith thereference inoneplace.Ideasandthoughtsarecapturedontheslip-boxnotesandconnectedtoothernotesalwaysinthesamewayinthesameplace.Thesestandardizationsmakeitpossiblethatthetechnicalsideofnote-takingcanbecomeautomatic.

Nothavingtothinkabouttheorganisationisreallygoodnewsforbrainslikeours–thefewmentalresourceswehaveavailable,weneedforthinkingabouttheactualrelevantquestions:thoseconcerningthecontents.

This

kindofself-imposedrestrictioniscounterintuitiveinaculturewheremorechoiceisusuallyregardedasagoodthingandmoretoolstochoosefromseenasbetterthanhavinglessathand.Butnothavingtomakedecisionscanbequiteliberating.Inhisbook“TheParadoxofChoice,”BarrySchwartzusednumerousexamples,fromshoppingtocareeroptionstoromance,toshowthatlesschoicecannotonlyincreaseourproductivity,butalsoourfreedomandmakeiteasiertobeinthemomentandenjoyit(Schwartz,2007).Nothavingtomakechoices

it(Schwartz,2007).Nothavingtomakechoicescanunleashalotofpotential,whichwouldotherwisebewastedonmakingthesechoices.AcademicwritingshoulddefinitelybeaddedtoSchwartz’

listofexamplesinwhichlesschoiceisbetter.

The

formalstandardizationoftheslip-boxmightseemtobeatoddswithoursearchforcreativity.Buthere,too,itismorelikelytheoppositeistrue.Thinkingandcreativitycanflourishunderrestrictedconditionsandthereareplentyofstudiestobackthatclaim(cf.Stokes2001;Rheinberger1997).Thescientificrevolutionstartedwiththestandardizationandcontrollingofexperiments,whichmadethemcomparableandrepeatable(cf.Shapin,1996).Orthinkofpoetry:Itimposesrestrictionsintermsofrhythm,syllablesorrhymes.Haikusgivethepoetverylittleroomforformalvariations,butthatdoesn’tmeantheyareequallylimitedintermsofpoeticexpressiveness.Onthecontrary:

termsofpoeticexpressiveness.Onthecontrary:Itisthestrictformalismthatallowsthemtotranscendtimeandculture.

Language in itself is extremely standardised and limited inmanyways.Wearerestrictedtotheuseofonly26letters,butwhatthatenablesustodo!Wecanwritenovels,theories,lovelettersorcourtorders–justbyrearrangingthese26

letters.Thisiscertainlynotpossibledespitetherestrictionto26letters,butbecauseofit.Nobodywillopenabookandwishitcontainsmoretypesoflettersorbedisappointedbecauseitis,again,justanothervariationofthesamealphabet.[36]

A

clearstructureallowsustoexploretheinternalpossibilitiesofsomething.Eventheactofbreakingwithconventiondependsonit.Thelimitationofthecanvasdoesnotmaketheartisticexpressionsofpaintersseemlimited,butopensupthepossibilityofanartistlikeLucioFontanatocutintothecanvasinsteadofpaintingonit.Itisnoteventruethatamorecomplex

structureprovidesmorepossibilities.Quitethecontrary.Thebinarycodeisradicallymorelimitedthanthealphabetasitcontainsonlytwostates,oneorzero,butitopeneduparangeofcreativepossibilitiesthatisunprecedented.

The

biggestthreattocreativityandscientificprogressisthereforetheopposite:alackofstructureandrestrictions.Withoutstructure,wecannotdifferentiate,compareorexperimentwithideas.Withoutrestrictions,wewouldneverbeforcedtomakethedecisiononwhatisworthpursuingandwhatisnot.

Indifferenceistheworstenvironmentforinsight.Andtheslip-boxis,aboveall,atoolforenforcingdistinctions,decisionsandmakingdifferencesvisible.Onethingisforsure:thecommonideathatweshouldliberateourselvesfromanyrestrictionsand“openourselvesup”tobemorecreativeisverymisleadingindeed

(Dean2013,201).

13ShareYourInsight“Writing

itselfmakesyourealisewherethereareholesinthings.I’mneversurewhatIthinkuntilIseewhatIwrite.AndsoIbelievethat,eventhoughyou’reanoptimist,theanalysispartofyoukicksinwhenyousitdowntoconstructastoryoraparagraphorasentence.Youthink,‘Oh,thatcan’tberight.’Andyouhavetogoback,andyouhavetorethinkitall.”(CarolLoomis)[37]

Sincewritingisnothingmorethantherevisionofaroughdraft,whichisnothingmorethanturningaseriesofnotesintoacontinuoustext,whicharewrittenonaday-to-day basis, connected and indexed in the slip-box, there is no need toworryaboutfindingatopictowriteabout.Justlookintoyourslip-boxandseewhereclustershavebeenbuiltup.Theseclustersarewhatcaughtyour interestagainandagain,soyoualreadyknowthatyouhavefoundmaterialtoworkwith.Nowyoucanspreadout thesenotesonyourdesktoporusetheoutlinerof theZettelkasten, outline your argument and construct a preliminary order ofsections, chapters or paragraphs. This will make questions, which are notanswered, obvious, and itwill show the gaps in the argument that need to befilledandmakevisiblewhichpartsstillneedsomework.The perspective changes another time: Now, it is not about understanding

somethingin thecontextofanotherauthor’sargument,andit isalsonotaboutlooking for multiple connections in the slip-box, but about developing oneargumentandbringingitintothelinearityofamanuscript.Insteadofwideningtheperspectivetofindasmanypossiblelinesofthoughttowhichanideamightcontribute,itisnowaboutnarrowingtheperspective,makingadecisiononone

topic only and cutting out everything that does not directly contribute to thedevelopmentofthetextandsupportthemainargument.

13.1FromBrainstormingtoSlip-box-Storming“Rememberthelesson:‘Anideaorafactisnotworthmoremerelybecauseitiseasilyavailabletoyou.’”(CharlesT.Munger)

Wheneversomeonestruggleswithfindingagoodtopictowriteabout,someoneelse will recommend brainstorming. It still has a modern sound to it, eventhough itwas described in 1919 byAlexOsborn and introduced to a broaderaudiencein1958inthebook“Brainstorming:TheDynamicNewWaytoCreateSuccessfulIdeas”fromCharlesHutchisonClark.Formanypeople,itisstillthebestmethodtogeneratenewideas.Isuggesttoseeitratherasanexpressionofan outdated fixation on the brain, which is mirrored in the fixation of oureducational system to learn things by heart – which means to think withoutexternal tools.Testing students formemorisedknowledgedoes not givemuchindicationabouttheirunderstanding,andthefactthatsomeonecameupwithalotofideasduringabrainstormingsessiondoesnotgivemuchindicationabouttheirquality.Whilewewant tofindtopicsthatareimportant, interestingandcanbedealt

with using the material we have available, the brain prioritises ideas that areeasily available in themoment. This, obviously, does not equal relevant. Thebrainmoreeasilyremembersinformationthatitencounteredrecently,whichhasemotionsattached to itand is lively,concreteorspecific. Ideally, it rhymesaswell(cf.Schacter,2001;Schacter,ChiaoandMitchell,2003).Everythingthatisrather abstract, vague, emotionally neutral or does not even sound good is fardown on its list of priorities – not exactly the best criteria for an intellectualendeavour.Itmakesthingsworsethatwetendtolikeourfirstideasthebestandarevery

reluctant to let go of them, irrespective of their actual relevance (Strack andMussweiler 1997).Andbefore younowwonder if itwouldbe a good idea toovercome the limitationsofbrainstormingbyassemblingagroupof friends tobrainstorm together, forget it: More people in a brainstorming group usuallycomeupwithlessgoodideasandrestrictthemselvesinadvertentlytoanarrowerrangeoftopics(Mullen,Johnson,andSalas1991).[38]But finding theright topic towriteabout ismostlyaproblemfor thosewho

treatedwritingasaseparatetaskfromothers,anyway–notforthoseofuswho

workwiththeslip-box.Thosewhorelyontheirbrainswillfirstaskthemselves,then their supervisor: I read somuch, but what should I write about?On theother hand, we who have already accompanied our studies by writing andcollecting notes in a smartway simply don’t have the need for brainstorminganymore. We can just look into our slip-box instead. If we had a good ideabefore(anditiscertainlymorelikelythatwewillcomeupwithagoodideaoverthecourseofseveralmonthsratherthanwithinacoupleofminutes),itwillbeinthere. Itmight even already have proved itself worthy of following up on, inwhichcaseitisalreadyconnectedtosupportingmaterial.Itissomucheasiertoseewhatworkedthantopredictwhatmightwork.Wedon’tneedtoworryaboutthequestionofwhattowriteaboutbecausewe

haveanswered thequestionalready–many timesonadailybasis.Every timewereadsomething,wemakeadecisiononwhatisworthwritingdownandwhatisnot.

Everytimewemakeapermanentnote,wealsomadeadecisionabouttheaspectsofatextweregardedasrelevantforourlonger-termthinkingandrelevantforthedevelopmentofourideas.Weconstantlymakeexplicithowideasandinformationconnectwitheachotherandturnthemintoliteralconnectionsbetweenournotes.Bydoingthis,wedevelopvisibleclustersofideasthatarenowreadytobeturnedintomanuscripts.

