Das frühe Archiv der Systemtheorie: Genese, Mechanik und thematisches Profil des Zettelkastens I von Niklas Luhmann (1952–1960)

1. Einleitung: Entstehungskontext und biografische Verortung (1952–1960)

Die 1950er-Jahre markieren in der intellektuellen Biografie Niklas Luhmanns eine Phase der Latenz und der autodidaktischen Fundierung, die für sein späteres soziologisches Œuvre von konstitutiver Bedeutung sein sollte. In den Jahren zwischen 1952 und 1960 war Luhmann weder als Soziologe noch als universitärer Wissenschaftler tätig. Nach seinem Jura-Studium in Freiburg arbeitete er zunächst als Referendar, später als Assistent am Oberverwaltungsgericht Lüneburg und ab 1955 als Verwaltungsbeamter im Kultusministerium des Landes Niedersachsen. Doch parallel zu dieser pragmatisch-juristischen Berufspraxis entfaltete Luhmann im privaten Arbeitszimmer ein außergewöhnliches Lektüre- und Forschungspensum. Es umfasste weite Teile der Philosophie, der Rechtswissenschaft, der frühen Organisations- und Verwaltungstheorie sowie zunehmend der US-amerikanischen Soziologie.

Aus dieser intensiven, fachübergreifenden Rezeption erwuchs ein tiefgreifendes Problem der Wissensorganisation. Luhmann erkannte früh die Defizite traditioneller Exzerpiermethoden. Wer in gebundenen Heften notiert oder Zettel starr alphabetisch nach Autoren oder starren Sachkategorien ablegt, bindet das Wissen an den Zufall der Lektürechronologie oder zwingt es in ein unflexibles taxonomisches Korsett, das neue interdisziplinäre Querverbindungen erstickt. Vor diesem Hintergrund vollzog Luhmann 1952 einen radikalen methodischen Bruch: Er begann mit dem Aufbau eines modularen, auf Zetteln basierenden Speichersystems, das heute in der Forschung als „Zettelkasten I“ (ZK I) firmiert.

Das Initialjahr 1952 markiert somit nicht nur den Beginn einer privaten Sammlung, sondern die Geburt einer spezifischen epistemologischen Praxis. Der Zettelkasten I, der in seiner aktiven Phase bis etwa 1960/1961 wuchs – bevor Luhmann nach seinem Studienaufenthalt in Harvard bei Talcott Parsons in die akademische Soziologie übertrat und mit dem „Zettelkasten II“ einen inhaltlichen und systematischen Neustart wagte –, umfasst rund 24.000 Zettel in 108 thematischen Abteilungen. Er ist das historische Dokument eines Geistes, der aus den Fesseln der juristischen Dogmatik ausbrach und durch die Mechanisierung seiner eigenen Lesefrucht die abstrakte Beobachtung von Gesellschaft einübte. In dieser formativen Phase diente das System Luhmann als Vehikel, um die immense Komplexität seiner Leseerfahrungen nicht nur zu bändigen, sondern produktiv zu wenden.

2. Architektonik und Mechanik des Zettelkastens I

Die historische Faszination des Zettelkastens I liegt weniger in seiner physischen Materialität als vielmehr in seiner logischen Architektonik. Physisch bestand das System aus standardisierten Papierkarten im Oktavformat (DIN A6), die in simplen Holzschubladen gelagert wurden. Die intellektuelle Innovation Luhmanns lag in der Abkehr von jedweder feststehenden, hierarchischen Systematik – etwa einer Klassifikation nach dem Vorbild der Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation. Stattdessen implementierte er eine dynamische, rein relationale Stellordnung.

