Scott P Scheper, page 3
After several months, I became a pretty advanced user of Obsidian. I had custom commands and macros that were fed inputs and spat out nicely formatted starter templates for my notes. I used these features extensively. I had dozens of hotkeys I would use for various things to save time. I became what I now call a “hotkey junkie.”
Nevertheless, discouraging thoughts would arise in my mind now and then.
The thoughts revolved around the fear that all I was really doing was busy work. Deep down, I felt like I was just majoring in the minor. “Never mistake activity for achievement,” as John Wooden would say.
At this point, I was looking at a folder size of 105 MB, with 1,272 items in it. Almost all the files were notes, though there were a few images and template files. After this much work, I imagined I would feel more tranquil and organized—or at the very least, closer to what I was trying to accomplish.
I had set out to use Obsidian to map out all the concepts from the books I was reading. My goal was to organize them into a cohesive whole that would become greater than the sum of its parts. I hoped to use the concepts to produce a book or a newsletter on marketing, copywriting, and cryptocurrency. Yet, I had ended up with what amounted to a rat’s nest of 1,272 linked files, and a nifty diagram presenting me with a bubble graph of the mess!
I felt hopeless, and like I had ventured further away from making sense of my readings. Even the mishmash of my commonplace book and Excel felt more helpful than the mess I had created with Obsidian.
At this point, a book showed up in the mail. I had heard about the book in the online course I had taken. The book, How to Take Smart Notes, was written by an academic named Sönke Ahrens. I began reading the book and soon encountered the same term, which I recall coming across on Foam’s website, where it had been implied that this term had a cultish following—the term was Zettelkasten.
Yet as I read the book How to Take Smart Notes and learned more about Zettelkasten and its creator, Niklas Luhmann, I started to gain a clearer understanding of what it was actually all about.
Ahrens provided more explicit detail on how a Zettelkasten worked compared with what I had found researching online. In addition, Ahrens explained how an analog Zettelkasten worked. Although it provided a very sparse description, it was the only description I had come across that explained how an analog Zettelkasten works.
Oddly, however, Ahrens seemed less interested in the functions of the analog Zettelkasten. Instead, he spent most of his time preaching that Luhmann’s system could be refitted for the digital age by using digital apps possessing note-linking capabilities. In this spirit, Ahrens seemed to invent new concepts for doing this, coining terms like fleeting notes, literature notes and permanent notes.
Although Ahrens’s notion sounded intriguing, from my previous experiences, it created a digital mess. Instead, I decided to give the analog version—the original version—a good solid try first.
As soon as I began using the Zettelkasten in analog form, I recall saying to myself, “Ahhh…so this is how all this stuff is supposed to work!” I remember thinking how different it was compared to the digital apps I had used—and how much better the analog version was! The next day, I wrote by hand for nearly twelve hours straight. I wanted to stop, but simply couldn’t. I had so many ideas I felt needed to be developed. In the previous months, I had spent most of my energy linking notes, formatting them, and making them “atomic.” Now my thoughts were pouring out. I remember writing so much that a callous formed on my index finger. Thoughts were being developed on paper and flowing from my mind. Yet, I could actually see myself using the knowledge and internally developing it over the long term. This experience was exciting.
Yet, Ahrens’s description of how an analog Zettelkasten worked was rather wanting. It was missing a ton of detail and was vaguely outlined in several paragraphs.19 But to Ahrens’s credit, his vague description was perhaps the best out there of how an analog Zettelkasten worked. To compensate for the vagueness of Ahrens’s description, I began researching online. Soon, I came across something fascinating: a special project had commenced at Bielefeld University in Germany, the same university where Luhmann was tenured. The project entailed digitizing Luhmann’s entire Zettelkasten (roughly ninety thousand notecards) and uploading it online for all to view.20
I began to scan Luhmann’s Online Archive and even started writing out the translated versions of his notes by hand. Using Luhmann’s actual Zettelkasten as a guide, I began building out my analog Zettelkasten over the following months.
I also began porting over the notecards I had taken for the previous fifteen years. I had been building out a notecard box off and on over the previous fifteen years. These cards were not addressed, but just free-floating notecards. The thing I was missing was the infinite internal branching brought forth by the Antinet’s tree structure.
I started installing the old cards into my analog Zettelkasten by giving them numeric-alpha addresses in the top-right corner, and then branching them with similar cards. I began to observe how the notecards I had created for over a decade began to reveal patterns I would have otherwise not seen if they’d remained organized by book title. It was very exciting to observe the power of such a system.
The experience and the journey I went through helped me realize that the magic of a Zettelkasten—and indeed the magic of knowledge management—rests not in the idea of creating notes; just as important is the medium one uses to create the notes. The magic of Zettelkasten does not come from taking atomic notes and linking them together using sexy software. Rather, the magic rests in the analog thinking system Luhmann created. One built of a pen, paper, and…a brain.
