I’m sorry, we had a server error and I only had daily backups active.
The below post by @hanbzu was lost. I restored it from my email notification.
Post from 2. October 2020 by @hanbzu:
Slow hunch is creating an idea slowly, in small bits—opposite to the famous eureka in the bathtub moment. Also referred to as slow burn.
Charles Darwin himself (in his autobiography) said he came up with the idea of natural selection in an eureka moment but then later Howard Gruber studied Darwin’s notes and came to the conclussion that it was more of a slow hunch.
This seems like a good thing to exploit when building effective tools for thought.
We’ve seen this getting popularity with Roam Research, where people describe they use “backlinks” (= mentions) as a way to slowly build content for a page:
- Whenever they encounter related content they write a comment and they [[mention]] the target note, event if it’s empty.
- They navigate to the note and, out of the collection of backlinks they sketch the content of the note.
What I’m trying to do here is analyse the process.
I see two things that afford this:
- You can mention inline, whether it’s by typing @ or [[. This affords for disambiguation (the autocomplete interface shows options, you pick one) without losing the train of thought (it’s a micro-interruption because it does not involve a big search). @johannesmutter has talked about this naming it “pull from workspace”. It effectively reduces a linking task to a micro-interruption of the flow you are in:
- Mentions are visible, so you can see the paths that lead to the place you are in. This is giving a lot of information of that place from different angles, which is a proto-description, or even a complete description, depending on the mentions.