I have to read philosophical essays. Philosophy is a bit unique academically in that it's "primary units of thought" aren't particularly "atomic" facts about the world that can be paired down into index card sized notes. They're (often poorly written) rants where ideas stretch over several pages or whole chapters of a book. They only make sense if you're aware of their context, and their context is itself usually pretty complicated.

Reading that sort of thing is hard which is why I started thinking about note-taking methods in the first place. Scrunching ideas down so that they fit in my head all at once is the only way to process books like this.

So I end up with summaries. Gigantic files where I've compressed the actual thought process in the text. I need these. I could split them up by section or something, but the structure of the original text is important in itself.

It seems like zettelkasten as an idea is fundamentally opposed to long-form summarizing like this. The expectation seems to be that if there's any rote facts for you to reference, you're either putting a dictionary definition in a ZK note or just doing a bibliographic reference (on the assumption that you already have what's being referenced in your head). This can't possibly be right. It seems totally backwards. What am I missing?

Once again, there are some hard-coded formats. This could be solved by using a template like in my other plug-in New Note from Template. Maybe later ?

I mapped the eight ways thinking changes shape as it leaves your head.

The question isn’t how well does your system capture ideas? It’s how many modes can it hold?

Fig: Zettelkasten Thinking. 8 Modes of Externalization.

1. Is it okay to avoid very long titles? For example, I’m studying Roman Law, and many of my notes naturally want to become something like: “something something… Roman Law” or “legal transaction… in Rome.” It’s not a huge problem, but I feel my titles are becoming repetitive and unnecessarily long.

Should I try any technique to avoid this issue?

2. I’m also trying to avoid excessive hierarchies and overly remote links because I don’t want to turn my Zettelkasten into an overengineered system that becomes impractical for daily use. For example, “condictio” is technically related to “accidental elements of Roman legal transactions,” but instead of linking it directly to a broad note like “Roman legal transactions,” I’m linking it only to the more immediate conceptual note. I’m doing this to avoid obsessing over connections and spending more time engineering the system than actually studying. Does this approach make sense?

3. I’m not using numeric hierarchies or Folgezettel. I looked into it, but it feels somewhat impractical for modern digital workflows. Instead, I’m organizing things mainly through index notes.

Does this sound reasonable for a beginner, or am I building bad habits early on?

I'm a PhD student and an experimental material scientist, and I've used a zettelkasten via Obsidian for organising my review of the scientific literature. It's an incredibly useful framework for synthesising and summarising literature, but I remain unsure how to best integrate my original research (seeing as I'm yet to publish a paper!) Of course, in the humanities and social sciences the output of the zettelkasten consists of original research in and of itself, but aside from the review paper I hope to write I still have to get my hands dirty with electron microscopes and geochemical modelling software due to the nature of the field (not by itself a problem, as I love labwork).

But how I go from calculations in a spreadsheet or results from a machine to coherent zettels in obsidian isn't trivial. Does anyone have any advice about how to incorporate this kind of material into a zettelkasten?

Many thanks,

Patrick

The Archive needs a refresher for this new era. It hardly makes sense for our team of 1 developer (me) to maintain two styles for backward compatibility going forward, so when this releases, it'll be macOS 26 or newer, and not compatible with older macOS versions.

We planned an overhaul of the UI anyway in the summer, but now we actually need to embrace this much harder than expected.

The goals for the visual update are:

• Remove "UI chrome". Focus on the note contents and make the toolbar, tabs, etc. less prominent. That gels well with Tahoe's look, although the default is often rather broken. With this, we rethinking the saved search display and consider to get rid of the thick sidebar completely.
• Focus. Focus on the text, on the paragraph, on the part you're working on. Typewriter mode was an essential step 8 years ago, but we can do more with this and want to experiment with section/sentence/paragraph focus modes.
• Search and links. These are our means of navigation. Links were always a priority, but with a cleaned-up UI, we can play with new ways to make search work better and show more relevant context. I'm actually excited for this a bit because the sidebar, while serviceable, also got in the way at times.
• Responsiveness. The Archive started as a single-window application with one configuration, but grew into a multi-window, multi-tab application. There's potential in making it more nimble by adjusting the window contents to fit the space you give the app. macOS can do some basic tiling nowadays, so you can have 50:50 splits and such. In this world, we want to look at ways to make smaller side-windows more useful, so that you can work in a split setup to take notes while you read a website, for example. The current UI is too clunky for that.