Das Kernstück dieser Mechanik war das Prinzip der internen Verzweigung mittels eines alphanumerischen Codes. Jeder Zettel erhielt eine feste Nummer (z. B. 1, 2, 3), die ihn an einem festen physischen Ort im Kasten verankerte. Wenn Luhmann nun einen Gedanken zu Zettel 1 ergänzen wollte, der gedanklich nicht in das lineare Fortschreiten zu Zettel 2 passte, fügte er einen neuen Zettel direkt dahinter ein und bezifferte ihn mit 1a. Weitere Differenzierungen setzten diesen Rhythmus fort: Auf 1a folgte 1b, eine gedankliche Abzweigung aus 1a wurde zu 1a1, gefolgt von 1a2, und eine weitere Ausdifferenzierung von 1a1 wurde als 1a1a verschlagwortet.
Diese Technik löste ein massives physikalisches Problem: Sie erlaubte das unendliche interne Wachstum an jeder beliebigen Stelle des Kastens. Keine Vorentscheidung über die Wichtigkeit eines Themas musste getroffen werden; das System konnte organisch wuchern, ohne die vorhandene Ordnung zu zerstören.

Die Stellordnung allein hätte jedoch lediglich zu isolierten Gedankengängen geführt. Die eigentliche Emergenz – das oft von Luhmann selbst beschriebene Moment, in dem der Zettelkasten als "Kommunikationspartner" Überraschungen produziert – wurde durch das radikale Prinzip der Verweisung (Querverweise) generiert. Luhmann notierte auf den Karten Verweise zu Zetteln in völlig anderen Abteilungen des Kastens. Ein juristischer Gedanke in Abteilung 12 konnte so kurzgeschlossen werden mit einer erkenntnistheoretischen Reflexion in Abteilung 57. Diese Verweisungsnetzwerke emanzipierten die inhaltliche Struktur des Zettelkastens von seiner physischen Linearität. Der ZK I funktionierte de facto als analoger Hypertext.

Um in diesem dichten, nicht-hierarchischen Netzwerk Orientierung zu finden, verzichtete Luhmann auf Inhaltsverzeichnisse. Als einzige Zugangsmedien dienten ein separates Schlagwortregister sowie ein bibliografisches Register (der Literaturkasten). Im Schlagwortregister wurde ein Begriff (z. B. "Staat" oder "Organisation") mit nur ein bis drei zentralen Zettelnummern versehen (den sogenannten Einsprungstellen). Von diesen Startpunkten aus folgte Luhmann den netzartigen Verweisen auf den Karten selbst, um sich durch das Themengebiet zu navigieren.

Eine unabdingbare methodische Prämisse für das Gelingen dieses Systems war Luhmanns Selektionsregel: Der Zettelkasten nahm keine reinen Buchzusammenfassungen oder simplen Zitate auf. Luhmann exzerpierte nicht den Gedankengang eines Autors, sondern übersetzte die Lektüre unmittelbar in seine eigene Begriffssprache und in die Struktur des Kastens. Er extrahierte Theoreme, Begriffe und Relationen aus der Literatur und rekombinierte sie mit bereits bestehenden Zetteln. Der ZK I war somit von Beginn an kein passives Archiv fremden Wissens, sondern eine Maschine zur aktiven Theorieproduktion.

3. Subject-Mapping: Inhaltliche Schwerpunkte und Wissensbestände der Frühphase

Während die universitäre Wahrnehmung Luhmanns primär auf seiner ab den lateinischen 1960er-Jahren entwickelten, umfassenden Soziologie der Gesellschaft basiert, offenbart die inhaltliche Kartierung des Zettelkastens I (ZK I) ein gänzlich anderes Profil. Der ZK I ist das Protokoll einer geistigen Metamorphose – der schrittweisen Transformation eines juristisch-verwaltungswissenschaftlich geschulten Beamten in einen interdisziplinären Sozialtheoretiker.

Den dominanten Kern der Bestände im Zeitraum zwischen 1952 und 1960 bilden Themenfelder des öffentlichen Rechts, der Staats- und Verwaltungslehre sowie der Politikwissenschaft. Die frühesten Abteilungen des ZK I kreisen um klassische dogmatische Fragen:

    die Funktion von Grundrechten und Staatszielbestimmungen,

    die Grenzen des Verwaltungsermessens und

    das Wesen der Bürokratie im modernen Sozialstaat.

