A reading inbox to capture possibly-useful references

To avoid a proliferation of anxiety-inducing browser tabs and a terrifying folder of PDFs, it’s important to have an automatic procedure for capturing references to readings which might prove useful.

Once captured, each item in the inbox either:

1. gets trashed (doesn’t look like it’s worth a detailed read after all)
2. gets read in a serious fashion (i.e. Write about what you read to internalize texts deeply)
3. gets read shallowly and filed in the reference library
4. (maybe) gets added to some other list like “recipes to be cooked”

Importantly, this isn’t a “someday maybe” list. It doesn’t accumulate indefinitely, because then it wouldn’t be a reliable way to Close open loops.

So, when constructing a reading inbox, the important considerations are:

1. zero-friction capture for books, articles, web pages (to easily close that loop)
2. zero-friction to view the reading corresponding to an inbox item
3. zero-friction listing across item type
4. the inbox should encourage lingering items to be removed (e.g. it should be obvious when one has been passed over many times)

Interestingly, no existing “read later” or reference management system fits these criteria. They’re usually siloed by content type, and none of them encourages lingering items to be removed. See also: Beware automatic import into the reading inbox.

The reading inbox is an important release valve for things I encounter when on my smartphone (see Use phones to collect and triage, not (usually) to read).

Related: Incremental reading

References

Note-Taking when Reading the Web and RSS • Zettelkasten Method

The Inbox is the place to hold the items we either want to or need to pay attention to. A lot of stuff will never reach our inbox; we can shut off the noise outside.

Some things that found their way onto the reading lists turn out to be useless. Toss them. Putting items on the reading list is a tiny commitment only: we commit to pay attention to them later, but we don’t need to hold on to them if they don’t withstand a critical look.

Write about what you read to internalize texts deeply

If you want to deeply internalize something you’re reading, the best way I know is to write about it:

• because Understanding requires effortful engagement
  • and in particular, Writing forces sharper understanding
  • remember: Collecting material feels more useful than it usually is
• because otherwise you won’t Do your own thinking
• because Knowledge work should accrete and Evergreen note-writing helps reading efforts accumulate
• indeed: Most people read ineffectively

For deep understanding, it’s not enough to just highlight or write marginalia in books: there isn’t much pressure to synthesize, connect, or to get to the heart of things. And they don’t add up to anything over time as you read more. Instead, write Evergreen notes as you read.

But of course, it doesn’t always make sense to read in this way: much of the time you’re not really trying to internalize the text deeply, and text may not be worthy of that much attention: The best way to read is highly contextual.

Also, it’s worth noting: The most effective readers and thinkers I know don’t take notes when reading. Speaking at least for myself, experience has suggested that I need more support to effectively engage with what I’m reading.

Method

Our broad approach is an alternating cycle:

1. Collect passages that seem interesting and thoughts that emerge while reading: How to collect observations while reading
2. Process clusters of those passages and thoughts into lasting notes:How to process reading annotations into evergreen notes

References

Luhmann, N. (1992). Communicating with Slip Boxes. In A. Kieserling (Ed.), & M. Kuehn (Trans.), Universität als Milieu: Kleine Schriften (pp. 53–61). Retrieved from http://luhmann.surge.sh/communicating-with-slip-boxes

It is impossible to think without writing; at least it is impossible in any sophisticated or networked (anschlußfähig) fashion.

Levy, N. (2013). Neuroethics and the Extended Mind. In J. Illes & B. J. Sahakian (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics (pp. 285–294). Oxford University Press.

Notes on paper, or on a computer screen … do not make contemporary physics or other kinds of intellectual endeavour easier, they make it possible.