Over the following months, I began to see some encouraging results using the analog Zettelkasten. From studying Luhmann’s archives, I discovered there were four key principles that serve as the foundation of Luhmann’s system. These four principles comprise the acronym “ANTI.” From there on, I began using the term “Antinet” to describe the system.
Meanwhile, I was progressing on the project related to marketing, copywriting, and cryptocurrency. I began to see my knowledge compounding, and this helped me produce content.
I was gaining a ton of momentum and making progress. I also began using an analog weekly planner to manage my to-do’s and my goals. I found my productivity skyrocketing during this period. These practices also helped me detach myself from the digital distractions brought forth by phone and laptop.
More importantly, my mind felt like it was actually being stretched, and like it was growing again. If I’m not learning and growing, I’m not the happiest person to be around. This system started bringing me happiness and joy again.
I’ve since introduced the magic of the Antinet to my Little Brother, who I mentor (initially, we met through the Big Brothers Big Sisters mentorship program, and I’ve continued mentoring him beyond). I’ve seen him go from starting fights in clubs to literally bring his Antinet into the library and growing his mind all day. He reads and develops his notes from his readings well past the time the sun goes down. He’s learning copywriting and marketing with my help. He’ll also soon be the first in his family to graduate from college. Like me, he has named his Antinet (he named his “Huncho”; mine is named “Stewie”), in recognition of what Luhmann himself described as the magic of the Antinet: it functions as “an alter ego with whom we can constantly communicate.”21
After discovering the power of the analog Zettelkasten (aka, the Antinet), I began sharing my material online with people. I’ve met some incredible people through my website, and through Reddit, YouTube, and Twitter. I’ve started to see the transformation of others who use analog thinking systems. There are some fascinating people out there who are having success with this tool. For instance, Stephanie Williams uses an Antinet to teach her deaf son, who has a unique learning style.22
The Antinet helped me achieve what I was missing—a system that possessed the power of thinking on paper. It helped me retain the power of writing by hand without it turning into a disconnected knowledge swamp (which is what commonplace books create). It helped me to finally make some progress in my projects and develop them to fruition.
Yet something odd happened early on in my project related to marketing, copywriting, and cryptocurrency. It fell to the wayside because I felt this compelling desire to share the power of the Antinet. After all, I had to discover the system the hard way, and I knew others would have to go through the same slog I experienced to discover the true power of the Zettelkasten (in all its analog glory). At this point, I stopped and listened to my heart, not my head. If I had learned anything from my previous cryptocurrency experience, true fulfillment comes not from chasing money but from genuinely creating a product one can be proud of. Sure, there’s more money in creating a newsletter or book that provides money-making insights for entrepreneurs, marketers, and crypto speculators. Yet, in my heart, I felt less passionate about doing such a thing and more compelled to explore the seemingly absurd idea of teaching people about an analog thinking system.
Let’s be clear, getting passionate about an analog Zettelkasten is quite absurd. It’s a seemingly outdated system of notecards devised by some dead academic whose books are nearly impossible to read! Yet I couldn’t resist. I felt drawn to sharing what I had discovered. I remembered the fascinating people I interacted with in the online course I had taken on Obsidian. I weighed these feelings and then decided. To hell with taking the safe route and creating some crypto project to serve entitled speculators (who want to get rich without lifting a finger)!
I decided to do the risky thing—some would say the crazy thing. That is, I decided to spend a year of my life reading and writing all day about an analog notebox system—the Antinet. I’ve worked on this book like a dog; however, I’ve done so without burning myself out.
I am energized writing about something that I know can help driven people, academics, and knowledge workers develop their minds. It hasn’t been easy. I’ve been living off my investments and savings, without making a penny off this work. But I don’t care; I sleep soundly at night knowing I haven’t sold my soul, or wasted people’s lives with wasteful, speculative products that bilk other people out of money. Somehow I ended up doing what I wanted to do all along—and I found it in quite an odd vehicle. I decided to do something that was missing in my previous ventures, and that is this: helping people worth helping.
It’s an honor for me to serve you and help you read more effectively, take useful notes from readings, and transform them into powerful long-term material that makes an impact in your field.
However, I would like to point something out: what you’ve signed up for won’t be easy. You’re choosing to do things the hard way—the only way—the best way.
“part ii,” accessed February 15, 2022, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data /1577351/000119312518143726/d579201dpartii.htm.
“part ii,” accessed February 15, 2022, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1577351/000119312519133301/d689828dpartii.htm#fin689828_5. This was done through making use of the U.S. Security & Exchange Commission’s Program for startup companies that was enacted as part of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (jobs Act), known as a Reg A+ Offering.
“San Diego Blockchain Startup XY Lays off 40 People, Losing Half Its Staff,” San Diego Union-Tribune, June 4, 2019, https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/technology/story/2019-06-04/san-diego-blockchain-startup-xy-lays-off-40-people-losing-half-its-staff.
https://news.ycombinator.com
“Foam,” Foam, accessed February 10, 2022, https://foambubble.github.io/foam/.
