Research
What is the best system for filtering information and converting it into actionable insights?
The Core Problem
Most research systems re-discover. Every time you return to a topic, you re-read, re-find, re-derive. Information exists but knowledge does not accumulate. The time cost is constant — no matter how many times you have visited the domain.
The alternative: design your research system so each new source integrates into what you already know — updating summaries, flagging contradictions, strengthening or challenging existing synthesis. Knowledge compiled once is available instantly on the next question. Knowledge re-discovered is expensive forever.
Multi-angle Coverage
A single research pass produces a single perspective. Investigate any topic from at least four angles:
| Angle | Question |
|---|---|
| Academic | What does evidence say? |
| Practitioner | What works in practice? |
| Contrarian | What is the strongest case against? |
| Historical | What has been tried before? |
The contrarian angle is the most skipped and most valuable. The strongest objection to your thesis is the one most likely to be true. Finding it early prevents compounding on a false foundation.
The Filter
Three questions before a note becomes permanent:
- Does this change what you would do, believe, or decide?
- Does it contradict something you already hold? Resolve the contradiction — do not file both.
- Would it survive being explained to someone unfamiliar with the domain?
Notes that fail all three are information. Notes that pass at least one are knowledge. The goal is a smaller collection of higher-quality notes, not a larger archive of everything read.
Source Trust
Publication speed is not credibility. For any source:
- What are the author's incentives?
- What would need to be true for this to be wrong?
- Has the claim survived contact with contrary evidence?
Primary sources — original research, first-hand accounts — degrade slowly. Secondary sources — summaries, analyses — degrade fast. When in doubt, trace back to the primary source and check when the secondary account last engaged with contradictory evidence.
Research to Insight
Research ends when you can teach the finding. Until you can explain it to someone who has never encountered the domain, you have stored information — not synthesized insight.
The test: write one sentence capturing the actionable implication. If the sentence cannot be written, keep researching. If it can, file it and act on it.
Context
- Meta-Learning Pipeline — Where research fits in the Awareness→Teach cycle
- Knowledge Schema — Map new domains fast using a reference anchor
- Note Taking — Capture and protect what research produces
- Matrix Thinking — Empty cells as research agenda
- Decision Frameworks — Convert research into decisions
Links
- Feynman Technique — Teaching as the final research filter
- How to Read a Paper — Multi-pass reading for depth
Questions
What is the most valuable insight you have synthesized recently — and where does it live now?
- Which of your research cycles has compounded over time — and which keeps restarting from scratch?
- At what point does research become a substitute for action rather than a foundation for it?
- What does your research agenda look like if the goal is synthesis, not collection?
- Which information source do you trust most — and have you validated why you trust it?