The Zettelkasten Shouldn't Add Anything to Your Schedule

Sascha

The Zettelkasten methodology makes it obvious when you are skipping steps or directly when you are not spending time thinking. How to make time for your Zettelkasten

This one of the most frequent obstacles in learning the Zettelkasten Method: People don't make time to think (properly, carefully, deeply (-> Cal Newport is wrong about the ZKM, btw.))

ctietze

The link goes to @FernandoNobel's website, btw. Thanks for sharing

FernandoNobel

Yes, it's my website. Thanks for sharing it @Sascha :-)!

To give more context, I attended the ZK-101 workshop with Sascha. To write this post, I used many of the tips Sascha recommended. In particular, I deeply processed the ideas needed for this post in my Zettelkasten. In this sense, the Zettelkasten was an ideal tool to prepare myself to write.

Here is the structure note I used for processing the main idea of the post:

# 202312181953 -S- How to have time for the Zettelkasten methodology 
#-S- ##having-time-for-zettelkasten #zettelkasten #time


The goal of this note is to answer:

  "Following all the steps of the Zettelkasten methodology costs a lot of time,
  how can I find time for my Zettelkasten?"

---

How to find time for Zettelkasten:

  Zettelkasten is a suitable environment for thinking.........[[20231014152718]]
  Choose between thinking outside or inside your Zettelkasten...[[202401121222]]
  The Zettelkasten method is to think deeply....................[[202401150829]]
  A Zettelkasten costs no more time than you already invest.....[[202401160803]]
  You don't need to spend extra time to use your bike...........[[202401170845]]
  The real challenge is to invest time to think deeply..........[[202401160814]]
  It is possible to think deeply without using a Zettelkasten...[[202401160821]]
  Zettelkasten evidences that you don't invest time to think....[[202401160831]]
  Invest time to think and think inside your Zettelkasten.......[[202401170834]]
  -S- Understanding the goal simplifies learning Zettelkasten...[[202401190825]]

Andy

Nice blog post, @FernandoNobel! I like the sentence that Sascha quoted above: "The Zettelkasten methodology makes it obvious when you are skipping steps or directly when you are not spending time thinking." Or as the title of that section of the post says: "The Zettelkasten method makes it evident that you don’t spend time thinking."

I would say that the more advanced level of practice is using the note system to evaluate the quality of your thinking. That requires having some framework or criteria for thinking about quality. It's at that level that one can't say anymore that there is only one method, "THE Zettelkasten method", because at the more advanced level one applies frameworks for structuring the thinking that may be specific to a domain. But before one gets to that level, first one has to spend time thinking.

FernandoNobel

Thanks for reading @Andy :-)

I believe that the quality of our thinking is a mix between:

• the mental models we know
• the tools we have to think
• our personal and professional experience.

In this sense, the Zettelkasten method is both a tool for thinking and a place to store (and create) mental models, which can help improve the quality of our thinking. Still, I wouldn't know how to evaluate the quality of my thinking.

Andy

@FernandoNobel said:

Still, I wouldn't know how to evaluate the quality of my thinking.

There may be some relevant ideas for evaluating the quality of your thinking in "Discussion: Learning from Chess about Thinking (What is a good idea?)" (April 2023). One of the ideas that I mentioned in that discussion was (what is called in USA education terminology) the rubric. You may know this idea by some other term.

FernandoNobel

Thanks @Andy for the links, I'll check them out for sure :-)

Sascha

@Andy said:
@FernandoNobel said:

Still, I wouldn't know how to evaluate the quality of my thinking.

There may be some relevant ideas for evaluating the quality of your thinking in "Discussion: Learning from Chess about Thinking (What is a good idea?)" (April 2023). One of the ideas that I mentioned in that discussion was (what is called in USA education terminology) the rubric. You may know this idea by some other term.

Currently, I naturally developed the habit of using "!!", "!?" and "!". So, I can attest in n=1, they work. For me, they seem to help highlight the quality of the idea and my initial reaction to it.

I started them just recently. So, I can report back only when I process a couple of sources more.

GeoEng51

@Sascha said:
Currently, I naturally developed the habit of using "!!", "!?" and "!". So, I can attest in n=1, they work. For me, they seem to help highlight the quality of the idea and my initial reaction to it.

Interesting rubrics, partly because their meaning is apparent. I do something similar, although I also use "?" and "??".

Sascha

@GeoEng51 said:

@Sascha said:
Currently, I naturally developed the habit of using "!!", "!?" and "!". So, I can attest in n=1, they work. For me, they seem to help highlight the quality of the idea and my initial reaction to it.

Interesting rubrics, partly because their meaning is apparent. I do something similar, although I also use "?" and "??".

For that I use a thunderbolt, since I am exceptionally disagreeable and want to escalate immediately. (Perhaps, I try to train myself to be more consistent)