I'll be sharing more of the process with you in the upcoming days and weeks as I prepare the app for the next stage.

On my side, I'm continuing to experiment with different kinds of #tagging. Right now I'm testing how some theoretical frameworks can go across many different topics and categories, and I'm wondering if that could be a base for multi-note tagging. For example, Systems Theory and Game Theory have concepts and keywords that could be applied to many different areas.

A previous experiment with workflow-based tags has worked well, so I'm keeping that for the longer-term.

I also want to branch out a bit in the kind of sources I've used in the past. I noticed I didn't have much in regards to natural sciences, so I've gotten a book about evolution and that will be the first biology/natural science book I'll have taken notes on for my ZK.

Also this month, I'm revisiting a lot of older notes and reworking them. Depending on the case, that can mean editing and reorganizing them, or synthesizing them with completely new notes. It's slower than I expected, as I spend more time thinking that I do writing. But I'm happy with the newer versions.

I am new using Zettelkasten. Or, at least, I am new using Zettelkaten knowing that the name "Zettelkasten" was describing the principles I was using to my own personal knowledge management but more matured, systematic, and a few more. So I am very happy I found a wider, more consistent framework to apply.

I strongly believe that systems like this one are essential as we mature and come across more topics we have to incorporate to our body of knowledge. We never get too old to learn, we just become overwhelmed by the amount of things to keep in our heads if we don't have a method to manage it.

So, yes: I am excited about Zettelkasten, I have a lot of expectations on it and it is already growing on me as I started to notice its benefits.

I am currently compiling a research plan for a wider perspective on atomicity. So, I am looking at old sources on hypertexts, linguistic text theories, contemporary approaches like blogs (e.g. https://writingslowly.com/), Plato's archetypes, basically everything that I can lay my hands on.

I asked What is Next For Atomicity. My answer is to go to the extremes:

1. Informing the Zettelkasten Practice: I prepared a complete guide to atomicity. This complete guide aims to give the reader focussed understanding on what atomicity means for the Zettelkasten and what it looks like in practice. One place to answer the question "What is atomicity, why does it matter and how do I act on it?"
2. Casting a wide net for anything that is similar to atomicity. This is the part for what I am asking for sources.

So, hammer all the sources that you deem remotely relevant to this topic (perhaps, with a sentence to give reasoning on why it is relevant if it is obscure).

Live long and prosper
Sascha

It’s nice to meet you. I feel like I’m very bad at Zettelkasten as I’m just starting out with it and want to get better. I decided to sign up after lurking here.
I’m looking forward to learn and improve!

If you have any questions, feel free to ask them here.

Here is my report on why I'm here and my current ZK work themes and ideas:

• I have to eat my own dog food. I've tried to get lurkers to participate in the forum discussions, and now I find myself a lurker. Hesitant to start a conversation, comment, or ask a question because I'm not sure of what to say or if I have the time to engage appropriately.
• Doing basic things well with fewer complications is the highest goal. "We avoid doing simple things that work because they don't make us look smart. Smart people feel stupid doing simple things, so we invent complicated alternatives that accomplish less but feel more intellectually satisfying. Meanwhile, the people who dominate their fields are doing embarrassingly basic things, but they do them better than everyone else." - Farnam Street Brain Food Newsletter
• I'm fed up with Bear's inability to sync via iCloud. It has gotten worse because I have over 3000 notes. For journaling, I'm exploring iA Writer. The simple interface is inviting, and I can focus on the writing without distractions. I recommend watching the YouTube video by the bullet journal guy, Ryder Carroll. This Tiny Writing Setup Changed Everything - YouTube
• The idea of a daily note as the hub of my knowledge work is central to my Zettelkasten system. I don't think it has to be in the same application, but it has to be able to be linked.
• Journaling my writing journey could serve as an example for others. An example of what to avoid in order not to be laughed at.
• The older I get, the busier my life is. Why is this? It seems unfair.