Theprocessisself-reinforcing.Avisiblydevelopedclusterattractsmoreideasandprovidesmorepossibleconnections,which in return influenceourchoicesonwhattoreadandthinkfurther.Theybecomesignpostsforourdailyworkandorient us to what is worth thinking about. Topics grow bottom up and gain

tractionalongtheway.Assoonastheslip-boxhasgrownabit,wecanreplaceour thoughts on what is interesting and what we think is relevant with apragmaticlookintotheslip-box,wherewecanplainlyseewhattrulyprovedtobeinterestingandwherewefoundmaterialtoworkwith.Itistheonedecisioninthebeginning,tomakewritingthemeanandtheend

of the whole intellectual endeavour, that changed the role of topic-findingcompletely. It isnow lessabout findinga topic towriteaboutandmoreaboutworkingonthequestionswegeneratedbywriting.Bygeneratingquestionsinthecourseofoureverydaywork,webringthelaw

oflargenumbersonourside.Thetruthis thatfewquestionsaresuitabletobeansweredwithinanarticle,athesisorabook.Somearetoobroad,somearetoonarrow, some are impossible to answer with knowledge we can reasonablyacquire,butformost,wejustdon’thavethematerialtoworkwith.Thosewhostartwith a plan and an idea aboutwhat towritewill probably encounter thattruth somewhere along the way. They then might be able to correct anunfortunate choice once or twice, but will have to stick with what they havechosenatonepoint,otherwisetheywillneverfinishtheirproject.Ifwe,ontheotherhand, letquestionsarisefromtheslip-box,weknowthat

they are tried and tested among dozens or even hundreds of other possiblequestions.

Thevastmajorityofquestionsmighthavebeenansweredquicklyordisappearedasnonotesweredrawntothem,eitherbecauseofalackofinterestoralackofmaterial.Thisishowevolutionworks:bytrialanderror,notplanning.

Goodquestionsareinthesweetspotofbeingrelevantandinteresting,nottooeasy to answerbutpossible to tacklewithmaterial that is availableor at leastwithin our reach.When it comes to findinggoodquestions, it is therefore notenoughtothinkaboutit.Wehavetodosomethingwithanideabeforeweknowenough about it tomake a good judgement.Wehave towork,write, connect,differentiate, complement and elaborate on questions – but this iswhatwedo

whenwetakesmartnotes.

13.2FromTopDowntoBottomUpDevelopingtopicsandquestionsfromwhatwehavehasahugeadvantage.

Theideaswedecideonarenottakenoutofthinair,butarealreadyembeddedinacontent-richcontextandcomewithmaterialthatwecanuse.Startingwithwhatwehavealsocomeswithanother,unexpectedadvantage:Webecomemoreopentonewideas.

It seems counterintuitive thatwe becomemore open to new ideas themorefamiliarwearewithideaswehavealreadyencountered,buthistoriansofsciencewill happily confirm this (Rheinberger 1997). Itmakes sensewhen you thinkaboutit:withoutintenseelaborationonwhatwealreadyknow,wewouldhavetrouble seeing its limitations, what is missing or possibly wrong. Beingintimatelyfamiliarwithsomethingenablesustobeplayfulwithit,tomodifyit,tospotnewanddifferentideaswithoutrunningtheriskofmerelyrepeatingoldideasbelievingtheyarenew.Thisiswhyitfeelsinthebeginningthatfamiliaritymakesithardertocomeupwithnewideas.Wejustdidn’tknowthatmostoftheideaswehad are actuallynot that innovative.Butwhile thebelief inourowningenuity decreases with expertise, we become more able to actually make agenuinenewcontribution.JacobWarrenGetzels andMihalyCsikszentmihalyi showed that this is also

true in art: New, groundbreaking work is rarely created on a whim by someaccidental artist who believes himself to be amazingly innovative. On thecontrary: The more time an artist devotes to learning about an aesthetic“problem,”themoreunexpectedandcreativehissolutionwillberegardedlaterbyartexperts(GetzelsandCsikszentmihalyi1976).If open-mindedness is all that is needed, the best artists and scientistswere

hobbyists.JeremyDean,whohaswrittenextensivelyonroutinesandritualsand

suggestsseeingoldwaysofthinkingasthinkingroutines,putsitwellwhenhewrites thatwe cannotbreakwith a certainwayof thinking ifwe arenot evenawarethatitisacertainwayofthinking(Dean,2013).

13.3GettingThingsDonebyFollowingYourInterestsIt is not surprising that motivation is shown to be one of themost importantindicators for successful students – next to the feeling of being in control ofone’s own learning course.When even highly intelligent students fail in theirstudies,it’smostoftenbecausetheyceasetoseethemeaninginwhattheyweresupposed to learn (cf.Balduf 2009), are unable tomake a connection to theirpersonalgoals(Glynnetal.2009)orlacktheabilitytocontroltheirownstudiesautonomouslyandontheirownterms(ReeveandJan,2006;Reeve,2009).These findings are an important argument for academic freedom. Nothing

motivatesusmore thanseeingaprojectwecan identifywithmoving forward,andnothing ismore demotivating thanbeing stuckwith a project that doesn’tseemtobeworthdoing.Theriskoflosinginterestinwhatwedoishighwhenwedecideupfrontona

long-termprojectwithoutmuchclueaboutwhattoexpect.Wecanmitigatethisrisk considerably by applying a flexible organisation scheme that allows us tochangecoursewhenevernecessary.If we accompany every step of our work with the question, “What is

interestingabout this?”andeverythingwe readwith thequestion,“What is sorelevant about this that it is worth noting down?” we do not just chooseinformationaccordingtoourinterest.Byelaboratingonwhatweencounter,wealso discover aspects we didn’t know anything about before and thereforedevelopourinterestsalongtheway.Itwouldbequitesadifwedidnotchangeourinterestsduringresearch.Theabilitytochangethedirectionofourworkopportunisticallyisaformof

controlthatiscompletelydifferentfromtheattempttocontrolthecircumstancesby clinging to a plan. The beginning of the research project that led to thediscoveryofDNA’sstructurewastheapplicationforagrant.ThegrantwasnottodiscoverDNA’sstructure,butfindatreatmentforcancer.Ifthescientistshadstucktotheirpromises,notonlywouldtheyprobablynothavefoundacureforcancer, but they definitely would not have discovered the structure of DNA.Mostlikely,theywouldhavelostinterestintheirwork.

Luckily,theydidnotsticktotheirplan,but

Luckily,theydidnotsticktotheirplan,butfollowedtheirintuitionandinterestandtookthemostpromisingpathtoinsightwheneveroneopenedup.

Theactualresearchprogramdevelopedalongtheway(Rheinberger1997).Onecouldsaytheyfinishedtheplanonwhattodotheverymomenttheyfinishedthewholeproject.

Theability tokeepcontroloverourworkandchangecourse ifnecessary ismadepossibleby the fact that thebig taskof “writinga text” isbrokendowninto small, concrete tasks, which allows us practically to do exactly what isneededat a certain timeand take thenext step from there. It is not just aboutfeelingincontrol,it isaboutsettinguptheworkinawaythatwereallyareincontrol. And the more control we have to steer our work towards what weconsiderinterestingandrelevant,thelesswillpowerwehavetoputintogettingthingsdone.Onlythencanworkitselfbecomethesourceofmotivation,whichiscrucialtomakeitsustainable.

“When

peopleexperiencedasenseofautonomywithregardtothechoice,theirenergyforsubsequenttaskswasnotdiminished.Animportantquestionthatdeservedempiricalattentionconcernsthepotentialforautonomouschoicetovitaliseorenhanceself-regulatorystrengthforsubsequenttasks.What,forexample,aretheconditionsthat

tasks.What,forexample,aretheconditionsthatwillleadautonomouschoicetoenhancepeople’smotivationfornewtasks?Wesuggestthatamongthefactorsthatarelikelytoaffectwhetherchoicewillbevitalizingisthenatureoftheoptionsbeingprovidedtotheperson.Ifapersonisofferedchoiceamongoptionsthatheorshedoesnotvalue,thataretrivialorirrelevant,thechoiceisunlikelytobevitalizingandmaybedepleting,evenifthereisnosubtlepressuretowardaparticularoption.Ontheotherhand,havingautonomouschoiceamongoptionsthatdohavepersonalvaluemayindeedbequiteenergizing.”(Moller,2006,1034)

Organizingtheworksowecansteerourprojectsinthemostpromisingdirectionnotonlyallowsus tostayfocusedfor longer,butalso tohavemorefun–andthatisafact(Gilbert2006).[39]

13.4FinishingandReviewThereisnotmuchlefttosayaboutthelasttwostepsbecausethemainworkisalreadydone.A key point: Structure the text and keep it flexible.While the slip-boxwas

verymuchaboutexperimentingwithandgeneratingnewideas,wenowneedtobringourthoughtsintoalinearorder.Thekeyistostructurethedraftvisibly.

Itisnotsomuchaboutdecidingonceandforall

whattowriteinwhichchapterorparagraph,butwhatdoesnotneedtobewritteninaparticularpartofthemanuscript.Bylookingatthe(alwayspreliminary)structure,youcanseeifinformationwillbementionedinanotherpart.

Theprobleminthisstageisalmostexactlytheoppositeofthe“blankscreen.”

Insteadofnotknowinghowtofillthepages,wehavesomuchathandthatwehavetocurbourimpulsetomentioneverythingatthesametime.

