I'm in California right now, visiting my parents. I was telling my mom about zettelkasten, and she said, that's exactly how John Ciardi did it, when he was writing his translations of Dante. My parents met Ciardi a couple of times, and he brought his note-box to one of the events.
Thank you for sharing your notes. I find fascinating the relation of some concepts herein explored, with deeper, more philosophical questions that may be the foundation of these systems: how do we think, explore, consume, put into action the knowledge we obtain from different sources? Looking forward to upcoming videos.
Thanks for watching and commenting. I'm also fascinated by the ways interacting with these ideas we pick up from a variety of sources informs our own thinking, and the degree to which we're all building on what we've learned.
Fantastic video! Luhmann uses a rather dense vocabulary when showcasing his ideas, especially in this essay. So him stressing the idea of a context-less organizational system slipped passed me without me noticing. You clarifying it in plain english really made it that much easier to understand! That the card addresses have nothing to do with the content of the card itself, and that by linking cards together, similar cards "clump" up together simply by merit of having content that is connected. I've been ironically using Luhmann's slip-box note-taking method to study his slip-box note-taking method, so you can guarantee that this little snippet of information made it in there :D. I've been so focused on artificially categorizing notes into their separate categories (thanks, school) that I forgot the whole point of the system is the totally chaotic and organic nature of it!
Very nice video. I also had a hierarchical mindset without realizing it. But at one point, this situation caused inefficiency. Recently I started studying Luhmann's method and noticed some mistakes in thought. Hierarchical structures hide many connections, especially when doing a multidisciplinary study. However, Luthmann's organic structuring reveals connections that seem unrelated to each other. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for watching and commenting. I really enjoy it when people manage to apply insights from one inquiry to another. I agree that connecting seemingly unrelated thoughts is probably harder to do in a system that puts classification or taxonomy or finding the right folder first.
00:54 - value comes from place of notes in the chain 02:59 - don't adapt the sequence of a book 05:42 - Disadvantage: Original text is interuppted by 100s of slip notes but proper order can help to get back to trail 10:05 - Relationising of relations
thank you!! this renews my belief that these emergent knowledge tools (obsidian and roam research) and linking are exciting and a very good and productive path. i wish i knew german so i could read the article. perhaps apple/google/microsoft translate are good enough that i’ll catch enough of his meaning-especially since this is more practical than theoretical? thanks again, and i hope you have a happy thanksgiving! i’m thankful that you have shared your time and insight!
My pleasure, and thanks for your response! Let me know what you think once you read the article. I found a chapter about Luhmann by Johannes F.K. Schmidt in a book called _Forgetting Machines_ which I'm going to read and review next.
Hi Keith, I was revisiting this video and found your comment. Take a look at luhmann (dot) surge (dot) sh (slash) communicating-with-slip-boxes (replace those dots and slash for the real thing); it's an English translation of Luhmann's article
Really great video. I just catched the question... what if the same idea or thought comes again to me after a while. I don't remember is it in my slipbox and i automatically capture this "new" idea. Now in my slipbox has 2 almost identical or close to identical notes. What do i do? I constantly see this happening to me. I am operating with so many contexts that i am not sure is this a new idea or just a old forgotten idea. Basically... how he deals with duplications. And the clarifications/improvements/corrections of the old ideas.
Good question. I'm not 100% sure how Luhmann dealt with duplications. I imagine that, given the fact he said writing and reviewing notes took him more time than writing books, he was probably VERY familiar with the contents of the slipboxes and less likely to mistakenly re-enter exactly the same idea. But I suppose that depends on what you mean by "the same". I think there are a lot of opportunities to revisit ideas from different perspectives, especially as you find other sources that have something to say about them. The key then seems to be connecting old info with new via appropriate links.
Very nice video on the stelkastein. My problem with this system is where to settle boundaries as for example what of a topic is enough in the slipbox so as to not overwelm it with a bunch of uneuseful information. Thanks for sharing this.
That's a good question. I suspect it's a personal judgment of what information you will use and how much is too much. I plan to continue assessing this, so I don' t end up spending a lot of time recording things that are not going to contribute to my own writing.
@@DrDanAllosso thank you for your nice reply. My main concern is that since it is a personal management system, where do you set a limitation so as not to waste time creating a unuseful personal wikipedia. It's the fault I see in this system. I will follow your videos through, hoping to learn more. Thank you.