Books I'm reading or have read:

• Nisargadatta. I Am That: Talks with Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj. Edited by Sudhakar S. Dikshit, translated by Maurice Frydman, 2nd American ed, Acorn Press, 2012.
• Haig, Matt. The Humans. First Simon&Schuster hardcover edition, Simon & Schuster, 2013.
• Maclean, Norman. A River Runs Through It and Other Stories, Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Edition. University of Chicago Press, 2009. [[202507301741]]
• Proulx, Annie. Brokeback Mountain: Story to Screenplay. With Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana, Scribner, 2005.
• McDowell, Gary L., and F. Daniel Rzicznek, editors. The Rose Metal Press Field Guide to Prose Poetry: Contemporary Poets in Discussion and Practice. Rose Metal Press, 2010.
• Wilkins, Joe. Fall Back down When I Die. Little, Brown and Company, 2019.

Most recent note

• Everything is Becoming Television 202510310637
  • Subatomic: The gravitational pull of the infinite scroll of screen media threatens creativity, inwardness, and deep attention by reshaping culture into passive consumption and flattening the dimensions of my inner life.

I hope my contribution is helpful, and I'm sure you have even better ideas.

Christian (@ctietze) encouraged me to share my book project here: The Minimalist’s Zettelkasten – Think Better with Less.

It’s about keeping your Zettelkasten light, clear, and practical — useful without growing out of control.

I’m looking for a few beta readers for version 0.14. If you’d like to take a look and share your thoughts, just send me a quick direct message and I’ll share the PDF.

Thanks a lot,
Edmund

Install from https://codeberg.org/ctietze/ta by downloading the tar compressed binary, or the installer .pkg file -- your choice!
(GitHub Mirror at our organization https://github.com/Zettelkasten-Method/ta )

Its intended use is to help with scripting, but also with coding agents (Claude, Codex, Gemini, Grok, Cursor, AMP, ...) to browse your notes.

Command-Line Interface

The command-line tool is simple enough and self-documenting for agents to fiddle with it:

$ ta
OVERVIEW: Zettelkasten retrieval CLI for coding agents.

EXAMPLES:
  Find notes by tag, expand 1 hop along wiki-links:
    ta search --tag learning --depth 1

  AND-combine predicates (tag + phrase + whole word):
    ta search --tag thinking --phrase "second-order" --word inversion

  Positional phrase shortcut:
    ta search "mental models" --depth 2

  Tag-only convenience:
    ta tag thinking --depth 2

  Print one or more notes (frontmatter + raw markdown):
    ta show "202503091430 Mental Models.md"

Archive path resolution (highest precedence first):
  1. --archive PATH  — flag on a subcommand (search, tag, or show)
  2. TA_DIR  — environment variable
  3. archive: PATH   — key in ~/.config/ta/config.yaml

USAGE: ta <subcommand>

OPTIONS:
  --version               Show the version.
  -h, --help              Show help information.

SUBCOMMANDS:
  search                  Search the Zettelkasten with AND-combined predicates.
  tag                     Search for notes carrying a specific hashtag (convenience for 'search --tag').
  show                    Print the full body of one or more notes.

  See 'ta help <subcommand>' for detailed help.

Agent Skills

The real value for users of The Archive is in agent skills. You already have the app, why deal with an inferior experience But agents don't so they'll benefit.

The repository contains copy-paste-able agent skills in the canonical format of https://agentskills.io/

Find the list here for your convenience:
https://codeberg.org/ctietze/ta/src/branch/main/docs/skills

LLMs and coding agents by extension are good for coming up with similar word searches, and the skills are meant to trigger this capability; see the deep research example below.

Fiddle with the skills, or write your own ones; there's no reason to be precious about these Markdown files. I'm experimenting with the ones I have for a while and report back and invite you to do so, too!

I use the ##tag method from Sasha to signify a root link or parent link attached to a note. When I search for ## I also get all the H2 sections.
So I changed all my ##links to @#links, is there a way to have a saved search with a joker like to catch every terms beginning with @# like @#$ or @#catchall?

To organize myself I use ttt to signify a note as a terrain in french, meaning field, for me they work not like hubs. And I have the feeling I would appreciate to have a saved search with ttt AND my root tags to get an idea of where my energy is going.

