This post is a companion post to the prior post on taking analog notes. In the first section I will cover the reasoning behind my system (which is more important than any specific implementation), and in the second section I will give a simple method for storing digital notes. If you only want the method, read the second section, but a method is far less important than understanding why you are doing what you are doing.
I. The Reason for the Method
Dr. Mayes and I fundamentally agree on our philosophy of taking notes (he as an academic, I as a parish pastor). Where we differ is only in method, which is not that important.
Storing notes is not about amassing quotes. It does little use to store a bunch of data that never gets used. Not only must the data be stored, but in such a way that it will present itself to us for thought when we need it. It is as if our notes become a lifelong conversation partner.
It’s not just saving quotes and passages, but why and what we were thinking in notating it. It’s not just that notes need to be linked, but write down why we are linking them.
Such notes guard our thinking against the feature positive effect (Ahrens-2017, 117). This is the natural tendency to give greater importance to information that readily comes to mind or to information that has been more recently acquired despite the fact that it might not be the most relevant information. This is a powerful argument against just preaching whatever comes to mind first in sermon preparation. Awareness of this defect in our thinking does make us less prone to engaging in it. But the classical process of inventio (discovering things to say) sought to combat this by asking questions to find the most relevant facts and argument. We force ourselves away from the feature positive effect and toward discovery by distinguishing Law and Gospel, the fivefold applications of Scripture, and by asking questions like: What is not meant? What is excluded? What is interesting? Relevant? Why? So what? Such inventio is also part of the note-making processes.
Simply put, writing is thinking. We often think we understand something we’ve read or heard but then struggle to express those ideas in writing or in clear, unbroken speech. If it can’t be written out, it doesn’t count. Here technology does us a disservice, and I will freely bow to the superiority of an all-analog system such as Dr. Mayes described. Although the digital revolution allows us to aggregate data like never before, we know less. Typing and digital recordings allow us to record things verbatim. Handwritten notes are slower, and therein lies their power. Handwritten notes force us to summarize and rephrase as we read or listen to a lecture. Current psychology suggests that taking handwritten notes for lectures and books is better than digital note taking because it forces summarizing and elaboration. The ability to review every word is not the same as learning. But if I put the idea into my own words I thus prove that I understand it, whereas digital notes can be stored verbatim without understanding and therefore with less ability to recall (Ahrens-2017, 78).
The philosopher John Searle explains it with concision, “If you can’t say it clearly, you don’t understand it yourself.” Bad preaching and bad catechesis is unclear. With good reason did our orthodox fathers urge us to read our Bibles with pens in hand, creating our own outlines, connections, paraphrases, and summaries for each chapter of the Bible. In prescribing just such a method for his students, Johann Gerhard was 400 years ahead of the best-available modern neuroscientific findings about the plasticity of the brain and the formation of neural pathways. The old Socratic method generated learning by forcing elaboration, clarification, connection, and counter-argumentation. I used to feel bad asking catechumens questions to which I knew they did not (yet) have the answers. As it turns out, that is one of the most effective things a teacher can do: “If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” (Matt. 22:45).
“The best-researched and most successful learning method is elaboration” (Ahrens-2017, 89).
For these reasons, I do not use a pure digital system. Fleeting notes (see Dr. Mayes’s post) should be made with pencil and paper. But once I am ready to make a permanent note, I go digital. For me the reasons are simple:
- I will actually do it. I am not nearly committed enough to indexing and handwriting to maintain a proper analog system.
- When I write, I write on the computer. So my permanent notes are in the same place as my writing.
- If I want analog notes (e.g., during Bible class), I simply query the notes I want and hit “print.”
II. A Digital Method
When I read, I keep a folded half sheet of paper in the book and make notes with a pencil. A key is not to just mark things but to write down why you are marking them and what thoughts you have at the time.
The worthier of these notes then go into plain text computer files. One file per note. Use plain text because it is simple to search and will never be deprecated. Do not use proprietary formats or software. If you need formatting use something simple like Markdown (https://www.markdownguide.org/cheat-sheet/).
Again, do not use special programs. Not even MS Word. You can search
an entire plain text directory without hassle if you use a specific
file-naming scheme. I use DATE--TITLE_KEYWORDS.EXTENSION
(borrowed from here).
Using the date and time means that each note will have a unique ID, even
if the notes were created in the same morning.
Example: 20220719T072731–weak-faith-is-true-faith__faith_gerhard_justification.md
A sample note (click for larger size):
This scheme enables several features without becoming dependent on
any software. I know it exists, but I avoid special software because it is highly unlikely that
I will still be using it in 20 years. The metadata at the top of the file
is optional. Feel free to ignore or adapt. A useful addition might be to
add an author: field.
With this method, you can tag your notes and link them to each other by the unique filename. Anything that is a note on a Bible passage I tag with book and chapter (e.g., rom8). Need notes on Romans 8? Just search for “_rom8.” Simple. Therefore you can search them a number of ways: by content, date, name, keywords. And that’s mostly all just using the filename.
I don’t use an index or sort notes into folders. The computer makes them unnecessary, and I hate “deciding” where things go. There is also such thing as a “metanote” (tagged as such) which is like a mini index for a specific topic or research line, but I don’t use those much.
Why do I not worry about folders? If you think about it, whether you put notes in a book/file and index them or put them on notecards/textfiles and tag them, it amounts to the same thing. A folder on a computer is just a “tag.” With a digital system the “index” is auto-generated every time I search and I don’t have to maintain it.
To summarize:
- Always read with paper and a pencil
- Plain text only on the computer
- No special software dependencies besides a good plain text editor
- One “thought” = one file
- Notes need to be able to reference one another by a unique filename
- No indexing or sorting things into different folders
Final Thoughts
My sermons are stored in regular folders (one for each Sunday, but if I were starting from scratch, I wouldn’t bother with the folders). So if I have an idea, e.g., for Pentecost, I will open that file and save the note there. When I go to write that sermon I may or may not use that note. And if the note is worthy of being permanent, I will put it in my permanent notes and then put a reference to it in that sermon’s file.
I try to read some of my notes every day (synced to my phone), usually after my Bible reading. Sometimes this leads to writing new notes. By linking notes together, you can write entire papers or sermons “on accident” over time. I don’t do a lot of this as a preacher, though. Instead, when I write sermons I search and reference my notes. Often I make a note and then also link it in a file for an upcoming sermon to remind myself. I rarely write from a blank page anymore. Being on the One-year lectionary, I basically know for what Sunday any given note or thought I have throughout the year might be useful.
No comments:
Post a Comment