David et al.. Just a quick point while some may find " Myers-Briggs" useful for stimulating discussion about the diversity of people, it actually has being shown to have no basis in science or research, in fact the opposite, it is positively wrong in many respects. I know this as a fact from multiple sources and experts, but just like the concepts of "we only use 10% of our brain" or people are "left or right brained" they are simple urbane myths with no support in fact. I have also seen good evidence for "learning styles" and NLP (Neuro linguistic Programming) to also be total "hogwash". Although all of these ideas can stimulate thinking, it must be remembered that they are merely useful myths.
It is not that I want to argue this fact, there are resources out there if you look, I simple want to raise this as a counter position. Some related quotes “If I were to remain silent, I'd be guilty of complicity.” ― Albert Einstein “Always have something to say. The man who has something to say and who is known never to speak unless he has, is sure to be listened to.” ― Dale Carnegie Regards Tones On Tuesday, 20 July 2021 at 07:15:18 UTC+10 David Gifford wrote: > > Hi Si > > I read this the other day but didn't have time to comment. Now I am done > getting ready for our trip tomorrow and I have a moment to breathe. My > thoughts: > > 1. Fascinating that this is the *opposite* of Evergreen notes, which is > all the rage now. > 2. I think it would make more sense to allow overwriting notes, but take a > moment to think things through in the moment: might I need this version's > info later? Like Tones said, a combination approach. There could be > academic fields or professions where tracking the development of one's > thoughts is pretty important. But probably most people would feel fine > adding to or updating a note. > 3. It would be interesting to know the personality types (whether using > Myers-Briggs or OCEAN) that gravitate toward certain notetaking tools. This > person seems like he could be an OCD type, feeling the need to have all > information organized thoroughly. > 4. The article seems also to be pre-release propaganda for the Idea Flow > product. Probably best just to evaluate Idea flow when it becomes available > for preview. Maybe seeing it work will give us an idea on how to implement > in a useful way. > On Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 2:18:48 PM UTC-5 Si wrote: > >> I just came across this post: https://thesephist.com/posts/inc/, and it >> challenges a lot of my own views on effective note-taking practices, so I >> thought it was worth sharing here. >> >> The author advocates for a kind of chronological system, where as a rule >> notes are never updated after they are made, meaning that they retain a >> fixed position in time. It kind of reminded me of Soren's random thoughts: >> https://randomthoughts.sorenbjornstad.com/ >> >> Anyway this approach seems completely counter to my current approach to >> note-taking, where I want my notes to represent ideas that I am building >> over time with little regard to where or when they originally came from. >> >> I'm not particularly convinced, but I'm curious if anyone here has any >> thoughts? Do you see any advantages to this approach? Disadvantages? Do you >> think it could gel with the zettelkasten philosophy, or are they polar >> opposites? >> >> Just interested in hearing other peoples thoughts. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/a1727bc7-7ba2-46f5-b7da-970d950d0e60n%40googlegroups.com.