Thank you

The subject of the post is a technical discussion of how to link. In the post, Sascha argues why linking notes using unique IDs (UIDs) is preferable to having note titles function as link targets. The reasons he gives support why The Archive uses link-as-search over direct links. He also shows how aliases can provide a usable workaround in applications that don't support link-as-search, like Obsidian.

At the end of the post, @Sascha said:

"If you are an Obsidian power user, you can for sure write a small plugin that changes the linking mechanics by automating some of the steps to create a link alias."

This inspired me. I've been wanting link-as-search implemented as an option in Obsidian for a long time. Users have discussed/requested this feature previously (e.g., here, here, and here), but to no avail. The best workaround seemed to be aliases, like Sascha's suggestions.

I've actually just been using search to navigate my vault. That said, it would be even easier if I could alter Obsidian's default internal linking behavior to function as link-as-search. Then, I could navigate through my notes by clicking links, saving me about two mouse clicks and 6-8 keystrokes each time.

Compared to a lot of other plugins available for Obsidian, this seemed like an absurdly simple thing to implement---if you knew how to code. As it happened, I've been teaching myself more about coding recently, and I decided I finally had enough confidence to attempt this as my first plugin.

The plugin is called Link by ID, and the GitHub repository can be found here. It does what it says on the tin, i.e., the plugin enables linking notes using unique IDs by altering Obsidian's internal linking behavior to function as link-as-search.

I built in a few additional features that make life easier when using the plugin:

• Page preview uses the same search logic, so hovering over links made using UIDs will display correctly.
• There is a setting to toggle whether clicking on internal links opens the search panel, providing a similar way of viewing backlinks as in The Archive.
• There is a setting to enable CSS that removes the dimmed appearance of all unresolved links, so links made using UIDs look identical to standard links.
• There is a setting to enable a configurable link ID autocomplete suggester that you can use to search for notes and insert UIDs as links. There are options to configure the character sequence that actives the autocompletion, as well as specify the ID delimiter (the character(s) separating the ID from the rest of the filename) and position (whether the IDs are at the start or end of filenames).

I made a related post describing the plugin in the Obsidian forums here. You can also view the README file for the repository on GitHub here.

I still have to go through the steps to submit this plugin to be reviewed as an official community plugin. This means you'll have to install the plugin manually if you want to try it out. I describe how to do this in the related post I made in the Obsidian forums.

I mainly wanted to share this here to respond to the idea posed at the end of Sascha's newsletter, which helped inspired me, as well as to have an opportunity for early feedback, especially since I know there are several developers in this community with far more experienced than I have.

This is my first time doing anything like this, so feedback and comments are very welcome. I used this sample plugin template as a starting point, and went from there. I found this overview in the docs helpful. I also relied heavily on Google and LLMs for coding advice and suggestions.

I’ve only tested this plugin on macOS in small/medium sized vaults, so I’d love to hear how it works for other setups.

I'm very excited to be sharing this, and I hope others also find it useful.

• I am OK with a cyborg approach. No querying some question and pasting that onto a new note or finding connections solely based on LLMs.
• I see using LLMs in the learning phase. You may not like learning from LLMs directly, I like it. I mainly use LLM-based learning for quick definition checks and evaluating my inferences in the beginner phase. I also should indicate that I use my vault mainly for academic research. Academic research if the area is heavily complex requires too much time passes with engagement for learning purpose. It helps if you want tangible output in the learning phase. I don't delete my thinking notes.
• I am trying to achieve a state of not starting with a blank slate. You should add your organic thinking process on top of what you yield from LLMs. Engagement with the vault without LLMs is required.

Here are the skills I use in Claude Code for reading and research:

• process-paper — Takes a paper you've already highlighted and turns it into a hub note (summary of the paper) plus a set of atomic notes, one per key idea. Nothing gets invented — only what's in the highlights.

This is the output I get from this skill showing only the mechanism part. There are other ontology types I created. Sometimes I batch read articles and I use this part as a table of content for quick reference if I don't find enough time to go through the whole paper.

• find-papers — Reads a note in your vault and searches for real academic papers closely related to it. Returns full citations with links.

• review-literature — Builds a reading list by looking at a topic from three angles at once. It treats complex research projects as A intersects B, gives papers on A, B and the intersection listed in increasing complexity.