Enjoyed the video. I am very interested in how you use the method personally. I have been reading a bit on Luhmann's method over the last couple weeks in hopes of adopting it, but not sure how well it will work for something like studying history with the huge amount of raw information that I may want to record when following his idea of one simple idea per "card." I hope you will update with your experiences.
Thanks for watching and commenting! I'm thinking about that workflow this week, as I have a big packet of notes from a book of new findings on the earliest evidence of people in the Americas, that I want to use to update my chapter in my Environmental History textbook. I think there's an intermediate layer of data-oriented notes that will get permanently stored in my digital system, but may not make their way quite to the slip-box. I'll probably want to summarize the findings of this evidence and mention it in a permanent note in the box, though. I'll report on that as I do it.
@@DrDanAllosso Out of curiosity, what is the book to which you referred. Is it by chance Paulette Steeve's Indigenous Paleolithic of the Western Hemisphere?
very interesting Dan! just a question : if new notes are classified by finding the most analog note and completing the numbering of the new before placing it after its analog sister note, how do you explain the combinatory quality you talk about?
I think that's a result of the keyword indexes you make as you go, as well as the process of reviewing, which gives you multiple opportunities to compare the ideas on one note with adjacent notes, follow threads of ideas, etc.
@@DrDanAllosso maybe (I don’t feel you as convinced as you use to be on this answer 😉 but it is my perception) ! I found an interesting alternative to this numbering that - for me - is a constraint due to the physical material ( the paper) : it is based on hierarchies ( plugin breadcrumbs) . I use it for weeks now and it generates potentially multiple numberings for each note. And there, the magic happens: when the hierarchies intersect. full freedom of electronic support to reach Luhmann’s objective
I still like the graph view that Obsidian affords me if I double-bracket keywords. But I've been able to really streamline the path to output by switching to paper notes. I'll probably settle on a combination of digital and analog in the long run.
@@DrDanAllosso Hi! Well, I think this is a fad. People will spend a lot of time organizing and entering their data in a non-Z way and abandon it. 2. The free apps for this, like Obsidian, will start charging subscriptions and more will abandon. 3. No one is actually using the Z method, which takes years to get any results, so abandon. 4. Z is archaic. Modern info systems are way beyond it not to mention AI. However, I am using Obsidian in a non-Z way and like it, but the non-db db will make moving your data out of it, very difficult. prob. destroying relations. OTH, Z seems like a great way to co-opt other people's copyrighted content. Creativity for the uncreative.
I'm a german native and wrote academic texts in legal philosophy - so Luhmann is very well known to me because he actually started out as a legal theorist and not a sociologist! I liken the Zettelkasten-method to a squirrel collecting little nuts of knowledge and then spreading them out for an "intellectual diet" . It's great for Text production and explains why Luhmann was able to be such an immensely productive writer - but it also explains why his writing style is so terrible, except for little ironic quips he puts in once in a while. So while I do recommend using the system for writing texts I also recommend putting in more Time in editing them afterwards because they tend to be badly written stylistically
Thanks! I agree, collecting ideas does not guarantee one will be able to synthesize them creatively or express insights in a way that will be valuable to readers. But it increases the possibility, I think!
@@DrDanAllosso Apart from the organizational aspect of zettlekasten, it seems to me there's a creative aspect which can get lost (at least for me) in trying to figure our the "how" of the system, which increases the likelihood we'll think of zettlekasten as simply a note taking system to keep us organized so we can be ready to write that article or book at some point in the future. The "magic" of zettlekasten is that in essence it's a creative system, a system that says from the beginning one should be responsive to what is being noted, writing as we go, recording on the fly the thoughts and insights which arise as we contemplate the material at hand.
I'm in California right now, visiting my parents. I was telling my mom about zettelkasten, and she said, that's exactly how John Ciardi did it, when he was writing his translations of Dante. My parents met Ciardi a couple of times, and he brought his note-box to one of the events.
This video is one of the best expositions on zettelkasten that I've found so far! You've caught the spirit of Lumann. Many thanks!
Wow, thank you!
So glad to see this. Just read the article yesterday for the first time and hadn't processed my notes yet. Now I've got more! Thanks for sharing
Glad it was helpful! Thanks for watching!
Thanks for summarizing in this video. Been experimenting with his method and still learning along the way. Cheers
Glad it was helpful! Thanks for watching and commenting!