Thedesktopfunctionof theZettelkastenis theplacetosortyournotesforaparticularproject. Ithelpswithdevelopingaroughstructure,but italsoallowsyoutokeep it flexible.Thestructureofanargument ispartof itand thereforewillchangeduring theprocessofdeveloping it– it isnotavessel tobe filledwithcontent.Assoonasthestructurenotlongerchangesmuch,wecanhappilycall it a “table of contents.” But even then, it helps to see it as a structuralguidelineandnotaprescription.Itisnotunusualtochangetheorderofchaptersattheveryend.Another key point: Try working on different manuscripts at the same time.

While the slip-box is already helpful to get one project done, its real strengthcomes intoplaywhenwe startworkingonmultipleprojects at the same time.Theslip-boxisinsomewaywhatthechemicalindustrycalls“verbund.”Thisisa setup inwhich the inevitableby-productofoneproduction linebecomes theresourceforanother,whichagainproducesby-productsthatcanbeusedinotherprocessesandsoon,untilanetworkofproductionlinesbecomessoefficientlyintertwined that there is no chance of an isolated factory competing with itanymore.[40]Theprocessofreadingandwritinginevitablyproducesalotofunintendedby-

products.

Notallideascanfitintothesamearticle,andonlyafractionoftheinformationweencounterisusefulforoneparticularproject.

If we read something that is interesting, but not directly relevant to ourcurrentproject,wecanstilluseitforanotherprojectweareworkingonormightworkon.Everythingthatenrichesourslip-boxhas thepotential toendupinatextwemightwrite.Bytakingsmartnotes,wecollectenpassantthematerialforourfuturewritingsinoneplace.Theprojectsweworkoncanbeincompletelydifferentstagesofcompletion.Someofthemmightnotevenhavecometoourattention.Thisisadvantageousnotonlybecausewemakeprogressonthenextpapersorbookswhilewearestillworkingonthecurrentone,butalsobecauseitallowsustoswitchtootherprojectswheneverwegetstuckorbored.Remember:Luhmann’sanswertothequestionofhowonepersoncouldbeso

productivewas thathenever forcedhimself todoanythingandonlydidwhatcame easily to him. “When I am stuck for one moment, I leave it and dosomethingelse.”Whenhewasaskedwhatelsehedidwhenhewasstuck,hisanswerwas:“Well,writingotherbooks.Ialwaysworkondifferentmanuscriptsatthesametime.Withthismethod,toworkondifferentthingssimultaneously,Inever encounter any mental blockages.” (Luhmann, Baecker, and Stanitzek1987,125–55)Itislikemartialarts:Ifyouencounterresistanceoranopposingforce,youshouldnotpushagainstit,butredirectittowardsanotherproductivegoal.Theslip-boxwillalwaysprovideyouwithmultiplepossibilities.

13.5BecominganExpertbyGivingupPlanningOneinconvenienttruthintheend:Theplanningskillsofstudentsarepathetic.The psychologists Roger Buehler, Dale Griffin and Michael Ross asked a

groupofstudentsto:1.Estimaterealisticallythetimetheywouldneedtofinishapaper.2.Estimateadditionallyhowlongtheythinktheywouldneeda.

ifeverythinggoesas

smoothlyaspossibleor

b.

ifeverythingthat

couldgowrongwouldgowrong.

Interestingly, the majority of the student’s “realistic” estimates were not sodifferent from their estimates for writing under perfect conditions. This aloneshouldhavegiventhempauseforthought.

Butwhentheresearcherscheckedhowmuchtimethestudentsreallyneeded,itwasmuch,muchlongerthantheyestimated.Notevenhalfofthestudentsmanagedtofinishtheirpapersinthetimetheythoughttheywouldneedundertheworstpossibleconditions(Buehler,GriffinandRoss1994).Theresearchersdidnotassumethathalfofthestudentssuddenlyfacedcalamitiesbeyondtheirimagination.

In another study a year later, the psychologists lookedmore closely at thisphenomenon, which still puzzled them because the students could haveansweredanywaytheyliked–therewasnobenefitingivingoverlyoptimisticanswers.

Theyaskedthestudentstogivethemtime

Theyaskedthestudentstogivethemtimerangesinwhichtheywereeither50%,70%or99%suretofinishtheirpaper.

Again: They were free to give any answer. But, sure enough, only 45%managedtogettheirpapersdonewithinthetimetheyweresuretheyhada99%likelihood to finish it under any condition they regarded as possible (Buehler,Griffin, andRoss 1995).Now, youmight think itwouldmake a difference toremind them about their not-so-perfect guesses last time. The researchersthought so, but the students proved them wrong: Experience doesn’t seem toteachstudentsanything.Butthereisoneconsolation:Ithasnothingtodowithbeingastudent.Ithas

something to do with being human. Even the people who study thisphenomenon,whichiscalledtheoverconfidencebias,admitthattheytoofallforit(Kahneman2013,245ff).Thelessontodrawistobegenerallyscepticalaboutplanning,especiallyifit

ismerelyfocusedontheoutcome,notontheactualworkandthestepsrequiredtoachieveagoal.Whileitdoesn’thelptoimagineoneselfthegreatauthorofasuccessful and timely finished paper, it does make a difference if we have arealistic ideaaboutwhatneeds tobedonetoget there inourminds.Weknowfromsportsthatitdoesn’thelpwhenathletesimaginethemselvesaswinnersofarace, but it makes a big difference if they imagine all the training that isnecessarytobeabletowin.Havingamorerealisticideainmindnotonlyhelpsthemtoperformbetter,italsobooststheirmotivation(Singeretal.

2001).Weknowtodaythatthisisnotonlytrueforathletes,butforanyworkthatneedseffortandendurance(PhamandTaylor1999).Writingdefinitelybelongsinthiscategory.

Theotherlessonisnotthatwecan’tlearnfromourexperiences,butthatwecanonlylearnfromourexperiencesiffeedbackfollowsshortlyafterwards–and

maybemorethanonceinawhile.Disassemblingthebigchallengeof“writingapaper” into small, manageable tasks helps to set realistic goals that can bechecked on a regular basis. If someone starts from the unrealistic assumptionthat a paper can bewritten by following a linear plan of finding a topic first,doing literature research second, followed by separable stages of reading,thinking,writingandproof-reading,thenitisnosurprisethatanytimeplanningthatisbasedonthisassumptionwillbeunrealisticaswell.

Oncewedosomeresearch,wemaydiscoverthatourinitialideawasnotasgoodaswethought;oncewereadsomething,itislikelythatwewilldiscoversomethingelsetoread,becausethatishowwediscoverliterature;oncewestartwritingdownourarguments,itislikelythatwewillrealisethatweneedtotakesomethingelseintoaccount,changeourinitialideasorgobacktoanarticlewemightnothaveunderstoodwellenough.Noneofthisisunusual,butallofthiswillmessupanygrandplans.

Ifwe insteadsetout towrite, say, threenotesonaspecificday, reviewoneparagraphwewrotethedaybeforeorcheckalltheliteraturewediscoveredinanarticle,weknowexactlyattheendofthedaywhatwewereabletoaccomplishandcanadjustourexpectationsforthenextday.Gettinghundredsofthesecasesof feedbackover the courseof ayearwillmakeusmuchmore likely to learnfrom themand tobecomemore realisticaboutourproductivity than ifwe justmissadeadlineonceinawhile,which,ofcourse,willnothappenagain–untilnexttime.Theproblemwiththelinearmodelisnotjustthatonephasemightneedlonger

thanplanned,butthatitishighlyunlikelythatwewillfinishaphasesoonerthanplanned. If the whole problem was just an error in judgement, we would onaverage overestimate the time we need as often as we underestimate it, butunfortunately, that is not how it works. According to the famous law ofParkinson,everykindofworktendstofill thetimewesetasidefor it, likeairfillseverycornerofaroom(Parkinson1957).While this is almost a universal law for longer time frames, the opposite is

true for tasks that can be completed in one go. This is partly due to theaforementionedZeigarnik effect (Zeigarnik 1927), inwhichour brains tend tostayoccupiedwithataskuntilitisaccomplished(orwrittendown).Ifwehavethefinishlineinsight,wetendtospeedup,aseveryoneknowswhohaseverrunamarathon. Thatmeans that themost important step is to get started.Ritualshelp,too(Currey2013).But the biggest difference lies in the task you are facing to startwith. It is

mucheasiertogetstartedifthenextstepisasfeasibleas“writinganote,”

“collectwhatisinterestinginthispaper”or“turningthisseriesofnotesintoaparagraph”thanifwedecidetospendthenextdayswithavagueandill-definedtasklike“keepworkingonthatoverduepaper.”

13.6TheActualWritingErnestHemingwaywasonceaskedhowoftenherewrotehisfirstdraft.Hisanswer:“Itdepends.Irewrotetheendingof‘AFarewelltoArms,’thelast

pageofit,thirty-ninetimesbeforeIwassatisfied.”“Was there some technical problem there? What was it that had stumped

you?”theinterviewerasked.“Gettingthewordsright,”Hemingwayreplied(ParisReview,1956).Ifthereisonepieceofadvicethatisworthgiving,it istokeepinmindthat

thefirstdraftisonlythefirstdraft.SlavojŽižeksaidinaninterview[41]thathewouldn’t be able to write a single sentence if he didn’t start by convincing

himself hewas onlywriting down some ideas for himself, and thatmaybe hecouldturnitintosomethingpublishablelater.Bythetimehestoppedwriting,hewasalwayssurprisedtofindthattheonlythinglefttodowasrevisethedrafthealreadyhad.One of themost difficult tasks is to rigorously deletewhat has no function

withinanargument–“killyourdarlings.”[42]Thisbecomesmucheasierwhenyoumovethequestionablepassagesintoanotherdocumentandtellyourselfyoumight use them later. For every document I write, I have another called “xy-rest.doc,” and every single time I cut something, I copy it into the otherdocument, convincingmyself that Iwill later look through it and add it backwhere itmightfit.Ofcourse, itneverhappens–but itstillworks.Otherswhoknowathingortwoaboutpsychologydothesame(cf.Thaler,2015,81f).