Luhmann beließ es jedoch nicht bei der juristischen Rekonstruktion von Normen. Sehr früh begann er, die Rechtswissenschaft phänomenologisch und funktionell aufzubrechen. Über die Rezeption der US-amerikanischen Verwaltungswissenschaft – allen voran den Arbeiten von Herbert A. Simon (Administrative Behavior) sowie Chester I. Barnard – hielten organisationstheoretische Kategorien Einzug in den Kasten. Die Frage, wie Entscheidungen unter den Bedingungen unvollständiger Information strukturiert werden und wie formale und informale Strukturen in Organisationen ineinandergreifen, entwickelte sich zu einem zentralen Motiv der Zettelreihen der späten 1950er-Jahre.

Zugleich zeigt der ZK I eine intensive Auseinandersetzung mit der Soziologie, noch bevor Luhmann 1960/61 nach Harvard ging, um bei Talcott Parsons zu studieren. Bereits in den Fünfzigerjahren exzerpierte Luhmann parsonssche Schriften sowie Werke der französischen Soziologie (u. a. Émile Durkheim, Marcel Mauss) und der philosophischen Anthropologie (u. a. Arnold Gehlen).

In dieser Rezeptionsphase zeichneten sich die begrifflichen Keimzellen der späteren Systemtheorie ab. Luhmann begann, fundamentale kognitive Werkzeuge einzuüben:

    Zweck-Mittel-Relationen: Die Umstellung vom substanziellen Denken auf funktionale Analysen, bei denen nicht mehr nach dem „Wesen“ eines Phänomens gefragt wird, sondern nach dessen Funktion für die Problemlösung.

    Struktur und Funktion: Das systematische Durchdenken von Systemen als Gefüge, die durch Strukturbildung Komplexität reduzieren.

    Formalität vs. Informalität: Die Beobachtung, dass Organisationen ihre Existenz der ständigen Spannung zwischen offiziellen Regelwerken und inoffiziellen Verhaltensweisen verdanken.

Der ZK I dokumentiert somit keine fertige Theorie, sondern den mühsamen, hochgradig kreativen Entstehungsprozess eines eigenen begrifflichen Instrumentariums. Er ist das Laboratorium, in dem der Jurist Luhmann das theoretische Rüstzeug schmiedete, das ihm in den 1960er-Jahren die schlagartige Integration in den soziologischen Fachdiskurs ermöglichte.

4. Epistemologischer Ertrag und Methodische Synthese

Der erkenntnistheoretische Ertrag des Zettelkastens I liegt weit über seinem bloßen Wert als Informationsspeicher. Aus wissenshistorischer Perspektive bildete die Symbiose aus Luhmann und seinem Kasten ein hybrides Kognitionssystem. Luhmann selbst sprach rückblickend von einer „Verdopplung der Persönlichkeit“ oder dem Zettelkasten als einem „Zweitgedächtnis“.

Die theoretische Tragweite dieser Konstellation lässt sich in drei Dimensionen verdichten:

    Emergenz durch Dezentralisierung: Durch den Verzicht auf eine übergeordnete Systematik besaß der ZK I kein Zentrum. Wissen war dezentral abgelegt. Wenn Luhmann über Jahre hinweg Zettel an disparate Stellen einsortierte und über die Registratur verknüpfte, erzeugte das System eine Eigendynamik. Bei Recherchen stieß er regelmäßig auf Verbindungen, die er Jahre zuvor notiert, aber längst vergessen hatte. Der ZK I wurde zu einer Suchmaschine für Analogien und strukturelle Isomorphien zwischen scheinbar unzusammenhängenden Sachverhalten.

