Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to think in writing

henrikkarlsson.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 131 posts

Re: How to think in writing

#111

Post by codazoda »

sph wrote: post #54
BeetleB wrote: post #33

I'm torn about this article. On the one hand, he's right: Writing helps refine your thoughts. On the other hand, if your goal is to probe the validity of your thoughts, this is painfully inefficient. You'll get much further if you do one or two simple passes on your writing, and then pass what you've written around and ask for feedback. I think I learned this in one of Haidt's books, and it has jived with my experien…

> On the other hand, if your goal is to probe the validity of your thoughts, this is painfully inefficient. You'll get much further if you do one or two simple passes on your writing, and then pass what you've written around and ask for feedback. And how do you avoid having to start with a blank page. I have been reading "How to take smart notes", which delves into Zettelkasten, and the point of writing and linking n…

Consider the book Refuse to Choose by the late Barbara Sher. This book helped me fill notebooks where before I would start a notebook and throw it aside after a handful of pages.

https://amzn.to/3RSCGov

Re: How to think in writing

#112

Post by random3 »

BeetleB wrote: post #48
random3 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you have few, very simple thoughts, feedback is not really effective, nor scalable, compared to self validation for which writing is required.

I would urge you to seek feedback from a more diverse crowd then. The article talks about counterexamples. It's hubris to think you will find most of the relevant counterexamples on your own. It's also hubris to think you'll do it quicker than others. As for scalability, I'm confused. If you have a crowd of followers, for example, you'll reach lots of people quickly, whereas by writing for yourself you'll never get f…

Keep in mind that the topic is thinking in writing (vs "volatile" thinking).I average 25-30 notes per day. Even if I'd ignore it's relatively specialized math and CS, it would take a rather large crowd to review and a lot of context. Meanwhile, like with coding, writing and re-reading notes forces your mind to lay out things with more structure, often uncovering loose ends.

I agree that public forum like HN/Reddit is a good, scalable way to review (some) ideas, but it works for a fraction.

Re: How to think in writing

#113

Post by benhoyt »

jilles wrote: post #85

“Writing organizes and clarifies our thoughts. Writing is how we think our way into a subject and make it our own. Writing enables us to find out what we know—and what we don’t know—about whatever we’re trying to learn.” ― William Knowlton Zinsser, Writing to Learn One of the books that got me into writing for myself.

I just finished "On Writing Well" by William Zinsser. Here's a little blurb I just wrote about it:

What a great book! Zinsser uses such crisp, engaging prose. He covers how to write, why to write, and what to write. He uses lots of examples from his own writing and from others -- good and bad. Stories abound. This is not a boring grammar book.

Here's a taste -- he starts the chapter called "The Lead and the Ending" with these stark statements: "The most important sentence in any article is the first one. If it doesn't induce the reader to proceed to the second sentence, your article is dead." Punchy and self-referential.

There's a decent amount about good technique, but it's more about style and voice. The second half of the book covers topics like "Writing in Your Job" (without sounding passive or using buzzwords) and "Writing Family History and Memoir" (that's actually why my brother lent me the book). And it finishes with an inspiring chapter on the craft of writing called "Write as Well as You Can".

If you want to learn to write better, read this book. If you don't, definitely read it.

Re: How to think in writing

#114

Post by Folcon »

codazoda wrote: post #111
sph wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, if your goal is to probe the validity of your thoughts, this is painfully inefficient. You'll get much further if you do one or two simple passes on your writing, and then pass what you've written around and ask for feedback. And how do you avoid having to start with a blank page. I have been reading "How to take smart notes", which delves into Zettelkasten, and the point of writing and linking n…

Consider the book Refuse to Choose by the late Barbara Sher. This book helped me fill notebooks where before I would start a notebook and throw it aside after a handful of pages. https://amzn.to/3RSCGov

Just out of curiosity, having looked at the blurb, I'm left wondering, what do you fill notebooks with?

Planning projects and what you want to do?

From the description, I'd personally think I could be labelled a scanner, but I'm trying to work out if this is a read now or read later book/

At present I'm interested in unpacking more of what's going on in my head and putting it down on paper, and I'm curious to know what reading the book gave you and if it will be useful in pulling out interesting stuff from my thoughts =)...

Re: How to think in writing

#115

Post by naikrovek »

> If writing down your ideas always makes them more precise and more complete, then no one who hasn't written about a topic has fully formed ideas about it. And someone who never writes has no fully formed ideas about anything nontrivial.

This is very flawed logic. This assumes that only writing can result in fully formed ideas, and that is simply a false assumption. I can't believe that it was even typed out as-is, it's so wrong. It's wrong on its face. It's wrong if you think about it for 1/10th of a second. It's wrong if you think about it for a minute. It's wrong if you think about it for an hour. It's even wrong if you write it out.

Re: How to think in writing

#116

Post by nequo »

__0x01 wrote: post #64
nequo wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taking the statement completely out of context, it states : if A implies B, then not A implies not B. This is a logical flaw. The statement in TFA is not that though. Instead, it is "if A implies B, then not A implies not C." A: writing about thoughts B: thoughts become more complete C: thoughts are most complete If "A implies B" is true, then it also doesn't matter if other methods also make your ideas more comple…

What books can I read to reason like this? EDIT: shortened sentence

This might sound strange but a book on real analysis or topology that walks through proofs could be one.

Re: How to think in writing

#118

Post by sandspar »

hsavit1 wrote: post #117

I love how Paul Ghram is quoted and not an actual writer. Why would I take writing advice from him and not from, say, James Joyce?

There are different kinds of writing. They have unique requirements.

James Joyce was a novelist. The article is about writing essays.

Paul Graham is one of our leading essayists. Measured by impact on "builders" he's probably the foremost essayist.

If you want to learn how to make documentaries, would you rather learn from the best documentarian or from Spielberg?

Re: How to think in writing

#119

Post by realprimoh »

hsavit1 wrote: post #117

I love how Paul Ghram is quoted and not an actual writer. Why would I take writing advice from him and not from, say, James Joyce?

How is Paul Graham not an actual writer? He has written some extremely influential essays that have reached outside of just Silicon Valley.

Re: How to think in writing

#120

Post by interroboink »

I don't mind this person relating their experiences, and encouraging others to do similar. But as someone who is (and strives to be!) non-verbal in a lot of my thought, keep in mind that there are other brain types out there (:

This article is sprinkled with "people this" and "people that" terminology, which is mirrored in our broader culture. But I say it is actually "some people this" and "some people that." Don't be a word-chauvinist.

To be fair, I do appreciate that a lot of the author's sentences started with "When I ..." and similar. Makes it more palatable to me.

----

This idea I just wrote down was fully-formed in my mind, and I could have just moved on with my life. I chose to put it into words (and pick those words, and re-edit them, spending my short time on this planet to do so) in order to communicate it to you, dear reader. Not to help me think (:

(though I do sometimes use words to help me think, too. Let's not get too black-and-white about it)

Post reply on HN