14MakeItaHabit“Itisaprofoundlyerroneoustruism,repeatedbyallcopybooksandbyeminentpeoplewhentheyaremaking speeches, thatwe should cultivate the habit of thinking ofwhatwe are doing. Theprecise opposite is the case. Civilization advances by extending the number of importantoperationswhichwecanperformwithoutthinkingaboutthem.”(Whitehead)[43]

The most reliable predictor of our behaviour in the immediate future is –surprise,surprise–theintentiontodoit.Ifwedecidetogotothegymnow,thechanceis thatwereallydogoto thegymnow.But this is,unfortunately,onlytrue for thevery immediate future.When itcomes to the longrun, researchersstruggle to find any measurable connection between our intentions and ouractualbehaviour(JiandWood2007;Nealetal.2012).Thereisoneexception,though:wemostcertainlyactaccordingtoourintentionifwehappentointendtodoexactlywhatweusedtodobefore.It is really easy to predict the behaviour of people in the long run. In all

likelihood,wewilldoinamonth,ayearortwoyearsfromnowexactlywhatwehavedonebefore:eatasmanychocolatesasbefore,go to thegymasoftenasbefore,andgetourselvesintothesamekindsofargumentswithourpartnersasbefore.Toputitdifferently,goodintentionsdon’tlastverylong,usually.Wehave the best chance to change our behaviour over the long term ifwe

start with a realistic idea about the difficulties of behavioural change (Dean2013).

Andthatisnotsoeasy,becausethemoreweareusedtodoingsomethinginaparticularway,themoreincontrolwefeelaboutit,eventhoughwearelessincontrolofit.(Thisisinpartalsoduetotheaforementionedmere-exposureerror.)

“Thosewiththestrongesthabitswhoweretheleastsuccessfulinpredictingtheirbehaviouroverthecomingweekwerethemostconfidentintheirpredictions.

Thefindingisstrikingbecauseithintsatoneof

Thefindingisstrikingbecauseithintsatoneofthedarksidesofhabits.

Whenweperformanactionrepeatedly,itsfamiliarityseemstobleedbackintoourjudgmentsaboutthatbehavior.Weendupfeelingwehavemorecontroloverpreciselythebehavioursthat,inreality,wehavetheleastcontrolover.It’sanotherexampleofourthoughtprocessesworkingintheoppositewaytoourintuitiveexpectations.”(Dean2013,22)Thetrickisnottotrytobreakwitholdhabitsandalsonottousewillpowertoforceoneselftodosomethingelse,buttostrategicallybuildupnewhabitsthathaveachancetoreplacetheoldones.Thegoalhereistogetintothehabitoffetchingpenandpaperwheneverwereadsomething,towritedownthemostimportantandinterestingaspects.Ifwemanagetoestablisharoutineinthisfirststep,itbecomesmucheasiertodeveloptheurgetoturnthesefindingsintopermanentnotesandconnectthemwithothernotesintheslip-box.Itisnotsodifficulttogetusedto

thinkingwithinanexternalmemoryofnotes,astheadvantagesbecomeobviousquitequickly.Assoonaswehavedevelopedanewroutine,wecandowhatintuitivelyfeelsright,whichrequiresnoeffort.Watchingothersreadingbooksanddoingnothingotherthanunderliningsomesentencesormakingunsystematicnotesthatwillendupnowherewillsoonbeapainfulsight.

AFTERWORD

The Take Smart Notes principle works. Many successful writers, artists andacademicsusesomeformofaslip-box.Thisbookisalsowrittenwiththehelpof the slip-box. It was, for example, a note on “technology, acceptanceproblems” that pointed out to me that an answer to the question why somepeople struggle to implement the slip-box could be found in a book on thehistory of the shipping container. I certainly would not have looked for thatintentionally–doingresearchforabookoneffectivewriting!Thisisjustoneofmanyideasandconnectionstheslip-boxpointedouttome.Thatitisnotjustatool towritemore efficiently, but also a training device for serious long-termlearning,shouldhavebeenobvioustome,butwasn’t.OnlywhenIwastakingsmartnotesonmorerecentlearningexperimentsdiditdawnonmethatIaminthemiddleofputtingexactlyintopracticewhatisproventoworkbest.Iwanttopointout,though,thatIsometimeshaveideasallbymyself.The particular technique presented in this book enabledNiklasLuhmann to

become one of themost productive and innovative social theorists of the lastcentury.

Thereareincreasingnumbersofacademicsandnonfictionwriterstakingnotice.[44]Butitisstillnotaneasysellforthemajorityofstudentsandwriters.Therearedifferentreasonsforthis.Firstofall,thelong-term,cross-topicorganizationofnotes,whichisguidedonlybyone’sownunderstandingandinterest,isverymuchatoddswiththemodular,compartmentalisedandtop-downapproachinwhichthecurriculaof

universitiesandcollegesareorganised.Teachingisstillsetupforreview,andstudentsarenotreallyencouragedtoindependentlybuildanetworkofconnectionsbetweenheterogeneousinformation–despitetheradicalchangeinourunderstandingonhowourmemoryandlearningworks.Thereisalotoftalkaboutinnovativeapproaches.Butwithoutchangingtheactualworkflow,thistalkisidle.Someseeminglyinnovativeideas,likethe“learner-centred”

approach,oftendomoreharmthangood,astheystillneglecttheneedforanexternalscaffoldingtothinkin.Itisnotthelearnerwhoshouldbethefocusofattention.

The slip-box does not put the learner in the centre. Quite the contrary: Itallowsthelearnertolethisorherownthinkingbecomedecentralisedwithinanetwork of other ideas. Learning, thinking and writing should not be aboutaccumulatingknowledge,butaboutbecomingadifferentpersonwithadifferentwayofthinking.Thisisdonebyquestioningone’sownthinkingroutinesinthelightofnewexperiencesandfacts.The prevalence of linear and learner-centred approaches also lead to the

commonmisunderstanding about the use of the slip-box as a tool that can beusedwithoutchangingtheworkroutinesaroundit.Itisthenoftenusedsimplyasanarchivewhereyou just takeoutwhatyouput inearlier.This,ofcourse,willleadtodisappointment.Ifwearejuststoringinformation,therewouldbeno

need to use a slip-box. To reap its benefits, we need to change our workingroutines.Andthebasisforthatisadeepunderstandingonhowandwhyitworksandhowthedifferentstepsandtasksofwritingfittogether.Thisiswhyabook,notjustamanual,isneededtoexplaintheprincipleandideasbehindit.Anotherreasonwhythistechniqueisstillahardsellisthatmoststudentsonly

realise the need for a good system when they already struggling with theirwriting,typicallytowardstheendoftheuniversityprogram,whenabachelor’s,master’s or doctoral thesis needs to be written. It certainly still helps, but itwouldhavehelpedmuchmoreifonestartedearlier–verymuchlikesavingforretirement. It isalsodifficult tochangebehaviour in timesofstress.Themorepressurewefeel,themorewetendtosticktoouroldroutines–evenwhentheseroutinescausedtheproblemsandthestress in thefirstplace.This isknownasthetunneleffect(MullainathanandShafir2013).

ButMullainathanandShafir,whoexaminedthisphenomenonthoroughly,alsofoundawayoutofit:Changeispossiblewhenthesolutionappearstobesimple.

Andthatistheverygoodnewsattheend.Theslip-boxisassimpleasitgets.

Readwithapeninyourhand,takesmartnotesandmakeconnectionsbetweenthem.Ideaswillcomebythemselvesandyourwritingwilldevelopfromthere.

Thereisnoneedtostartfromscratch.Keepdoingwhatyouwoulddoanyway:Read,think,write.Justtakesmartnotesalongtheway.

If you want to kick-start your new note-taking efforts with a one-on-onecoaching session orwould like some help clarifying your thoughts on a pieceyouarewriting,checkoutmyoffersonhttp://takesmartnotes.com

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ahrens,Sönke.2014.ExperimentandExploration:FormsofWorld-Disclosure:FromEpistemologytoBildung.ContemporaryPhilosophiesandTheoriesinEducation,volume6.Dordrecht:Springer.

Allen,David.2001.GettingThingsDone:TheArtofStress-FreeProductivity.NewYork:Penguin.

Allison,ScottT.,andDavidM.Messick.1988.“TheFeature-PositiveEffect,AttitudeStrength,andDegreeofPerceivedConsensus.”PersonalityandSocialPsychologyBulletin14(2):231–41.

AndersEricsson,K.2008.“DeliberatePracticeandAcquisitionofExpertPerformance:AGeneralOverview.”AcademicEmergencyMedicine15(11):988–94.

Andreasen,NancyC.2014.“SecretsoftheCreativeBrain.”TheAtlantic,August.