“Principles,” Foam, accessed August 27, 2021, https://foambubble.github.io/foam/principles.html.
Sönke Ahrens, How to Take Smart Notes: One Simple Technique to Boost Writing, Learning and Thinking: For Students, Academics and Nonfiction Book Writers (North Charleston, SC: CreateSpace, 2017), 18-20.
Johannes Schmidt, “Niklas Luhmann’s Card Index: Thinking Tool, Communication Partner, Publication Machine,” Forgetting Machines. Knowledge Management Evolu- tion in Early Modern Europe 53 (2016), 292.
Niklas Luhmann, “Communication with Noteboxes (Revised Edition),” trans. Manfred Kuehn, https://daily.scottscheper.com/zettelkasten/.
Stephanie Williams,…Filing the Courses I Plan to Take into My Analogue Zettelkasten Aka #Antinet,” Twitter, January 30, 2022, https://twitter.com/utheol/status/1487584728064606208.
CHAPTER TWO
The Who And Why Of The Antinet
In the early days of writing this book, I recorded a podcast every day.23 In the podcast, I mainly discussed items related to what I was discovering about the Antinet.
One day, my father, who has served his community as a mortgage broker for over thirty-five years, visited me in San Diego, California. I learned that he had listened to a lengthy episode about the Antinet recorded the previous day. Yet instead of feeling grateful, I felt a bit uneasy. This prompted me to clarify who should bother investing their finite life energy into learning about the Antinet. Sure, my dad probably listened to the podcast because he loves me. But should he really invest his time learning about the Antinet?
Attention is the most valuable asset you have. You must not waste it learning something that you really shouldn’t bother with. I love my dad and would hate to think he’d waste his time learning about the Antinet when he really should be spending it on his craft. Even though I don’t know you, I’d hate for you to waste your time as well. For this reason, before you even begin getting too deep into this book, I would like to provide some context and reasons for why you should or shouldn’t read this book.
Why You Should Bother Reading This Book
Here are three reasons why you should read this book:
1. You’re a writer, author, or person who wants to create genius-level work in your field—the type of work that will last for over two hundred years.
2. You already have experience writing by hand, and you’re aware of its power—yet you ran into the same wall I once ran into stemming from notecard systems organized by category.
3. You wish to use a system that develops the two most essential skills you’ll need for thriving in the future: (1) the skill of getting to know your mind (self-awareness) and (2) the skill of developing your mind’s flexibility.24
Who Should Even Bother Reading This Book
As mentioned in the preface, Niklas Luhmann was the originator of the Antinet, and you will be learning more about him in this book. Luhmann himself held that the Antinet was a “universal tool.” A tool that could capture any thought and potentially provide value to anyone, as long the thought could be written on a notecard.25
Although Luhmann held that one “can place almost everything in [the notebox],” so long as it can be “noted down,” I hold a closer view to that of several scholars, that an Antinet is primarily beneficial for researchers and writers who wish to notate thoughts and ideas from their readings.26 It’s mainly useful for non-fiction writers who do much reading, thinking, and processing of ideas. The Antinet develops thoughts both in the short term and long term. Thoughts serve as the raw material for non-fiction writers, and thoughts stand as the raw material for the Antinet.
The purpose of the Antinet is to develop your thoughts so that they are more thoroughly evolved and supported by the time they make their way to your manuscript.
The Antinet is primarily a tool for researchers and writers. However, do note the use of the term primarily. The Antinet is primarily useful for non-fiction writers; yet, it’s not exclusively useful for such individuals.
A More Pessimistic Answer
A pessimistic answer to the question of who should bother learning the Antinet is this: most people shouldn’t bother with this book.
Here’s why—there are 1.65 million writers in the world.27 There are at least 7.8 million researchers in the world.28 For good measure, let’s throw in an extra twenty million more individuals who are aspiring writers, professional researchers, graduate students, and independent intellectuals. That’s 29.45 million people. Divide that into 7.9 billion people on earth, and you get 0.37%. In other words, there’s a 0.37% chance that an Antinet is helpful for any given person. Therefore, there’s only a small chance that you should bother with this book. However, you’re not an average person. Being that you found yourself here and are reading this right now, perhaps I’ve already filtered out the other 99.63% of people. And, in that case, I’m honored to have you here!
A More Optimistic Answer to Who Should Even Bother with Learning about the Antinet
The Antinet is a system that serves as a ruminant for your thoughts. The idea that only non-fiction writers can benefit from such a system is somewhat limiting and probably inaccurate. Indeed, mathematicians who construct proofs that require rumination over months (or perhaps years) would most certainly find value in a system such as an Antinet.
Richard Feynman and many physicists would find their success watered down if it were not for their analog devices that serve as a form of short-term thought development and long-term rumination.
