We're not going to agree here, we're going to descend into stupid walls of texts. I'll give you one more, but I probably wont respond. It's not personal, it's j

We're not going to agree here, we're going to descend into stupid walls of texts. I'll give you one more, but I probably wont respond. It's not personal, it's just not valuable for either of us. > There was no “destruction of knowledge”. It was a collection of notes which was never going to be looked at again and was causing stress to the author. Written knowledge which isn’t read is as useless at that which isn’t written in the first place. Would you also decry someone for not having written the note in the first place? I disagree that there was no destruction of knowledge. Even if the author is just copy/pasting from random sources, the link and choice of putting those 2 copies in the same folder is a bit of knowledge, a link solidified with an action. We have different ideas of what constitutes knowledge, I think you know you're being ridiculous if you're sincerely trying to argue that 7 years worth of notes doesn't have a single new contribution of any value to anything or anyone at all. I do decry people who don't take personal notes. > It was not a library. I bet that for the author it felt closer a hoarder’s house with stacks of scattered newspapers. I totally agree that's how the author felt - they let their own negative feelings towards what they've created destroy something which could be valuable to others. > Absurd. Deleting written notes does not make you immediately forget everything that was written on them. The lessons they needed, they internalised. The ones they didn’t weren’t important anyway. Sure, there may have been some good notes in there, but not in enough quantity and quality to warrant wading though them all and justify the extra anxiety the existence of these lists caused. What's even your point here? You start saying how notes aren't even needed and are pointless to be written down, then you argue that maybe there is some value in them written down, and then come back to support my argument that the author's own personal feelings have lead to the destruction of something valuable. > No, they will not. Signed, someone who learned to delete relentlessly and is much happier for it. > Maybe you would regret it. That says nothing about other people. If anything, I’d regret the years when I didn’t delete stuff. Ignorance is bliss: you can't get upset about the things you don't know any more. Knowledge is hard. Your position about not regretting throwing away potential personal knowledge and memories isn't a position I've heard from anyone over (*edited typo) the age of 50. You don't regret it just like the author doesn't, I think you have a future of denial or upset. > Yes, there was. The author needed it for their mental well-being and development. Let them be. Everyone copes with life in different ways. We’re all going to die, all your notes will be meaningless in the end. There's other ways to deal with information overload, like proper archiving. We're all going to die, and the only reason why have a culture or knowledge as a species is because everyone else hasn't done what this person is doing. > No, everyone should do what makes sense for them personally. > Having the thing “out of the way” is not the same as having it gone. It’s a very different feeling, like saving a memento from an unhealthy relationship VS throwing it away. There is freedom in deciding to let go without recourse. Congratulations with the individualism, you made yourself feel free by burning books. If that makes you happy - you do you, I don't care - but don't act like it's benefit anyone else other than the person struggling with the feeling of information overload.