Arnold,KathleenM.,andKathleenB.McDermott.2013.“Test-PotentiatedLearning:DistinguishingbetweenDirectandIndirectEffectsofTests.”JournalofExperimentalPsychology:Learning,Memory,andCognition39(3):940–45.

Balduf,Megan.2009.“UnderachievementAmongCollegeStudents”.JournalofAdvancedAcademics20(2):274–94.

Baram,T.,Y.Chen,C.Burgdorff,andC.Dubé.2008.“Short-termStressCanAffectLearningAndMemory.”ScienceDaily.

Baumeister,R.F.,E.Bratslavsky,M.Muraven,andD.M.Tice.1998.“EgoDepletion:IstheActiveSelfaLimitedResource?”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology74(5):1252–65.

Birnbaum,MonicaS.,NateKornell,ElizabethLigonBjork,andRobertA.Bjork.2013.“WhyInterleavingEnhancesInductiveLearning:TheRolesofDiscriminationandRetrieval”.Memory&Cognition41(3):392–402.

Bjork,RobertA.2011.“OntheSymbiosisofRemembering,ForgettingandLearning.”InSuccessfulRememberingandSuccessfulForgetting:aFestschriftinHonorofRobertA.Bjork,editedbyAaronS.Benjamin,1–22.

NewYork,NY:PsychologyPress.Bliss,T.V.P.,G.L.Collingridge,andR.G.M.Morris,Hrsg.2004.Long-termPotentiation:EnhancingNeurosciencefor30Years.Oxford ;NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Bornstein,RobertF.1989.“ExposureandAffect:OverviewandMeta-AnalysisofResearch,1968-1987.”PsychologicalBulletin106(2):265–89.

Brems,Christiane,MichaelR.Baldwin,LisaDavis,andLorraineNamyniuk.1994.“TheImposterSyndromeasRelatedtoTeachingEvaluationsandAdvisingRelationshipsofUniversityFacultyMembers.”TheJournalofHigherEducation65(2):183.

Brown,PeterC.2014.MakeItStick.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Bruner,JeromeS.1973.BeyondtheInformationGiven:StudiesinPsychologyofKnowing.EditedbyJeremyM.Anglin.NewYork:W.W.Norton&Company.

Bruya,Brian,Hrsg.2010.EffortlessAttention:ANewPerspectiveintheCognitiveScienceofAttentionandAction.Cambridge,Mass:TheMITPress.

Buehler,Roger,DaleGriffin,andMichaelRoss.1994.“ExploringThe‘PlanningFallacy:’WhyPeopleUnderestimateTheirTaskCompletionTimes.”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology67(3):366–81.

———.1995.“It’sAboutTime:OptimisticPredictionsinWorkandLove.”EuropeanReviewofSocialPsychology6(1):1–32.

Burkeman,Oliver.2013.TheAntidote:HappinessforPeopleWhoCan’tStandPositiveThinking.Edinburgh:CanongateBooks.

Byrne,JohnH.2008.LearningandMemory:AComprehensiveReference,Four-VolumeSet.Cambridge,MA:AcademicPress.

Carey,Benedict.2014.HowWeLearn:TheSurprisingTruthAboutWhen,Where,andWhyItHappens.NewYork:RandomHouse.

Carter,EvanC.,andMichaelE.McCullough.2014.“PublicationBiasandtheLimitedStrengthModelofSelf-Control:HastheEvidenceforEgoDepletionBeenOverestimated?”FrontiersinPsychology5(July).

Clance,PaulineR.,andSuzanneA.Imes.1978.“TheImposterPhenomenoninHighAchievingWomen:DynamicsandTherapeuticIntervention.”

Psychotherapy:Theory,Research&Practice15(3):241–47.Clark,CharlesH.1958.Brainstorming:TheDynamicNewWaytoCreateSuccessfulIdeas.GardenCity,NY:Doubleday&Company.

Cowan,N.2001.“TheMagicalNumber4inShort-TermMemory:AReconsiderationofMentalStorageCapacity.”TheBehavioralandBrainSciences24(1):87-114-185.

Csikszentmihalyi,Mihaly.1975.BeyondBoredomandAnxiety.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Currey,Mason.2013.DailyRituals:HowGreatMindsMakeTime,FindInspiration,andGettoWork.PanMacmillan.

Darwin,Charles.1958.TheAutobiographyofCharlesDarwin,1809-1882:WithOriginalOmissionsRestored.Collins.

Dean,Jeremy.2013.MakingHabits,BreakingHabits:WhyWeDoThings,WhyWeDon’t,andHowtoMakeAnyChangeStick.Boston,MA:DaCapoPress.

DePasque,Samantha,andElizabethTricomi.2015.“EffectsofIntrinsicMotivationonFeedbackProcessingDuringLearning.”NeuroImage119(October):175–86.

Dobrynin,NikolajFyodorovich.1966.“BasicProblemsofthePsychologyofAttention:PsychologicalScienceintheUSSR.”InU.S.Dept.ofCommerce,ClearinghouseforFederalScientificandTechnicalInformation,274–91.Washington,DC.

Doyle,Terry.2008.HelpingStudentsLearninaLearner-CenteredEnvironment:AGuidetoFacilitatingLearninginHigherEducation.Sterling,Virginia:StylusPublishing.

Doyle,Terry,andToddZakrajsek.2013.TheNewScienceofLearning:HowtoLearninHarmonyWithYourBrain.Sterling,Virginia:StylusPublishing.

Dunlosky,John,KatherineA.Rawson,ElizabethJ.Marsh,MitchellJ.Nathan,andDanielT.Willingham.2013.“ImprovingStudents’LearningWithEffectiveLearningTechniquesPromisingDirectionsFromCognitiveandEducationalPsychology.”PsychologicalScienceinthePublicInterest14(1):4–58.

Dweck,CarolS.2006.Mindset:TheNewPsychologyofSuccess.NewYork:

RandomHouse.———.2013.Self-Theories:TheirRoleinMotivation,Personality,andDevelopment.NewYork:PsychologyPress.

Ebbinghaus,Hermann.(1885).ÜberdasGedächtnis:UntersuchungenzurexperimentellenPsychologie.Berlin:Duncker&Humblot.

Engber,Daniel,andChristinaCauterucci.2016.“EverythingIsCrumbling.”Slate,March6.

Ericsson,K.Anders,RalfT.Krampe,andClemensTesch-Römer.1993.“TheRoleofDeliberatePracticeintheAcquisitionofExpertPerformance.”PsychologicalReview100(3):363–406.

Fehrman,Craig.2011.“TheIncredibleShrinkingSoundBite.”Boston.com,January2.

Feynman,RichardP.1963.“TheProblemofTeachingPhysicsinLatinAmerica.”http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/46/2/LatinAmerica.htm.

———.1985.“SurelyYou’reJoking,Mr.Feynman!”:AdventuresofaCuriousCharacter.NewYork:W.W.Norton.

Fishbach,Ayelet,TalEyal,andStaceyR.Finkelstein.2010.HowPositiveandNegativeFeedbackMotivateGoalPursuit:FeedbackMotivatesGoalPursuit.SocialandPersonalityPsychologyCompass,4(8),517–530.

Fleck,Ludwik.1979.TheGenesisandDevelopmentofaScientificFact,editedbyT.J.TrennandR.K.Merton,forewordbyThomasKuhn.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Flyvbjerg,Bent.2001.Makingsocialsciencematter:WhySocialInquiryFailsandHowItCanSucceedAgain.Oxford,UK;NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Franklin,Benjamin.1840.MemoirsofBenjaminFranklin.EditedbyWilliamDuane.McCarty&Davis.

Fritzsche,BarbaraA.,BethRappYoung,andKaraC.Hickson.2003.“IndividualDifferencesinAcademicProcrastinationTendencyandWritingSuccess”.PersonalityandIndividualDifferences35(7):1549–57.

Gadamer,Hans-Georg.2004.TruthandMethod.2ndrev.edition.Trans.J.WeinsheimerandD.G.Marshall.NewYork:Crossroad.

Gawande,Atul.2002.Complications:ASurgeon’sNotesonanImperfectScience.NewYork:MetropolitanBooks.

———.2010.TheChecklistManifesto:HowtoGetThingsRight.NewYork:MetropolitanBooks.

Getzels,JacobWarren,andMihalyCsikszentmihalyi.1976.TheCreativeVision:ALongitudinalStudyofProblemFindinginArt.NewYork:Wiley.

Gigerenzer,Gerd.2008.GutFeelings:TheIntelligenceoftheUnconscious.NewYork:VikingPenguin.

Gilbert,DanielTodd.2006.StumblingonHappiness.NewYork:A.A.Knopf.Glynn,ShawnM.,GitaTaasoobshirazi,andPeggyBrickman.2009.“ScienceMotivationQuestionnaire:ConstructValidationwithNonscienceMajors”.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching46(2):127–46.

Goldstone,RobertL.,andUriWilensky.2008.“PromotingTransferbyGroundingComplexSystemsPrinciples.”JournaloftheLearningSciences17(4):465–516.

Govorun,Olesya,andB.KeithPayne.2006.‘Ego—DepletionandPrejudice:SeparatingAutomaticandControlledComponents’.SocialCognition24(2):111–136.

Granovetter,MarkS.1973.“TheStrengthofWeakTies.”AmericanJournalofSociology78(6):1360–80.