    Abgrenzung von ZK I zu ZK II: Der Bruch um 1960/61 – markiert durch den Übergang zum Zettelkasten II – war die logische Konsequenz aus dem Wachstum des ersten Systems. Der ZK I war in seiner Struktur (108 oft noch sachlich gebundene Abteilungen) zwar hochflexibel, aber in Teilen noch von den juristisch-verwaltungswissenschaftlichen Ausgangsfragestellungen geprägt. Nach der intensiven Parsons-Lektüre in Harvard wählte Luhmann für den ZK II (ab 1961) eine noch abstraktere, rein funktionale Systematik, die ihn fortan durch das gesamte soziologische Hauptwerk trug. Der ZK I blieb dennoch das Fundament, auf dem Luhmanns frühe Monografien – wie Funktionen und Folgen formaler Organisation (1964) oder Grundrechte als Institution (1965) – direkt aufbauten.

    Materialität als Denkvoraussetzung: Luhmanns Theoriearbeit war nicht das Produkt rein abstrakter Geistestätigkeit im luftleeren Raum, sondern das Ergebnis einer haptischen, mediengebundenen Praxis. Ohne die Disziplin des täglichen Zettelschreibens, Bezifferns und Verweisens wäre die gigantische Syntheseleistung der Luhmannschen Systemtheorie schlicht nicht denkbar gewesen.

Fazit:

Der Zettelkasten I im Zeitraum von 1952 bis 1960 ist weit mehr als eine kurios-analoge Datenbank eines Arbeitsbesessenen. Er steht exemplarisch für die Entstehung moderner Theoriearchitektur im Medium der Karteikarte. In der Isolation des Verwaltungsdienstes schuf Niklas Luhmann mit dem ZK I eine Denkmaschine, die es ihm erlaubte, die Komplexität der modernen Gesellschaft nicht nur zu archivieren, sondern sie in ihrer eigenen netzartigen Struktur spiegelbildlich nachzubilden.

Creating a digital Zettelkasten

 

The Luhmann principle can be adapted to analog note taking and digital one both. An example for the digital version is shown in the screenshot. Even if graphics can't be inserted into a plain text document, the approach is very powerful and allows to create a personal knowledge base.

The restriction of 500 chars for each section results into atomicity, which means instead very long sections, there are multiple short sections available. The atomicity ensures, that similar information are located nearby. For each newly added card the user has to search for an existing section which matches closely to the subject. 

The main advantage of grouping similar information together is that the resulting text document can be read again. Its not a chaotic information collection but similar to a book all the information are grouped in chapters. In addition the Luhmann principle supports the memorization process similar to the Mindmapping method invented by Tony Buzan. 

Zettelkasten can't replace experiments

 The main purpose of note taking is to memorize information from the past. Everything what is written in books can be converted into note cards. The ability to add new cards and retrieve existing content makes it easier to remember content read in the past. This provides to the researcher a perfect external memory of all the read information.

In spite all the advantages, note taking with the Zettelkasten principle has one major drawback: it can't replace the experiment. Experiments are used in science to gather new information not written down in the existing literature. There are physical experiments, e.g. measuring the voltage in a circuit, mathematical experiments e.g. a number crunching problem, and even musical experiments in which a new song gets composed. All these experiments are by definition not available yet so they can't be found in the existing notes. If a zettelkasten is a look back into time, an experiments looks forward into the future.

The main problem with the zettelkasten notetaking principle is that encourages the researcher to look only in the past. Creating lot of notes and read them multiple times is equal to stay within existing knowledge. This is equal to a very conservative philosophy and rejects novelty. The untold bias is that everything important was written in the past, either by the researcher itself or by other authors who have published books about the subject. And everything what is not written down in the past, doesn't exists.

In contrast, an experiment driven research project is working with the opposite principle of a Zettelkasten. The question is not what was written about a subject already, and the question is not what sort of notes are avaiable, but the question is how to investigate something from scratch without pre-knowledge. The idea is heat up water and measure at which degree the maximum is reached, the goal is to program a prototype in python and think about the difficulties. So we can say, that the limitation of the Zettelkasten has to do with the difference between past and future.

