Functional Note Taking

Linked notes have opened up a lot of great possibilities. How can we level up the links? Notes can be thought of as a page or a block or whatever core entity you like, though perhaps it would be simpler if there was only Unify blocks and pages in Logseq|one type. Here follows a theory of notes (perhaps based on a theory of knowledge, who knows).

In a linked note taking, there are two basic types of objects: note and link.

A note is an atomic idea. A link exists in a note, and refers to another note. A note can be a file, a “block”, or some other basic entity. In linked note software, a link is usually denoted by brackets: [[A Note]].

In a thorough note system, everything can be represented by a note. We can have notes that aggregate other notes, notes for people, notes for places, notes for days, an image can be a note, a tag can be a note, a note can describe the note structure, etc.

What if links could be notes too?

# Claim 1
This claim is supported by [[Observation A]]

# Claim 1
[[supported by]]->[[Observation A]]

Then everything can become a Note, and I am thinking of a Note essentially as a function.

func [[A Cool New Idea]] -> (contents of [[A Cool New Idea]])

Whenever the arrow -> is used directly between two links, this indicates that the link before the arrow is describing the link after the arrow.

Right to left processing, so

[[Unsure]] -> [[Supports]] -> [[Observation 1]] -> [[Claim A]]

becomes

([[Certainty/High]] -> 
([[Supports]] -> 
([[Observation 1]] -> 
([[Claim A]])
)
)
)

both of which essentially mean:
I am highly certain that observation 1 supports claim A
(sidenote: not sure you would want to have a certainty link specifically)

Functional Note Taking

Linked notes have opened up a lot of great possibilities. How can we level up the links? Notes can be thought of as a page or a block or whatever core entity you like, though perhaps it would be simpler if there was only Unify blocks and pages in Logseq|one type. Here follows a theory of notes (perhaps based on a theory of knowledge, who knows).

In a linked note taking, there are two basic types of objects: note and link.

A note is an atomic idea. A link exists in a note, and refers to another note. A note can be a file, a “block”, or some other basic entity. In linked note software, a link is usually denoted by brackets: [[A Note]].

In a thorough note system, everything can be represented by a note. We can have notes that aggregate other notes, notes for people, notes for places, notes for days, an image can be a note, a tag can be a note, a note can describe the note structure, etc.

What if links could be notes too?

# Claim 1
This claim is supported by [[Observation A]]

# Claim 1
[[supported by]]->[[Observation A]]

Then everything can become a Note, and I am thinking of a Note essentially as a function.

func [[A Cool New Idea]] -> (contents of [[A Cool New Idea]])

Whenever the arrow -> is used directly between two links, this indicates that the link before the arrow is describing the link after the arrow.

Right to left processing, so

[[Unsure]] -> [[Supports]] -> [[Observation 1]] -> [[Claim A]]

becomes

([[Certainty/High]] -> 
([[Supports]] -> 
([[Observation 1]] -> 
([[Claim A]])
)
)
)

both of which essentially mean:
I am highly certain that observation 1 supports claim A
(sidenote: not sure you would want to have a certainty link specifically)

Linked notes have opened up a lot of great possibilities. How can we level up the links? Notes can be thought of as a page or a block or whatever core entity you like, though perhaps it would be simpler if there was only Unify blocks and pages in Logseq|one type. Here follows a theory of notes (perhaps based on a theory of knowledge, who knows).