• research-project — Creates a structured research project note with a "What I already know" section and a reading list. Separates sources you've processed from concepts you've only encountered but creates a starting point.

The remaining two are more controversial.

• write-zettel — Writes a new atomic note (one idea, one file) following the vault's rules. The title is always a claim, not a topic. Keeps notes short and plain. It only writes a WHAT layer. I do it because it nudges me towards writing more.

• related-notes — After every response you get from the terminal, appends a footer listing vault notes relevant to what was just discussed. Keeps the note graph connected over time. I don't get the rationale of the connection directly from Claude. Again, I think it nudges me towards creating more because the connections I get are very primitive ones. I can further add my own leverage any time.

Plus, I treat LLM-query outputs selectively. I mainly paraphrase, rarely copy-paste.

I was using Cursor since I bought an annual pro account but switched to Claude Code in Obsidian. I am creating hot keys and it became a mousepad-free tool where I can get into flow easier.

With Claude Code, I save something as skill any time I think it can be reused.

Dear Zettlers, I am currently wrestling with the question of what to make of mnemonics. I barely dipped my toe in this world. But I never seriously engaged with mnemonics.

Read the full story here

This is a PopClip Extension to select a Zettel in The Archive from any application.

You can select text containing a sequence of digits, and the option will be available on PopClip bar to open The Archive with the matching note(s) in your collection.

I hope you enjoy it!

Download OpenInTheArchive.popclipextz from GitHub

I realize you can do a TA quick-entry with a shortcut, which is configured, but I'm trying to learn to use Drafts. Since I use TA all the time for notes, I'd like to be able to throw new notes into TA from a default text processor like Drafts. Sometimes the [[title]] and [[body]] need to go to OmniFocus, sometimes they need to go to TA, et cetera.

1. Define in Zettel, reference Literature

This is the approach seemingly taken here[^1] where the Zettel notes contain the mathematical definition in its entirety and then may hold links to other relevant definitions and perhaps the piece of literature it was extracted from. This method is useful for:

• Linking to specific definitions from other Zettel notes
• Quick, simple reading of a specific definition (atomicity)
• Reading in parts (you don't have to update the Literature note, just add more Zettel notes)

The main problem I see with this approach is it seems to violate the spirit of the Zettel notes being (1) your own ideas, (2) not just exact quotes from a piece of literature you have read, and (3) you may end up filling what is supposed to be your vault of your ideas with other people's definitions.

2. Define in Literature

The second approach I could imagine is keeping all the definitions extracted from, say, a textbook in the Literature note for that book. This perhaps keeps more in the spirit of how I understand the Literature vs. Zettel note split to be. The idea being that exact quotations (which definitions are by technicality) should go in the Literature note, that is what it is for! But then it becomes harder to reference specific definitions, and in the case of a textbook, you may end up with an enormous Literature note filled with 10s if not 100s of definitions, which may be difficult to reference.

Please experienced zettler's, give me guidance! How have you/would you handle(d) this?

[1] https://forum.zettelkasten.de/discussion/2604/latex-zettelkasten-project-for-mathematicians-and-other-latex-users

Read the full story here

I was able to discover connections between different texts and synthesize a fascinating article on top of the source material. The article itself is deeply connected to the nodes of the knowledge graph allowing to see source material and explore more. The article is here:

https://iwe.pub/seventeen-centuries/virtue-across-centuries/

I wonder if you experimented with something like this and what was your experience.

If you want to learn more about how this graph was constructed all the sources are available here:

https://github.com/iwe-org/seventeen-centuries

Right now, I create a dedicated source note including the freewriting I do to identify what will go out from the paper (I need freewriting to decide on material that will be created from the paper) and highlights.

Als,o I don't read papers end-to-end mostly because I am new to the field I am working on. I start with reviews, dissect reviews into subproblems, and use a sandwich technique. Let me give an example.

I am reading a paper about how spatial navigation may be the intersection point towards the efforts to merge neuroscience with AI. The paper talks about the neurobiology of spatial navigation, lists major models from different schools of thought, e.g., attractor models, reinforcement learning-based models, and deep learning-based models.

