The Case Against Tagging Notes.
While the contents of this article will not be as controversial as its title, it will explore the difference between a “Tag First” versus a “Relationship First” approach to adding notes to your knowledge development system. I intend to show why focusing on relationships is the superior method for cultivating understanding.
But first, a few definitions and clarifications.
Tagging First Approach:
Notes are initially added to the system using tags; while there may be other connections (i.e. links to existing notes or Maps of Content), the only requirement before moving on to a new note is the addition of one or more tags.
Relationship First Approach:
Notes are added to the system by establishing relationships with already existing notes. This can be done by installing it within a hierarchy or through links. But the critical point is that your previous notes must be consulted and reviewed before adding a new thought.
For more information on my note installation process, see the YouTube video below or my article on why supporting structure is valuable.
Tagging is Isolation; Installation is Connection
When it comes to tagging, you only need to look at the note in isolation. The focus is on classifying a single idea and enabling it to resurface. Tags allow you to bypass thinking about the content already present within your system. Simply put, you can tag a note and move on to the next one.
However, when establishing relationships, a new note must be considered within the context of what you already know. You can’t continue until you’ve figured out how the new idea fits; until you’ve advanced your thinking in some way.
Tagging Focuses on Discoverability; Installation is for Development
While some element of discoverability is necessary for personal knowledge management systems, tagging puts it front and center to the detriment of our development.
Tagging can help classify and resurface, but how often does it help further your understanding of an idea?
I’ve spent so much time getting caught up in discoverability out of fear that I will lose my notes. Forgetting that the whole point is to develop my mind, not manage a second brain. Considering this, we should focus on the absolute minimum effort required for discoverability. So although I still use links to Index Notes (i.e. tags) within my system, it’s now a side dish instead of the main course.
A relationship approach supports the development of understanding through:
- Actively creating connections to other ideas, not just through links, but through the thinking process. Because when we have to search for relationships actively, this creates the necessary conditions for developing our knowledge. So a system with less discoverability may actually be better for us.
- It also tests our comprehension. If you don’t know the idea well enough, you’ll have difficulty finding a good place to put it.
Notes are a Means, Not an End
The tagging philosophy seems to be centred around notes being the end products of our thinking. Taking our ideas and neatly categorizing them for future use. But our notes are nothing but a means to develop a deeper understanding of the subjects that are important to us. What we do with that understanding may vary (check out my article on the value of an External Mind), but no matter what it is, the end goal is the improvement of our Internal Minds.
Notes should be reminders of what we know, not repositories of information we’ve encountered.
Conclusion
If there’s one thing to take from this article, it’s that no matter the process, a system with highly discoverable notes should be secondary to developing your understanding.
I’d rather have notes that were hard to find but a firmer grasp on the ideas so that they actually inform and update my mental models.
If you enjoyed this content, you can show your support by:
- 👏 Click the clap button!
- 👉 Follow me for more PKM articles.
- 📺 Head over and subscribe to my YouTube Channel for more PKM content.
- 🐣 Follow me on Twitter.