Gunel,Murat,BrianHand,andVaughanPrain.2007.“WritingforLearninginScience:ASecondaryAnalysisofSixStudies.”InternationalJournalofScienceandMathematicsEducation5(4):615–37.

Hagen,Wolfgang.1997.DieRealitätderMassenmedien.RadioBremenimGesprächmitNiklasLuhmann.http://www.whagen.de/gespraeche/LuhmannMassenmedien.htm.

Hallin,DanielC.1994.WeKeepAmericaonTopoftheWorld:TelevisionJournalismandthePublicSphere.London;NewYork:Routledge.

Hearn,MarshaDavis,TomBaranowski,JaniceBaranowski,ColleenDoyle,MatthewSmith,LillianS.Lin,andKenResnicow.1998.“EnvironmentalInfluencesonDietaryBehavioramongChildren:AvailabilityandAccessibilityofFruitsandVegetablesEnableConsumption”.JournalofHealthEducation29(1):26–32.

Hollier,Denis.2005.“Notes(ontheIndexCard).”October112(April):35–44.Inzlicht,M.,L.McKay,andJ.Aronson.2006.“StigmaasEgoDepletion:HowBeingtheTargetofPrejudiceAffectsSelf-Control”.PsychologicalScience17(3):262–69.

James,William.1890.ThePrinciplesofPsychology.NewYork:H.HoltandCompany.

Jang,Yoonhee,JohnT.Wixted,DianePecher,RenéZeelenberg,andDavidE.Huber.2012.“DecomposingtheInteractionBetweenRetentionIntervalandStudy/TestPractice:TheRoleofRetrievability.”TheQuarterlyJournalofExperimentalPsychology65(5):962–75.

Ji,MindyF.,andWendyWood.2007.“PurchaseandConsumptionHabits:NotNecessarilyWhatYouIntend.”JournalofConsumerPsychology17(4):261–76.

Job,V.,C.S.Dweck,andG.M.Walton.2010.“EgoDepletion–IsItAllinYourHead?ImplicitTheoriesAboutWillpowerAffectSelf-Regulation.”PsychologicalScience21(11):1686–93.

Johnson,Steven.2011.WhereGoodIdeasComefrom:TheNaturalHistoryofInnovation.1.paperbacked.NewYork:RiverheadBooks.

Kahneman,Daniel.2013.Thinking,FastandSlow.Reprintedition.NewYork:Farrar,StrausandGiroux.

Kant,Immanuel.1784.“WhatisEnlightenment?”TranslatedbyMaryC.Smith.1991.http://www.columbia.edu/acis/ets/CCREAD/etscc/kant.html.

Karpicke,JeffreyD.,AndrewC.Butler,andHenryL.RoedigerIII.2009.“MetacognitiveStrategiesinStudentLearning:DoStudentsPractiseRetrievalWhenTheyStudyonTheirOwn?”Memory17(4):471–79.

Kornell,Nate,andRobertA.Bjork.2008.“LearningConceptsandCategories:IsSpacingthe‘EnemyofInduction’?”PsychologicalScience19(6):585–92.

Kruger,Justin,andDavidDunning.1999.‘UnskilledandUnawareofIt:HowDifficultiesinRecognizingOne’sOwnIncompetenceLeadtoInflatedSelf-Assessments’.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology77(6):1121–34.

Kruse,Otto.2005.KeineAngstvordemleerenBlatt:ohneSchreibblockadendurchsStudium.Frankfurt/Main:Campus.

Langer,E.J.,andJ.Rodin.1976.“TheEffectsofChoiceandEnhancedPersonal

ResponsibilityfortheAged:AFieldExperimentinanInstitutionalSetting.”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology34(2):191–98.

Latour,Bruno,andSteveWoolgar.1979.LaboratoryLife:TheSocialConstructionofScientificFacts.BeverlyHills:SagePublications.

Levin,MaryE.,andJoelR.Levin.1990.“ScientificMnemonomies:MethodsforMaximizingMoreThanMemory”.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal27(2):301–21.

Levinson,Marc.2006.TheBox:HowtheShippingContainerMadetheWorldSmallerandtheWorldEconomyBigger.Princeton,N.J:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Levy,Neil.2011.“NeuroethicsandtheExtendedMind.”InJudyIllesandB.J.Sahakian(Ed.),OxfordHandbookofNeuroethics,285–94,OxfordUniversityPress.

Lichter,S.Robert.2001.“APlagueonBothPartiesSubstanceandFairnessinTVElectionNews”.TheHarvardInternationalJournalofPress/Politics6(3):8–30.

Loewenstein,Jeffrey.(2010).HowOne’sHookIsBaitedMattersforCatchinganAnalogy.InB.H.Ross(Ed.),ThePsychologyofLarningandMotivation:AdvancesinResearchandTheory,149–182.Amsterdam:AcademicPress.

Lonka,Kirsti.2003.“HelpingDoctoralStudentstoFinishTheirTheses.”InTeachingAcademicWritinginEuropeanHigherEducation,editedbyLennartBjörk,GerdBräuer,LotteRienecker,andPeterStrayJörgensen,113–31.StudiesinWriting12.SpringerNetherlands.

Luhmann,Niklas.1992.“KommunikationmitZettelkästen.EinErfahrungsbericht.”InUniversitätalsMilieu.KleineSchriften.,editedbyAndréKieserling,53–61.Bielefeld:Haux.

———.1997.DieGesellschaftderGesellschaft.FrankfurtamMain:Suhrkamp.———.2000.“LesenLernen.”InShortCuts,150–57.FrankfurtamMain:Zweitausendeins.

Luhmann,Niklas,DirkBaecker,andGeorgStanitzek.1987.Archimedesundwir:Interviews.Berlin:Merve.

Lurija,AleksandrRomanovič.1987.TheMindofaMnemonist:ALittleBookaboutaVastMemory.CambridgeMA:HarvardUniversityPress.

MacLeod,ColinM.2007.“TheConceptofInhibitioninCognition.”InInhibitioninCognition,editedbyDavidS.GorfeinandColinM.MacLeod,3–23.Washington:AmericanPsychologicalAssociation.

Mangel,Marc,andFranciscoJ.Samaniego.1984.“AbrahamWald’sWorkonAircraftSurvivability.”JournaloftheAmericanStatisticalAssociation79(386):259–67.

Manktelow,K.I.,andKennethJ.WCraik,(Ed.).2004.“TheHistoryofMentalModels.”InPsychologyofReasoning:TheoreticalandHistoricalPerspectives,179–212.NewYork:PsychologyPress.

Markman,K.D.,M.J.Lindberg,L.J.Kray,andA.D.Galinsky.2007.“ImplicationsofCounterfactualStructureforCreativeGenerationandAnalyticalProblemSolving.”PersonalityandSocialPsychologyBulletin33(3):312–24.

Marmot,M.G.,H.Bosma,H.Hemingway,E.Brunner,andS.Stansfeld.1997.“ContributionofJobControlandOtherRiskFactorstoSocialVariationsinCoronaryHeartDiseaseIncidence.”Lancet350(9073):235–39.

Marmot,MichaelG.2006.“StatusSyndrome:AChallengetoMedicine.”JAMA295(11):1304–7.

Maslow,AbrahamH.1966.ThePsychologyofScience.ChapelHill,NC:MauriceBassett.

Mata,J.,Todd,P.M.,Lippke,S.2010.WhenWeightManagementLasts.LowerPerceivedRuleComplexityIncreasesAdherence.Appetite,54(1),37–43.

McDaniel,MarkA.,andCarolM.Donnelly.1996.“LearningwithAnalogyandElaborativeInterrogation.”JournalofEducationalPsychology88(3):508–19.

McMath,RobertM.,andThomForbes.1999.WhatWereTheyThinking?NewYork:CrownBusiness.

Miller,GeorgeA.1956.“Themagicalnumberseven,plusorminustwo:somelimitsonourcapacityforprocessinginformation.”PsychologicalReview63(2):81–97.

Moller,A.C.2006.“ChoiceandEgo-Depletion:TheModeratingRoleofAutonomy”.PersonalityandSocialPsychologyBulletin32(8):1024–36.

Mueller,P.A.,andD.M.Oppenheimer.2014.“ThePenIsMightierThantheKeyboard:AdvantagesofLonghandOverLaptopNoteTaking.”

PsychologicalScience25(6):1159–68.Mullainathan,Sendhil,andEldarShafir.2013.Scarcity:WhyHavingTooLittleMeansSoMuch.London:PenguinUK.

Mullen,Brian,CraigJohnson,andEduardoSalas.1991.“ProductivityLossinBrainstormingGroups:AMeta-AnalyticIntegration.”BasicandAppliedSocialPsychology12(1):3–23.

Munger,Charles.1994.“ALessononElementary,WorldlyWisdomasitRelatestoInvestmentManagement&Business.”SpeechgivenatUSCBusinessSchool.

Muraven,Mark,DianneM.Tice,andRoyF.Baumeister.1998.“Self-ControlasaLimitedResource:RegulatoryDepletionPatterns”.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology74(3):774–89.

Nassehi,Armin.2015.DieletzteStundederWahrheit.WarumrechtsundlinkskeineAlternativenmehrsindundGesellschaftganzandersbeschriebenwerdenmuss.Hamburg:Murmann.

Neal,DavidT.,WendyWood,JenniferS.Labrecque,andPhillippaLally.2012.“HowDoHabitsGuideBehavior?PerceivedandActualTriggersofHabitsinDailyLife.”JournalofExperimentalSocialPsychology48(2):492–98.

