Forum Posts Feed
The Case for Using a Paper Planner
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Dr Andus
Mar 30, 2019 at 03:41 PM
thouqht wrote:
I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s best to plan digitally and reflect
>analog.
I agree that there is something about the digital vs. analog difference, and it may also have something to do with the typing vs. handwriting distinction, and the difference in the size of the medium (doing brainstorming on an A3 size paper or a scroll of wrapping paper vs. a digital space where your view is limited to the frame of the screen, despite the fact of the digital space being unlimited or zoomable), and the ability to focus (no distractions with paper, while easy to be distracted within the digital space), but I haven’t quite been able to figure out a pattern.
One thing I did notice though that it helps to switch from one medium to the other if one gets stuck. So it may be more about just switching frames than the inherent qualities of the medium.
Having said that, all my recent attempts to go back to analog largely failed, as the messiness that results from reordering things on paper and the inability to easily access past notes from multiple locations forces me to go back to digital every time.
Investing in a stylus-enabled Chromebook also didn’t turn out to be a panacea, as when the going gets tough I forget that option is even there.
But I do have a nagging feeling that allowing myself to be pressured to adopt the speed dictated by modern work (the need to solve problems by email and construct digital artefacts on the fly) I am missing something, and that reverting to pen and paper and slowing things down would lead to higher quality, more valuable and meaningful outcomes.
Maybe some of it is just nostalgia. (Coming across the Day Timer system was a revelation and I did enjoy using it before digital devices became portable.)
There are only two things I use paper notebooks for these days: to take notes in meetings (because it’s still quicker), and to write my mediation journal at the end of the day (where I don’t want to be distracted by a device again).
The American Psycho scene is brilliant and hillarious! Didn’t remember it at all…
Posted by Beck
Mar 30, 2019 at 04:43 PM
Dr Andus wrote:
>Maybe some of it is just nostalgia. (Coming across the Day Timer system
>was a revelation and I did enjoy using it before digital devices became
>portable.)
Maybe, but I also think there’s something to be said for challenging the idea that we’re capable and/or satisfied with the fast pace of most current work environments.
>There are only two things I use paper notebooks for these days: to take
>notes in meetings (because it’s still quicker), and to write my
>mediation journal at the end of the day (where I don’t want to be
>distracted by a device again).
Ooh, can you say a bit more about how you use your meditation journal?
Beck
Posted by Dr Andus
Mar 30, 2019 at 05:55 PM
Beck wrote:
>Ooh, can you say a bit more about how you use your meditation journal?
It’s a relatively recent practice, so there is not all that much to say about it, as I only have a handful of entries at this point.
At a superficial level it is just a description of how the mediation went, partly just to be able to reflect on it, in order to help maintain and improve the routine.
It is also a record of my state of mind leading into the mediation, and of any thoughts or reflections that occurred during the mediation.
While the purpose of mediation is not to have any thoughts, the kind of things that come up to distract me do often turn out to be informative about one thing or another.
Perhaps the most interesting thing that happened when starting to write these entries was the acute experience of how writing with a pen on paper just felt different.
Considering that much of the zen type of mediation is about suspending a sense of a self, I had this feeling when I was looking at my hand doing the writing that there was more to it than just my conscious self that was involved in the writing process, or at least it was a different experience of selfhood than when typing on a keyboard.
I realise this could be read as some kind of a spiritual mumbo jumbo, but what I’m talking about can be also placed within the agency/structure debate in the social sciences, i.e. where does one draw the line between the self and the actual agency that may partly coincide with the self but could be more broadly distributed across a network that converges in the act of writing (or any other type of decision making)?
I’m sure a lot of people must have had this experience on this forum when you end up writing something and afterwards (sometimes immediately, sometimes weeks, months or years later) you don’t recognise what you’ve written or are amazed at the content you came up with, using words you didn’t even know you knew etc.
In a sense all writers are some kind of mediums, channelling various forces and interests that are beyond them. Though some of it might be just plagiarism ;)
Anyway, to bring this back to the topic, what I’m getting at is that there may be some broader implications to handwriting vs. typewriting, as the nature and range of the chain of media involved in connecting the words (on paper vs. screen) with wherever those thoughts come from is different.
Perhaps it shouldn’t be too controversial to say that using different tools results in a different output. This can be observed in many other types of creation, especially in the creative arts (from sculpture to cinematography).
Posted by jaslar
Mar 31, 2019 at 12:19 AM
These are just the kind of responses I was hoping for: some thoughtful experience by someone who used the tool described, the random delightful link (Batman is 80 years old today, as it happens), and an extended musing on a new (to me) kind of journaling. I’ve been meditating since I was 12, and it never occurred to me to do a meditation journal. And of course, many other fascinating insights have popped up. Thanks to you all.
Posted by JakeBernsteinWA
Mar 31, 2019 at 03:14 PM
Dr Andus wrote:
Beck wrote:
>Anyway, to bring this back to the topic, what I’m getting at is that
>there may be some broader implications to handwriting vs. typewriting,
>as the nature and range of the chain of media involved in connecting the
>words (on paper vs. screen) with wherever those thoughts come from is
>different.
>
>Perhaps it shouldn’t be too controversial to say that using different
>tools results in a different output. This can be observed in many other
>types of creation, especially in the creative arts (from sculpture to
>cinematography).
I would like to echo these thoughts. I have begun using a Bullet Journal and it has made a world of difference in how I plan and organize my days. Not only does it eliminate the decision paralysis of where to write a task down, but it helps me a lot to go back and review. Every GTD system out there recommends a review process and Bullet Journaling is no different. The difference is that it’s very natural and tactile to flip pages in a book (and weirdly enjoyable too).
I’m also finding that switching mediums helps slow me down in a good way. It can bring a new perspective. And for me, taking notes by hand means I’m processing information more compared to going into what I call “court reporter” (or transcription) mode—i can type very fast (as I’m sure is true of many people on this forum) and I will often mistake “taking notes” for “transcribing a meeting.” The two are very different acts and using handwritten notes forces me to take real notes, not just transcribe.