Luhmann‘s use of unique IDs
I‘m new to this very interesting approach of Niklas Luhmann, using ‚Zettelkasten‘ to process knowledge. In my research on this method I’m reading and browsing the website managed by the university of Bielefeld as well as this site. I like how Sascha and Christian let us participate in their approach to the Zettelkasten method.
However, when comparing the explanations to Luhmann’s approach on the website of the university of Bielefeld with Sascha‘s and Christian‘s approach, I come across one big difference: The usage of unique IDs.
What does the university of Bielefeld say how Luhmann used IDs?
The explanation can be found here: https://niklas-luhmann-archiv.de/nachlass/zettelkasten
Please see chapter 3.4.
They have described the approach wonderfully, so please bear with me that I do not try to translate this into English. Maybe Google translate can be of help..?
However, in my current understanding Sascha and Christian do not make use of this kind of numbering. Instead, the focus lies solely on giving each note one unique ID. In their case they use the time stamp as their ID.
What is the reasoning behind this decision? What do you see as advantages of one method over the other?
In my current point of view I think Luhmann's approach to IDs is a central part of his whole "Zettelkasten" method. Only by using this kind of approach to IDs the benefits of the whole method can be gained.
Note: For a description of the benefits please see chapter 3.3: https://niklas-luhmann-archiv.de/nachlass/zettelkasten
I‘m looking forward to your feedback!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!