Great! I had read an English translation, but this was somehow more engaging. Thanks.
Thanks for watching and commenting!
Thank you for sharing your notes. I find fascinating the relation of some concepts herein explored, with deeper, more philosophical questions that may be the foundation of these systems: how do we think, explore, consume, put into action the knowledge we obtain from different sources?
Looking forward to upcoming videos.
Thanks for watching and commenting. I'm also fascinated by the ways interacting with these ideas we pick up from a variety of sources informs our own thinking, and the degree to which we're all building on what we've learned.
Fantastic video! Luhmann uses a rather dense vocabulary when showcasing his ideas, especially in this essay. So him stressing the idea of a context-less organizational system slipped passed me without me noticing. You clarifying it in plain english really made it that much easier to understand! That the card addresses have nothing to do with the content of the card itself, and that by linking cards together, similar cards "clump" up together simply by merit of having content that is connected.
I've been ironically using Luhmann's slip-box note-taking method to study his slip-box note-taking method, so you can guarantee that this little snippet of information made it in there :D. I've been so focused on artificially categorizing notes into their separate categories (thanks, school) that I forgot the whole point of the system is the totally chaotic and organic nature of it!
Thanks, Alan! I really like the serendipity, as clusters form where I'm spending time on ideas, rather than where I created folders or categories.
I use the Software Opsidian. Such a powerfull tool for dynamic linking. Unimaginable what Einstein and Luhmann could have done with this digital tool.
Very nice video.
I also had a hierarchical mindset without realizing it. But at one point, this situation caused inefficiency. Recently I started studying Luhmann's method and noticed some mistakes in thought. Hierarchical structures hide many connections, especially when doing a multidisciplinary study. However, Luthmann's organic structuring reveals connections that seem unrelated to each other.
Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for watching and commenting. I really enjoy it when people manage to apply insights from one inquiry to another. I agree that connecting seemingly unrelated thoughts is probably harder to do in a system that puts classification or taxonomy or finding the right folder first.
What a unique and helpful video! Thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
00:54 - value comes from place of notes in the chain
02:59 - don't adapt the sequence of a book
05:42 - Disadvantage: Original text is interuppted by 100s of slip notes but proper order can help to get back to trail
10:05 - Relationising of relations
really like the analogy of a path through a forest of information
Thanks, me too. I especially like the difference in dimensions between the forest and the path.
thank you!! this renews my belief that these emergent knowledge tools (obsidian and roam research) and linking are exciting and a very good and productive path. i wish i knew german so i could read the article. perhaps apple/google/microsoft translate are good enough that i’ll catch enough of his meaning-especially since this is more practical than theoretical? thanks again, and i hope you have a happy thanksgiving! i’m thankful that you have shared your time and insight!
My pleasure, and thanks for your response! Let me know what you think once you read the article. I found a chapter about Luhmann by Johannes F.K. Schmidt in a book called _Forgetting Machines_ which I'm going to read and review next.
Hi Keith, I was revisiting this video and found your comment. Take a look at luhmann (dot) surge (dot) sh (slash) communicating-with-slip-boxes (replace those dots and slash for the real thing); it's an English translation of Luhmann's article
@@douglasdrumond
Tks! I was looking all over for this.
Really great video. I just catched the question... what if the same idea or thought comes again to me after a while. I don't remember is it in my slipbox and i automatically capture this "new" idea. Now in my slipbox has 2 almost identical or close to identical notes. What do i do? I constantly see this happening to me. I am operating with so many contexts that i am not sure is this a new idea or just a old forgotten idea. Basically... how he deals with duplications. And the clarifications/improvements/corrections of the old ideas.
Good question. I'm not 100% sure how Luhmann dealt with duplications. I imagine that, given the fact he said writing and reviewing notes took him more time than writing books, he was probably VERY familiar with the contents of the slipboxes and less likely to mistakenly re-enter exactly the same idea. But I suppose that depends on what you mean by "the same". I think there are a lot of opportunities to revisit ideas from different perspectives, especially as you find other sources that have something to say about them. The key then seems to be connecting old info with new via appropriate links.
Very nice video on the stelkastein. My problem with this system is where to settle boundaries as for example what of a topic is enough in the slipbox so as to not overwelm it with a bunch of uneuseful information. Thanks for sharing this.
That's a good question. I suspect it's a personal judgment of what information you will use and how much is too much. I plan to continue assessing this, so I don' t end up spending a lot of time recording things that are not going to contribute to my own writing.