I started with this paper because, as a newbie researcher, I aim to design biologically inspired algorithms and models, but I am new to the field of spatial navigation.

So after reading the neurobiology part, I paused and searched for the major neurobiology work. The main problem of the field is to understand path integration (how we use internal cues to track our path without reference to any external input)

There are 3 major cell types occurring in path integration, namely place cells, grid cells and head direction cells. Besides these, there are many intermediary cells that may intermix some variables from the cells I mentioned at first.

I am treating this part as a black box because I need to divide the path integration problem into major cell agents, understand them in detail, and then examine how they are connected in circuits.

And there are models. This is the high-ROI part of my question.

Models start from a primitive understanding, and based on the requirements, you add or change stuff.

Right now, I am keeping a "Spatial Navigation Models" canvas in my Obsidian to see existing attempts, how they have evolved, and how they are connected.

So far, I mentioned my source note (for highlights, freewriting, and keeping track of what has been read) and canvases.

I envision these types of canvases as the places where reference/research gaps will emerge. My dream is to create a web of models, and through time, the models that are not already connected will be novel contributions.

What do you think? What do you do to keep track of the literature? If you are an academic, what's your workflow in finding research questions?

A detailed exploration of Luhmann's ZK note number 9/8,3 and what the notion of the 'ghost in the box' could mean.

Read the full story here

The foundation for Mark Lombardi's main piece of work is a collection of ˜14,500 index cards.

It is a terrific example of an artist taking a zettelkastenish approach to his work.

Just wanted to share this remarkable work on the crossroads of several of my passionate interests.

Have fun!

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Lombardi
• https://whalehunting.projectbrazen.com/mapping-networks-of-money-and-power/
• https://www.benfry.com/exd09/
• https://dottysresearchjournal.blogspot.com/2014/02/mark-lombardi.html
• https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/mark-lombardi-death-defying-acts-of-art-and-conspiracy/
  https://drawingcenter.org/search/?s=mark%20lombardi

When I was still active in various online forums for training, it was part of the routine for many athletes to keep an online diary. Interestingly, a lot of the most interesting discussions branched off from these diaries. So, I like to start this as an experiment.

Back then, it was part of the forum member's post training routine: Cool down, drink the protein shake and then check the diary for comments and submit your last session there.

Scholarly journaling is a practice that seems to become trendy occasionally, but seems not to stick. I wonder if it is because of the implementation problem: Whatever isn't self-reinforcing has to be implemented carefully by developing habits and maintaining them.

What if it becomes a social practice? Social practices are indeed self-reinforcing.

This is at the core of this experiment: If scholarly journaling becomes a social practice, will it become a more stable practice? And if yes, what are the effects of it?

on Mac OS Tahoe 26.3.1

• hashtag triggers a window of previous tags
• I create a new tag and so don't use it
• it stays on the screen across multiple notes
• closing app doesn't end this -- they are still in the middle of my screen...
• until I exit app completely.

Thanks.

I am unsure how to handle citations when studying a new field for the first time.

I believe that when there is no prior knowledge, one can utilize materials such as introductory books, encyclopedias, lecture videos, and textbooks.

Since the purpose is learning, if I were to cite, I would likely do so by summarizing the content. Should I mark the citations in my notes during this process?

Extreme mode:

• Check all references listed in the introductory book, read primary sources, and take notes.

Hard mode:

• Mark citations in every paragraph of notes.
• If two introductory books present different items, combine them and mark each item with a citation.

Easy mode:

• Write only a list of references at the bottom of the notes.

Nothing:

• Do not cite at the introductory stage.

Once you become an expert in the field, you realize that all such citations are futile. I was in the position of an engineer and practitioner in the fields of acoustics, music, and industry. From a practical perspective, this knowledge must all become 'common sense.' The source of the material is not what matters; knowledge itself is what is important.

However, I am trying to study an academic field, but I do not know how to do it. Citation leads to an increase in unnecessary actions that hinder my studies. When I do not cite at all, I often fail to distinguish between my own ideas and the ideas from what I have learned.

Additionally, I wonder if citing is necessary for explanations provided outside the textbook, even when taking in-person university lectures.

What is the use of all these things? Since I have not walked this path before, I do not know what to do.