Newman,Joseph,WilliamT.WolffandEliotT.Hearst.1980.“TheFeature-PositiveEffectinAdultHumanSubjects.”JournalofExperimentalPsychology.HumanLearningandMemory6(5):630–50.

Nickerson,RaymondS.1998.“ConfirmationBias:AUbiquitousPhenomenoninManyGuises.”ReviewofGeneralPsychology2(2):175–220.

Ophir,Eyal,CliffordNassandAnthonyD.Wagner.2009.“CognitiveControlinMediaMultitaskers.”ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences106(37):15583–87.

Oppenheimer,DanielM.2006.“ConsequencesofEruditeVernacularUtilizedIrrespectiveofNecessity:ProblemswithUsingLongWordsNeedlessly”.AppliedCognitivePsychology20(2):139–56.

Painter,JamesE,BrianWansink,andJulieB.Hieggelke.2002.“HowVisibilityandConvenienceInfluenceCandyConsumption”.Appetite38(3):237–38.

Parkinson,NorthcoteC.1957.Parkinson`sLawandOtherStudiesofAdministration.Cambridge-Massachusetts:TheRiversidePress.

Peters,Sibylle,andMartinJörgSchäfer.2006.“IntellektuelleAnschauung-unmöglicheEvidenz.”InIntellektuelleAnschauung.FigurationenvonEvidenzzwischenKunstundWissen,editedbySibyllePetersandMartinJörgSchäfer,9–21.Bielefeld.

Pham,LienB.,andShelleyE.Taylor.1999.“FromThoughttoAction:EffectsofProcess-VersusOutcome-BasedMentalSimulationsonPerformance.”PersonalityandSocialPsychologyBulletin25(2):250–60.

Quiller-Couch,Arthur.2006.OntheArtofWriting.Mineola,NY:DoverPublications.

Rassin,EricG.C.2014.“ReducingtheFeature-PositiveEffectbyAlertingPeopletoItsExistence.”Learning&Behavior42(4):313–17.

Ratey,JohnJ.2008.Spark:TheRevolutionaryNewScienceofExerciseandtheBrain.NewYork:Little,Brown&Company.

Reeve,Johnmarshall.2009.“WhyTeachersAdoptaControllingMotivatingStyleTowardStudentsandHowTheyCanBecomeMoreAutonomySupportive”.EducationalPsychologist44(3):159–75.

Reeve,Johnmarshall,andHyungshimJang.2006.“WhatTeachersSayandDotoSupportStudents’AutonomyduringaLearningActivity.”JournalofEducationalPsychology98(1):209–18.

Rheinberger,Hans-Jörg.1997.TowardaHistoryofEpistemicThings:SynthesizingProteinsintheTestTube.Stanford,Calif:StanfordUniversityPress.

Rickheit,Gert,andC.Sichelschmidt.1999.“MentalModels:SomeAnswers,SomeQuestions,SomeSuggestions”.InMentalModelsinDiscourseProcessingandReasoning,editedbyGertRickheitandChristopherHabel,6–40.Cambridge,MA:Elsevier.

Rivard,LéOnardP.1994.“AReviewofWritingtoLearninScience:ImplicationsforPracticeandResearch.”JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching31(9):969–83.

Robinson,FrancisPleasant.1978.EffectiveStudy.6thed.NewYork:Harper&Row.

Rodin,Judith,andEllenJ.Langer.1977.“Long-termeffectsofacontrol-relevantinterventionwiththeinstitutionalizedaged.”JournalofPersonality

andSocialPsychology35(12):897–902.Roediger,HenryL.,andJeffreyD.Karpicke.2006.“ThePowerofTestingMemory:BasicResearchandImplicationsforEducationalPractice.”PerspectivesonPsychologicalScience1(3):181–210.

Rosen,Christine.2008.“TheMythofMultitasking.”TheNewAtlanticSpring(20):105–10.

Rothenberg,Albert.1971.“TheProcessofJanusianThinkinginCreativity.”ArchivesofGeneralPsychiatry24(3):195–205.

———.1996.“TheJanusianProcessinScientificCreativity.”CreativityResearchJournal9(2–3):207–31.

———.2015.Flightfromwonder:aninvestigationofscientificcreativity.Oxford;NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Ryfe,DavidM.,andMarkusKemmelmeier.2011.“QuotingPractices,PathDependencyandtheBirthofModernJournalism.”JournalismStudies12(1):10–26.

Sachs,Helmut.2013.RememberEverythingYouWantandManagetheRest:ImproveYourMemoryandLearning,OrganizeYourBrain,andEffectivelyManageYourKnowledge.AmazonDigitalServices.

Sainsbury,Robert.1971.“The‘FeaturePositiveEffect’andSimultaneousDiscriminationLearning.”JournalofExperimentalChildPsychology11(3):347–56.

Schacter,DanielL.2001.TheSevenSinsofMemory:HowtheMindForgetsandRemembers.Boston:HoughtonMifflin.

Schacter,DanielL.,JoanY.Chiao,andJasonP.Mitchell.2003.“TheSevenSinsofMemory.ImplicationsforSelf”.AnnalsoftheNewYorkAcademyofSciences1001(1):226–39.

Schmeichel,BrandonJ.,KathleenD.Vohs,andRoyF.Baumeister.2003.“IntellectualPerformanceandEgoDepletion:RoleoftheSelfinLogicalReasoningandOtherInformationProcessing”.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology85(1):33–46.

Schmidt,JohannesF.K.2013.“DerNachlassNiklasLuhmanns–eineersteSichtung:ZettelkastenundManuskripte.”SozialeSysteme19(1):167–83.

———.2015.“DerZettelkastenNiklasLuhmannsalsÜberraschungsgenerator.”

InSerendipity:VomGlückdesFindens.Köln:Snoeck.Schwartz,Barry.2007.TheParadoxofChoice.NewYork:HarperCollins.Searle,JohnR.1983.Intentionality,anEssayinthePhilosophyofMind.Cambridge;NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Shapin,Steven.1996.TheScientificRevolution.Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Singer,R.,D.S.Downs,L.Bouchard,andD.delaPena.2001.“TheInfluenceofaProcessversusanOutcomeOrientationonTennisPerformanceandKnowledge.”JournalofSportBehavior24(2):213–22.

Stein,BarryS.,JoanLittlefield,JohnD.Bransford,andMartinPersampieri.1984.“ElaborationandKnowledgeAcquisition.”Memory&Cognition12(5):522–29.

Stokes,PatriciaD.2001.“Variability,Constraints,andCreativity:SheddingLightonClaudeMonet.”AmericanPsychologist56(4):355–59.

Strack,Fritz,andThomasMussweiler.1997.“ExplainingtheEnigmaticAnchoringEffect:MechanismsofSelectiveAccessibility.”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology73(3):437–46.

Sull,DonaldandEisenhardt,KathleenM.2015.SimpleRules:HowtoThriveinaComplexWorld.Boston;NewYork:HoughtonMifflinHarcourt.

Swing,E.L.,D.A.Gentile,C.A.Anderson,andD.A.Walsh.2010.“TelevisionandVideoGameExposureandtheDevelopmentofAttentionProblems.”PEDIATRICS126(2):214–21.

Taleb,NassimNicholas.2005.FooledbyRandomness:TheHiddenRoleofChanceinLifeandintheMarkets.2nded.NewYork:RandomHouse.

Thaler,RichardH.2015.Misbehaving:TheMakingofBehavioralEconomics.W.W.Norton&Company.

Trollope,Anthony.2008.AnAutobiography.Newcastle:CSPClassicTexts.Vartanian,Oshin.2009.“VariableAttentionFacilitatesCreativeProblemSolving.”PsychologyofAesthetics,Creativity,andtheArts3(1):57–59.

Wagner,Ullrich,SteffenGais,HildeHaider,RolfVerleger,andJanBorn.2004.“Sleepinspiresinsight.”Nature427(6972):352–55.

Wamsley,ErinJ.,MatthewTucker,JessicaD.Payne,JosephA.Benavides,and

RobertStickgold.2010.“DreamingofaLearningTaskIsAssociatedwithEnhancedSleep-DependentMemoryConsolidation.”CurrentBiology20(9):850–55.

Wang,Zheng,andJohnM.Tchernev.2012.“The‘Myth’ofMediaMultitasking:ReciprocalDynamicsofMediaMultitasking,PersonalNeeds,andGratifications.”JournalofCommunication62(3):493–513.

Whitehead,A.N.(1911):AnIntroductiontoMathematics.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Wolfe,ChristopherR.,andM.AnneBritt.2008.“TheLocusoftheMysideBiasinWrittenArgumentation”.Thinking&Reasoning14(1):1–27.

Zeigarnik,Bluma.1927.“ÜberdasBehaltenerledigterundunerledigterHandlungen.”PsychologischeForschung9:1–85.

Zull,JamesE.2002.TheArtofChangingtheBrain:EnrichingthePracticeofTeachingbyExploringtheBiologyofLearning.Sterling,Va:StylusPublishing.