@@DrDanAllosso thank you for your nice reply. My main concern is that since it is a personal management system, where do you set a limitation so as not to waste time creating a unuseful personal wikipedia. It's the fault I see in this system. I will follow your videos through, hoping to learn more. Thank you.
Enjoyed the video. I am very interested in how you use the method personally. I have been reading a bit on Luhmann's method over the last couple weeks in hopes of adopting it, but not sure how well it will work for something like studying history with the huge amount of raw information that I may want to record when following his idea of one simple idea per "card." I hope you will update with your experiences.
Thanks for watching and commenting! I'm thinking about that workflow this week, as I have a big packet of notes from a book of new findings on the earliest evidence of people in the Americas, that I want to use to update my chapter in my Environmental History textbook. I think there's an intermediate layer of data-oriented notes that will get permanently stored in my digital system, but may not make their way quite to the slip-box. I'll probably want to summarize the findings of this evidence and mention it in a permanent note in the box, though. I'll report on that as I do it.
@@DrDanAllosso Out of curiosity, what is the book to which you referred. Is it by chance Paulette Steeve's Indigenous Paleolithic of the Western Hemisphere?
Props to your communication skills!
Does anyone have a link to an online version of that article? (Even better if someone did a real, human translation of it).
Thank you for going to the source and sharing your views. I'm starting to use the system for studying.
Glad it was helpful! Thanks for watching and commenting!
very interesting Dan! just a question : if new notes are classified by finding the most analog note and completing the numbering of the new before placing it after its analog sister note, how do you explain the combinatory quality you talk about?
I think that's a result of the keyword indexes you make as you go, as well as the process of reviewing, which gives you multiple opportunities to compare the ideas on one note with adjacent notes, follow threads of ideas, etc.
@@DrDanAllosso maybe (I don’t feel you as convinced as you use to be on this answer 😉 but it is my perception) ! I found an interesting alternative to this numbering that - for me - is a constraint due to the physical material ( the paper) : it is based on hierarchies ( plugin breadcrumbs) . I use it for weeks now and it generates potentially multiple numberings for each note. And there, the magic happens: when the hierarchies intersect. full freedom of electronic support to reach Luhmann’s objective
I still like the graph view that Obsidian affords me if I double-bracket keywords. But I've been able to really streamline the path to output by switching to paper notes. I'll probably settle on a combination of digital and analog in the long run.
"relationalization of relations" -> relational database
Yes. I wonder whether tools and apps that have been developed make it less necessary for people to understand the relationships? What do you think?
@@DrDanAllosso Hi! Well, I think this is a fad. People will spend a lot of time organizing and entering their data in a non-Z way and abandon it. 2. The free apps for this, like Obsidian, will start charging subscriptions and more will abandon. 3. No one is actually using the Z method, which takes years to get any results, so abandon. 4. Z is archaic. Modern info systems are way beyond it not to mention AI. However, I am using Obsidian in a non-Z way and like it, but the non-db db will make moving your data out of it, very difficult. prob. destroying relations. OTH, Z seems like a great way to co-opt other people's copyrighted content. Creativity for the uncreative.
I'm a german native and wrote academic texts in legal philosophy - so Luhmann is very well known to me because he actually started out as a legal theorist and not a sociologist! I liken the Zettelkasten-method to a squirrel collecting little nuts of knowledge and then spreading them out for an "intellectual diet" . It's great for Text production and explains why Luhmann was able to be such an immensely productive writer - but it also explains why his writing style is so terrible, except for little ironic quips he puts in once in a while. So while I do recommend using the system for writing texts I also recommend putting in more Time in editing them afterwards because they tend to be badly written stylistically
Thanks! I agree, collecting ideas does not guarantee one will be able to synthesize them creatively or express insights in a way that will be valuable to readers. But it increases the possibility, I think!
@@DrDanAllosso Apart from the organizational aspect of zettlekasten, it seems to me there's a creative aspect which can get lost (at least for me) in trying to figure our the "how" of the system, which increases the likelihood we'll think of zettlekasten as simply a note taking system to keep us organized so we can be ready to write that article or book at some point in the future. The "magic" of zettlekasten is that in essence it's a creative system, a system that says from the beginning one should be responsive to what is being noted, writing as we go, recording on the fly the thoughts and insights which arise as we contemplate the material at hand.