Numbering photos with the Luhmann id

 Facebook is the largest photo sharing website in the world. The amount of daily uploaded pictures is at least 300 million per day. The best way to manage this amount of information is filename which is working with an alphanumerical key. Example:

1_holiday.jpg
2_christmas.jpg
2a_christmastree.jpg
2b_Deliciouscake.jpg
2b1_recipeforcake.png
3_sport.jpg
3a_photoofshoes.jpg

The numerical ID for each photo remains the same. It is given once during the creation. New photos can be added to the collection by choosing the id according to the existing system. The files are sorted by its similarity. In the literature the concept is described as hierarchical clustering of images

How to beautiy old index cards

One of the main reasons why paper based analog Zettelkasten is rejected by the note taking community is because it's low efficiency. It's more than a myth but a fact that writing something on a sheet of paper takes much longer than typing the notes into a keyboard. In addition, an electronic database makes sure the content is accessible forever, but a sheet of paper goes yellow after some months.

If a frequently used index card has dog's ear and the content can't be read anymore there is a need to copy the content to a new card. That means, the owner of the Zettelkasten has to manual copy the content word by word with a pen to a fresh card which has no visible signs of wear and then put the card back into the tray. Of course, the procedure will take some time and if the content is boring the time is wasted.

Zettelkasten Questionnaire

Please select a random Zettel from your analog slip box and answer the following 80+ questions.

1 Shape of card
- Is the paper lined (e.g. lined, blank, squared)?
- What color is the paper (e.g. white, blue, light red)?
- How thick is the paper (e.g normal index card 180gsm, thin paper 80gsm)?
- In which condition is the card (e.g. excellent, worn down, damaged by fire)?
- What abnormalities are there (e.g. paperclip on top, glue on back, extra postit notes)?
- Has the card holes on the left for a personal organizer (e.g. ISO 838, 6 ring binder)?

1a Longhand Scripture
- Was the text written in longhand (e.g. longhand, typewriter, PC printer)?
- If longhand, what sort of pen was used (e.g. pencil, fountain pen, roller ball)?
- if typewriter, which sort of typewriter was used (e.g. mechanical, electrical)?
- if PC, which sort of PC printer was used (e.g. inkjet, laser, dotmatrix)?
- What is the color of the ink (e.g. blue, black)?
- Is it readable for others (e.g. very good, medium, poor)?
- Are the characters connected which makes it harder for OCR recognition (e.g. yes, no)?
- Is the ink visible well (e.g. high contrast, fade writing)?

1b Layout
- What is the direction of the writing (e.g. portrait, landscape)?
- Are the lines written in two column mode (e.g. one column, two column)?
- Was a highlighter used for some words (e.g. no, yes in yellow)?

1c Size of card
- What is the size (e.g. DIN A6, A7, 3x5”)?
- How was the paper cut (e.g. pre-cut paper, by scissor, knife at ruler, paper cutting machine)?
- If a cutting machine was used, which type exactly (e.g. safety rotary, guillotine)?
- How many sheets of paper were cut at the same time (e.g. 0, 1, 2, 3)?
- is the card folded like DIN A5 folded to A6 (e.g. no, yes)?

2 Content
- How many words are written down (e.g. 50)?
- Does the Zettel has a picture (e.g. none, diagram, pencil drawing, mindmap, abstract drawing, photorealistic artwork)?
- Is there a table in the body (e.g. no, yes)?
- Is there a writing on the backside too (e.g. no, a bit, very much)?
- What is written on the backside (e.g. bibliographic reference, normal note, direct quote)?
- What is the language of the card (e.g. German, English, Lingua Latīna)?
- Is it a hub note or a normal note (e.g. normal_note, hub_note, bib_note, register_card)?

2a Reason for creation
- At which place was the card created (e.g. in the library, at home, at work)?
- Was the Zettel used for writing a new book (e.g. new book, new novel, none)?
- What is the purpose (e.g. recipe collection, excerpt notes, lecture notes, plotting a story)?
- How many people have seen the card (e.g. only me, one other, many)?
- Was the card used during a presentation in front of an audience (e.g. no, yes)?
- Has the content a practical nature (e.g. practical, theoretical)?