INDEX

Introduction1EverythingYouNeedtoKnow1.1GoodSolutionsareSimple–andUnexpected1.2TheSlip-box1.3Theslip-boxmanual2EverythingYouNeedtoDo2.1Writingapaperstepbystep3EverythingYouNeedtoHave3.1TheToolBox4AFewThingstoKeepinMind

TheFourUnderlyingPrinciples5WritingIstheOnlyThingThatMatters6SimplicityIsParamount7NobodyEverStartsFromScratch8LettheWorkCarryYouForward

TheSixStepstoSuccessfulWriting9SeparateandInterlockingTasks9.1GiveEachTaskYourUndividedAttention9.2Multitaskingisnotagoodidea9.3GiveEachTasktheRightKindofAttention9.4BecomeanExpertInsteadofaPlanner9.5GetClosure9.6ReducetheNumberofDecisions10ReadforUnderstanding

10.1ReadWithaPeninHand10.2KeepanOpenMind10.3GettheGist10.4LearntoRead10.5LearnbyReading11TakeSmartNotes11.1MakeaCareerOneNoteataTime11.2ThinkOutsidetheBrain11.3LearnbynotTrying11.4AddingPermanentNotestotheSlip-Box12DevelopIdeas12.1DevelopTopics12.2MakeSmartConnections12.3Compare,CorrectandDifferentiate12.4AssembleaToolboxforThinking12.5UsetheSlip-BoxasaCreativityMachine12.6ThinkInsidetheBox12.7FacilitateCreativitythroughRestrictions13ShareYourInsight13.1FromBrainstormingtoSlip-box-Storming13.2FromTopDowntoBottomUp13.3GettingThingsDonebyFollowingYourInterests13.4FinishingandReview13.5BecominganExpertbyGivingupPlanning13.6TheActualWriting14MakeItaHabit

Afterword

BibliographyIndex

[1] Cf. for example the writing guide of the University of Toronto:http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice

[2]Theresearchonwillpoweror“egodepletion”isinabitofturmoilatthemoment.Butitissafetosaythat using willpower is a terrible strategy to get things done in the long run. For an overview:https://replicationindex.wordpress.com/2016/04/18/is-replicability-report-ego-depletionreplicability-report-of-165-ego-depletion-articles/

[3] The introduction tohis theorywaspublished in1987 in the formofabookwith the title“SocialSystems”andthebookseriesnumber“666.”Thosewhowerenotawareofhisnote-takingsystemmighthave been tempted to think that this was not by chance, as his productivity could only have beenexplainedbyadealwiththedevil.

[4]https://youtu.be/qRSCKSPMuDc?t=37m30s(alllinksareontakesmartnotes.com)[5]Onthebackofhisnotes,youwillfindnotonlymanuscriptdrafts,butalsooldbillsordrawingsby

hischildren.[6] In theprogramZettelkasten, thedesktop iswhereyoucanbringnotes intoproject-specificorder.

Eachprojectshouldhaveitsowndesktop.Ifyouusepenandpaper,useyouractualdesktop.[7]ThisproblemisknownasMeno’sparadox(Plato,Meno80e,Grubetranslation).[8] SQ3R is the acronym for “Survey,Question, Read, Recite, Review,” developed by psychology

professorFrancisPleasantRobinsonfortheU.S.ArmyduringWorldWarII(Robinson,1978).[9]SQ4R,“Survey,Question,Read,Reflect,Recite,Review”willmostcertainlybereplacedsoonby

SQ5R–whateverthatwillstandfor.[10]Whiletherearenoofficialappsforsmartphonesavailableatthemoment,therearemultiplethird-party

solutionsforbothAndroidandiOS.[11]GoogleMontyPython“HowtoPlaytheFlute”.[12]UnfortunatelymostofitisinGerman:http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/soz/luhmann-archiv/[13]WhenevernopublishedEnglishversionofaGermantextisavailable,thetranslationisbymyself.[14]GuidetoAcademicWriting,EnglishandAmericanStudies,UniversityofBayreuth.[15]WritingandStyleGuideforUniversityPapersandAssignments,FirstversionpreparedbyFrançois-

PierreGingras(1998),SchoolofPoliticalStudies,FacultyofSocialSciences,UniversityofOttawa.[16]And,ofcourse,itisaddressingthe“fearoftheblankpage”(Kruse2005).[17]RyfeandKemmelmeiernotonlyshowthatthisdevelopmentgoesmuchfurtherbackintothepast

andfirstappearedinnewspapers(thequotesofpoliticiansgotalmosthalvedbetween1892and1968),butalsoposedthequestionifthiscanmaybealsobeseenasaformofincreasedprofessionalismofthemedia as they do not just let politicians talk as they wish (Ryfe and Kemmelmeier 2011). CraigFehrmanalsopointedouttheironyinthereceptionofthisrathernuancedstudy–itwasitselfreducedtoasoundbiteinthemedia(Fehrman2011).

[18] AsmuchasCsikszentmihalyi’sconceptof flowbecamepartofeveryday language, itwasneverthoroughly examined. In the 1960’s, some studies in the Soviet Union focused on “postvoluntaryattention,”whichbasicallymeansthesamething–anattentionwithouteffortthatisneitherinvoluntarynorvoluntary.Butalmostallof the study resultsareonlyavailable inRussianandnever found their

way into the international psychological discourse. (Cf. Bruya 2010, 4 with reference to Dobrynin1966).

[19]FlyvbjergdescribesthisexperimentandexamplenotonlywithreferencetothebookofDreyfusandDreyfus,butalsowithreferencetoextensivetalkswiththem.I thereforestickwith thedescriptioninFlyvbjerg2001.

[20]Thisiseventrueforhighlyspecialisedsurgeons(Gawande2002).[21]Here1195821962319664197051974becomes1.19582.19623.19664.19705.1974[22]Itisalmostimpossibletooverstatetheimportanceoftakingcareofthelittlethings.Notonlyarewe

easily distracted bymundane thoughts,we also routinely forget small but important thingswhenwedon’texternalisethem.Thisiswhychecklistsaresoimportantwhereversomethingseriousisatstake(cf.Gawande2010).

[23] Eventhoughthisisnotanewdiscovery,itisnowconfirmedbyneuroscientistsandexperimentalpsychologistsalike(DoyleandZakrajsek2013ref.Tambini,A.,Ketz,N.,andDavachi,L.2010).

[24]Neuroscientistswouldcallitlong-termpotentiation(Bliss,Collingridge,andMorris2004).[25]Thereisplentyofproofthatsleepingaidsinmemorization(cf.forexampleWagneretal.2004)and

canhelptofindsolutionstoproblems(Wamsleyetal.2010).[26]Franklin1840,250.[27]Hereisanexample:http://ds.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/viewer/toc/ZK_digital/1/#LOG_0000[28]Cf.WolfeandBritt,2008.[29]Theyclaimthisquoteisfrom(Jangetal.2012),butIcouldn’tfinditthere.Anyway:Itisagood

waytoputit.[30]Accordingtodifferentpersonalencounters.[31]About$30,000adjustedforinflation.[32]About$200,000ifyoutakethe7%theS&P500achievedhistoricallyadjustedforinflation.[33]“Genius:TheLifeAndScienceofRichardFeynman,”JamesGleick,PantheonBooks,1992(seepg.

409).[34]Justforfun,checkafewreferencesintheaforementionedbookfromDoyleandZakrajsek.Ibetyou

won’thavetosearchlongtofindsurprisingresults(DoyleandZakrajsek2013).[35] Youare lessprone tomake thiserror in judgement ifyouknowabout it (Rassin2014).Youare

welcome.[36] Anexceptionmightbe theauthorofmyfavouriteTripAdvisor review.HewroteofamuseumI

visited (and enjoyed): “There’s really not much to see in this museum. Just several buildings withpaintingshangingonthewalls.”(Google:UserOndskaMuseumPuriLukisan)

[37]http://longform.org/posts/longform-podcast-152-carol-loomis[38] Youcanavoid that, though,by lettingallmembersbrainstormfor themselvesandcompiling the

resultsafterwards.[39]Ifthatdoesn’tconvinceyou,thenmaybethefactthatthefeelingofbeingincontrollengthensyour

life (Langer and Rodin 1976; Rodin and Langer 1977). That is equally as well understood as theopposite:Thelossofcontrolhasanegativeeffectonyourhealth(M.G.Marmotetal.1997).Asashortoverview,cf.MichaelG.Marmot2006.

[40]Thefirstandmostdeveloped“verbund”islocatedinLudwigshafen,Germany.ItbelongstoBASF,theworld’sbiggestchemicalcompanyandoneofthemostconsistentlyprofitable,despitebeinglocatedinahighlydevelopedcountrywithhighwagesandsocialsecuritycosts.

[41]InthemovieŽižek!(USA2005;AstraTaylor).[42] ThequoteisvariablyattributedtoWilliamFaulkner,AllenGinsberg,OscarWilde,StephenKing

andothers.ItseemsthatthecriticArthurQuiller-CouchmentioneditfirstwhenhetoldhisstudentsatCambridgein1914:“Ifyouhererequireapracticalruleofme,Iwillpresentyouwiththis:Wheneveryoufeelanimpulsetoperpetrateapieceofexceptionallyfinewriting,obeyit—wholeheartedly—and

deleteitbeforesendingyourmanuscripttopress.Murderyourdarlings.”(Quiller-Couch2006,203)[43]AlfredNorthWhitehead,1911,61.[44]Cf.thediscussionsintheforumfortheprogramzettelkasten.de

How to take smart notes: one simple technique to boost writing, learning and thinking

Documents

Transcript of How to take smart notes: one simple technique to boost writing, learning and thinking