When it is convenient to use the Zettelkasten method and when not.

paribanufreitas

I just wrote a blog post trying to separate the Zettelkasten method as a note-taking method (among other things) and other note-taking methods developed for other possible purposes and with different mechanics. Basically the main argument is that any note taken in obsidian, logseq or any other "digital brain" app is not necessarily zettelkasten.

It is written from a somewhat fundamentalist and provocative point of view, basically because I understand that there is a commercial rise in the indication of note-taking as a miracle cure, which can be very frustrating for people who embark on setting up a Zettelkasten unnecessarily.

I share the link to the english translation of the article, courtesy of @Sascha

Link: https://tdg-hypotheses-org.translate.goog/359?_x_tr_sl=pt&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Andy

Hello Paribanú! Did you know that your fellow South American Mario Bunge also kept a Zettelkasten? It's true, but we don't know much detail about his method. It appears that his method was not as precise as Luhmann's method. Bunge said: "Before converting to the Apple faith, I wrote down every interesting idea or possibly useful datum on 5 × 8 cards that I kept in card-boxes. But I used them only sparingly to write papers or books, for they were just random collections." The case of Bunge illustrates that there is not only one Zettelkasten method, even among famous and prolific academics.

I think your point of view is legitimate, that a Zettelkasten method is especially appropriate for the kind of academic research that you described. (Note the indefinite article: not the Zettelkasten method, contra Sönke Ahrens, although Ahrens and the proprietors of zettelkasten.de have every right to refer to their method as "the Zettelkasten method" if they wish: we know what they mean.)

However, there is another point of view in which a Zettelkasten method can be appropriate for various kinds of knowledge work or knowledge synthesis, not limited to academic research. I believe that the systematization of knowledge is a cognitive virtue in general and can be part of the cognitive development of any person who seeks to know more systematically, and that a systematic Zettelkasten method may prove to be a helpful tool for pursuing this general cognitive goal in any area of life. In this point of view, the goal is not merely "taking notes" but synthesizing and systematizing our knowledge.

ZettelDistraction

@paribanufreitas I agree with your take on the Zettelkasten Method if one identifies Niklas Luhmann's use of Zettelkasten with the Zettelkasten method. To summarize:

• The Zettelkasten method is particularly suitable for long-term academic research or individuals with a defined research theme, especially when managing more than 100-200 permanent notes.
• The Zettelkasten method involves two key steps:
  1. Using a physical notebook to jot down initial ideas, concepts, and potential note titles during the reading process. This separation allows for more focused reading without interruption and provides a platform for initial idea generation.
  2. Then, move to the digital Zettelkasten system. Select and elaborate on your physical notes' most valuable and insightful ideas. The digital nature allows for better organization, interlinking of notes, and long-term storage.

@Andy makes a good point too.

@paribanufreitas writes (in translation--with a little rewriting):

However, possibly the current state of the debate and use of note-taking at the societal level has not come from the students, academics, and writers of non-fiction books to whom Ahrens addressed his book; but has been appropriated and marketed for the fields of personal management, task management, personal development, and economic effectiveness by such figures such as Tiago Forte.

These aspects of so-called "personal knowledge management" have nothing to do with critical thinking or intellectual work--on the contrary, the mixed, confused marketing messages of "personal knowledge management" undermines intellectual creation--necessarily, or it would have no traction in the marketplace. This appropriation is utterly non-threatening to capitalist relations of production and to what Matthew B. Crawford calls "The Humanitarian Party."

The helpful methods, at least for my purposes, facilitate critical thinking, self-reflection and help individuals resist the erosion of self-confidence brought about by the disqualification of common sense and disorientation resulting from the saturation of non-representative representations, among other things.

Andy

I don't disagree with anything that @ZettelDistraction said, insofar as I understand it, but that article by Matthew B. Crawford (or rather, as much of it as I can read for free) is the weirdest thing I have read in a long time. It reads like a QAnon missive to me: not like critical thinking, but rather the opposite. Now I suspect that @ZettelDistraction's last two paragraphs are some kind of joke that I didn't get on the first reading.

paribanufreitas

I will go by parts:

1. @Andy : Due to the illness of a professor at my university, I have to take charge of the "Epistemology" course for first-year students of the psychology degree. I'm going to tell that fact in class when I give the "Letter to an Apprentice Epistemologist."

2. @Andy , I agree with you that Luhhman's Zettelkasten method is the Zettelkasten method per se, since wooden files (with bibliographic and content notes) exist long before him. However, I know of no technical development of the method more grounded in theory and practice than Luhmann's development.

3. @Andy , I think I said it in a passing sentence. I distinguish academic work from university work, understanding academic work as a highly demanding and formal type of intellectual work; regardless of where it is done or the qualifications of who does it, and I give an example. Possibly when I retire I dedicate myself to carpentry; world away from writing scientific articles, but a world that has its specific knowledge. And in that sense, I understand super viable to develop a Zettelkasten for it if what you want is to develop that "hobby" with some dedication. as you mention.

4. @ZettelDistraction, I really appreciate your feedback. I agree with what you say about certain discourses on PKM's and the absence of critical thinking and intellectual creation, so I understand that your approach related to the Zettelkasten method seems wrong to me. However, I think he does not fully understand your contributions on the relationship between these speeches, Zettelkasten and capitalist relations / humanitarian party. Perhaps because of my distance from current American politics and political philosophy.

I am really comforted by all your contributions since initially the ideas that you ordered in the post were not so well received, for which I thank you again for the time to read it and the time to carry out such in-depth exchanges. I wish you a good week.

ZettelDistraction

@Andy It is weird, isn't it?

ZettelDistraction

@paribanufreitas said:
I will go by parts:
4. @ZettelDistraction, I really appreciate your feedback. I agree with what you say about certain discourses on PKM's and the absence of critical thinking and intellectual creation, so I understand that your approach related to the Zettelkasten method seems wrong to me.

What about my approach seems wrong to you?

Andy

@ZettelDistraction said:

What about my approach seems wrong to you?

I suspect there is a miscommunication here due to a mistranslation, since the second half of the sentence you quoted doesn't follow from the first half.

@paribanufreitas said:

I'm going to tell that fact in class when I give the "Letter to an Apprentice Epistemologist."

Thanks for mentioning that; I had not seen Bunge's "Carta a una aprendiza de epistemóloga", which could have been titled "How to become Mario Bunge". I have already failed at following Bunge's instructions, so the life of Bunge's "authentic epistemologist" is beyond my reach. I just have to keep doing the best I can even though I'm a failure. Professor Bunge, forgive me!

paribanufreitas

@Andy

paribanufreitas

@ZettelDistraction : mistake on my part. I should have said "I don't think it's wrong".

ZettelDistraction

@paribanufreitas OK--I thought so. As for the rest--ignore that. I agree that mixing up appointments, self-affirmations, and Instagram-ready life moments in a Zettelkasten seems like a distraction--at least Luhmann didn't have the Internet to distract him.

Sascha

Sadly, I have some difficulties to understand the intricacies of your argumentation. But least, I can comment on your conclusions to honor your work.

As mentioned, the adoption of the Zettelkasten method entails specific requirements and application conditions, namely: long-term development, thematic stability, thematic depth and academic level research and personal elaboration of knowledge and relationships between grades.

If you actually meant, that the Zettelkasten Method only works if those requirements are met, then I disagree.

• long-term development: I teached the ZKM just for single projects (like a master's thesis) successfully
• thematic stability, thematic depth: I agree and disagree. The missing factor of most people is depth. The ZKM is an enabler of depth. But too many people try just to capture or to manage. But you can just capture what you can identify and just manage on the level of your understanding.