2b Format of Bibliographic reference
- Are there bibliographic references (e.g. 0, 1, 2)?
- What is the citation style of the reference (e.g. [AuthorYear], [1], (a))?
- is the page number written near the reference (e.g. no, yes)?
- Where is the Author-Title-year information located (e.g. on the backside, at bib card, in external database)?
- is the reference stored in a digital database too (e.g. zotero, bibtex, none)?

2b1 Content of bibliographic references
- What sort of reference is it (e.g. a paper, a book, a podcast)?
- Who is the author of the reference (e.g. Mark Twain)?
- Is the reference publicly available (e.g. in the internet, only in printed format)?
- Is there a direct quote from a reference on the card (e.g. no, yes)?
- Is the Zettel judging with a negative connotation about the bibliographic reference (e.g. negative, neutral, positive)?
- What is the language of the bibliographic references (e.g German, English, Lingua Latīna)?

2c Time
- When was the Zettel created (e.g. January 2023)?
- Does the Zettel contains of a written date (e.g. no, yes)?
- If there is a date, how was it created (e.g. manual pen, rubber date stamp)?
- If there is a bibliographic reference, from which year is it (e.g. 2014)?
- Were information added later (e.g. no, with 1 day delay, with 1 week delay)?
- How long does it take to write the Zettel in longhand (e.g. 5 minutes, 10 minutes)?
- How many minutes would it take to type in the Zettel into a computer keyboard (e.g. 4, 6)?
- Dropping the Cettel from 1 meter, how long does it take until it hits ground (e.g. 0.5 seconds, 1 second)?

2d Links
- Are there are outgoing links to other cards (e.g. 0, 1, 2)?
- Are there are incoming links from other cards (e.g. 0, 1, 2)?

2e Named entity recognition
- Does the note contains of person names (e.g. no, yes)?
- If yes, is he male (e.g. male, female)?
- Are locations like a city mentioned in the note (e.g. no, yes)?
- if yes, which continent is it (e.g. Europe, America, Asia, Africa)?
- Are dates available like a year or a certain time (e.g. no, yes)?
- if yes, which century is it (e.g. 21th, 20th, 19th)?
- Are product names mentioned (e.g. no, yes)?
- if yes, what is the price range (e.g. below 100 US$, more than 100 US)?
- Does the Zettel contain of measurement units like kilogram or meter (e.g. no, yes)?
- If yes, what purpose is it (e.g. measure biology, measure physics, social indicators)?

2e1 Part of speech tagging
- Does a sentence contains of a question mark to label a misunderstood subject (e.g. no, yes)?
- How many nouns are on the card (e.g. 10)?
- Is there a personal comment on the Zettel (e.g. no, yes)?

3 Indexing
- Was the card indexed with a tag for faster recall (e.g. no, yes)?
- Are some words underlined (e.g. 0, 1, 2)?
- Has the card a colored tab (e.g. no, yes)?
- What is the general subject (e.g. Math, Art, Business, Sociology)?
- Give two keywords which are describing the Zettel (e.g. Euclidean geometry)
- How important is the Zettel to understand the general subject (e.g. low, medium, high)?
- What is the word count of the title (e.g. 2, 4, 6)?

3a Machine readable
- Was the card scanned for backup reasons (e.g. no, as jpeg file, including OCR)?
- if the card was scanned, what is the dpi resolution (e.g. 150dpi, 300dpi)?
- Is there a barcode or similar identification system (e.g. none, barcode, qr-code, rfid)?
- Has the edge some holes (e.g. edge-notched card, none)?
- Is the information on the card the same as in a digital PKM software (e.g. no unique, yes a copy)?
- Was carbon paper used for write through on a second card for backup reasons (e.g. no, yes)?

