Frequently asked questions about thinking, epistemology, and cognitive tools. 1480 answers
Treating all notes as equally important. If you give the same maintenance attention to a peripheral note with two links and a hub node with forty, you are under-investing in the infrastructure that holds your graph together. The other failure is creating artificial hubs — index notes that link to.
Nodes with many connections are core concepts that deserve extra attention.
Ideas that link separate areas of your knowledge graph are especially valuable.
Following connections through your knowledge graph generates new insights.
Following connections through your knowledge graph generates new insights.
Following connections through your knowledge graph generates new insights.
The shortest route between two seemingly unrelated ideas shows how they connect.
The shortest route between two seemingly unrelated ideas shows how they connect.
Natural groupings in your knowledge graph show you what you know most about.
Open your note system's graph view (or export your links and sketch them). Identify the three densest clusters — groups of notes that link heavily to each other but less to the rest of the graph. For each cluster, write a one-sentence label describing what that cluster is about. Now compare those.
Imposing categories onto your graph instead of reading them from it. You decide you should have a cluster about 'leadership' because it sounds important, then force-link unrelated notes until it appears. This defeats the entire purpose. Clusters must be discovered, not manufactured. If a domain.
Natural groupings in your knowledge graph show you what you know most about.
Areas where connections should exist but do not indicate knowledge gaps.
Pick a domain you consider yourself competent in — programming, cooking, investing, whatever you've spent real time on. Sketch 15-20 key concepts as nodes on paper or in a tool. Draw edges between every pair you can explain a specific relationship for. Now look at what's missing: which nodes have.
Treating gap identification as a one-time audit rather than an ongoing practice. You find gaps, feel a burst of motivation, study for a week, then stop checking. Gaps don't stay fixed — every new node you add creates new potential connections, some of which will be missing. The other failure mode.
Areas where connections should exist but do not indicate knowledge gaps.
Add new nodes and edges daily and the graph becomes increasingly powerful over time.
Add new nodes and edges daily and the graph becomes increasingly powerful over time.
Open your knowledge graph (or start one today). Add exactly one node — a concept, observation, or principle from the last 24 hours. Then add at least two edges connecting it to nodes that already exist. Write one sentence explaining each connection. Do this every day for the next seven days. On.
Waiting for a 'critical mass' of knowledge before starting to build. The person who says 'I will start my knowledge graph once I have enough material' will never start, because accretion is the mechanism that creates the material. The graph with five nodes and eight edges is already more powerful.
Add new nodes and edges daily and the graph becomes increasingly powerful over time.
Periodically review and clean your graph — remove dead links and add missing connections.
Periodically review and clean your graph — remove dead links and add missing connections.
Periodically review and clean your graph — remove dead links and add missing connections.