3b Luhmann ID
- What is the position of the Luhmann ID on the card (e.g. top left, top right)?
- What is the format (e.g. alphanumeric, IP number like, with slash after first digit)?
- If the ID is nested, how deep is it (e.g. 3 levels, 6 levels)?
- What is the classification system (e.g. self created, Dewey decimal classification)?
- Has the card a fixed position in a stack (e.g. no, yes a juxtaposition)?
- Does the ID contains of a minus - sign to sort the card before the parent card (e.g. no, yes)?

Typing speed for analog index cards

The main cause why modern computer users are shy to start an analog Zettelkasten is because they are believing in the myth of a highly efficient electronic data. The assumption is, that typing something on a keyboard is very fast and that URL and bibliographic references can be added by simple copy&paste to the knowledge database.

The underlying assumption behind the average Obsidian PKM user is, that there a no costs at all in creating all the nodes in the second brain while in contrast analog note taking is perceived as very complicated. The understanding is, that for creating an analog note somebody has to search endless time for a pen and needs lots of hours until all the index cards are written in long hand.

It is a widely known fact that Niklas Luhmann has created all the 90k index cards by hand. But Luhmann has worked in a time before the advent of the IBM PC. The prefered way of creating a Luhmann like Zettelkasten since the 1990s is of course a modern Windows or Linux computer which has many advantages of a luhmann style note taking system.

To get a better understanding why analog note taking is even in the year 2023 the most effieient way in creating a knowledge base, a short look in the figure may help. The spreadsheet compares the amount of data and the needed effort in minutes to create an analog vs. a digital zettelkasten.

The obvious difference is the typing speed in chars. It is a fact, that a computer keyboard allows to type in something much faster than an analog pen. On the second hand the difference is smaller than expected. If the user is reducing the amount of written of cards for each byte and also reduces the amuunt of daily cards he will need less overall time for creating new notes.

Let us slow down the situation a bit and describe why digital notetaking takes so long. According to the table lots of cards are created each year. Even if the typing speed is high, these cards are requiring manual effort. The user has to invest around 64.4 hours per year to write down 1095 digital note cards. It is not possible to reduce the needed time because there is a limit in the typing speed on a computer keyboard.

In contrast to a famous myth, the amount of effort for creating a digital card index is not zero but it will produce endless amount of hours in which the user has to type in something. And the example with only 3 newly created cards is simple one. If the user puts more effort into the Obsidian PKM software he will need more hours.

The main advantage of analog note taking is, that the user knows in advance that it is complicated to write in longhand. So he will think twice before he creates a new card and will reduce the information to a minimum. This allows to reach a higher productivity than with digital note taking. In the figure the overall needed time per year is smaller for analog note taking. That means, Analog note taking can safe time compared to digital note taking.

The main cause for the paradox situation is because of the slow typing speed in general. No matter if a human is preferring an analog pen or a digital computer keyboard, the possible speed is very slow. A typing speed of 170 chars per minute is equal 23 bit/s. In comparison, outdated analog modems are using 14400 bit/s as the average speed. Even if somebody is able to type in something very fast, his writing speed ridiculous slow. The world record on a computer keyboard is around 800 chars per minute. That means even the best user in the world will need endless amount of time until 1000 and more nodes in the Obsidian PKM software have been created.

The assumption is that the slow typiong speed in general plus the small difference to analog writing speed explains why a paper based Zettelkasten makes sense. It allows to use the ressources in an optimal way and avoids wishful thinking. Humans, no matter if they are prefering analog or digital note taking are not capable in creating hundred of index cards every day but in the optimal case there are only 2 or 3 newly created cards possible.

Proof that analog note taking is faster than Obsidian

The Zettelkasten community is proud of their self- developed tools like Obsidian, Emacs org-mode and Cherrytree. The promise is that creating a digital only knowledge base is highly efficient. To investigate the claim in detail the following Spreadsheet might help:

The user has to enter some information like writing speed and the amount of characters and then the spreadsheet will determine the estimated amount of minutes for each day. In the concrete example the analog Zettelkasten will occupy 2 minutes fewer than the digital version.It is more productive to create analog notes than typing the information into Obsidian.

But let us slow down the situation a bit and explain what the user of a zettelkasten is doing usually. He has to write of course new cards to add content to the system. Its up to the user how many cards he creates each day. This will affect how the note box will look in 6 months or in 12 months. More added cards per day will result into a larger and more interesting note box and vice versa.

The promise of digital note taking is, that it is pretty easy to write new cards. The assumption is that the computer keyboard in combination with an advanced GUI software is able to reduce the amount of time to zero. But this is not the case. Typing in something and clicking on all the drop down menus will require a certain amount of minutes. In the concrete example, the user has to invest 12.5 minutes each day for updating the digital Zettelkasten. After only a year the total amount is 12.5*365=76 hours. That means the user has to use the computer keyboard over endless amount of hours only to add some small piece of information into the digital knowledge base.

How to write an academic paper without taking notes?

 

Taking notes is a fundamental technique in academic writing and since the advent of the Unix operating system lots of software was created for this purpose, right? It is a rhetorical question because the history of note taking software is not well researched. Sure in terms of quantity many attempts were made for creating notes. The most famous one are the emacs program, the texinfo hypertext format and the bibtex format. The surprising situation is, that none of these attempts are popular and most users are not aware of these tools.

Let us compare the situation in Unix with other operating systems like Windows. The situation in Windows isn't very different. On the one hand there are some dedicated bibliographic databases available like Endnote and Citavi and on the other hand there are text editors and the famous ms-word program for making notes. All these programs are not very powerful. For example in fixed bibliographic database it is not allowed to enter full text comments, while in MS-word like text editor it is hard to search full text in the information.

If all the existing operating systems and note taking software have a low quality and are not used in reality, what was used instead for creating notes in the past? The surprising answer is that note taking is not a big thing, even in academia the value is overestimated. To investigate the working thesis in detail let us describe how to write a paper without any notes or references.

What the author needs is some sort of typing tool which are mostly a classical typewriter or a pen or a software like MS-Word or LaTeX. Then the sentences are formulated. If the text was written some (not more than 3 bibliographic references are added) The exact description which includes the title, DOI number and the journal is retrieved from a library catalog. Then the text gets formatted into the PDF format and is printed on a laser printer. The interesting situation is, that during the entire writing process there was no need to create notes or recall existing notes. But the academic author sits in front of an empty sheet of paper and formulates what he knows about a subject.

The chance is high, that such kind of writing process was common in the past and was applied by the majority of authors. The content of the written text depends mostly on the individual knowledge about a subject. If the author is informed very well he can write a better text and vice versa. Basically spoken all the hype around note taking, outliner software and bibliographic file formats doesn't fit to the reality. For writing a normal academic text there is no need to get familiar with the bibtex software or with a high end free form database like MyInfo.

Even the famous writer and sociologist Niklas Luhmann wasn't using a dedicated note taking system. His so called Zettelkasten was mostly a joke. He has explained to his student that note taking is very important but he wasn't using the technique for himself. Most of the 90000 index cards from his scientific legacy were created only for the public to mimicry reading skills.

Best practice for note taking

 

Steve: Hi, how are you?

Brian: Fine. You're are looking great.

Steve: Can you explain in easy words how to take notes?

Brian: For a certain subject, or in general?

Steve: In general, because in the past my efficiency was too low.

Brian: A common mistake in note taking is, that the users are trying to reinvent the Luhmann system.

Steve: Are you talking about Folgezettel?

Brian: Not only but also about the Luhmann id.

Steve: It looks like a mess

Brian: Yes, the nodes are sorted in a linear way which makes it hard to find something.

Steve: What can you recommend instead?

Brian: First thing to do is to create folders.

Brian: ... and then the id is removed because the outliner software handles the hierarchy by itself.

Steve: In the new note book it is much easier to write something because there is a clear structure available.

Brian: Exactly, The user can add new information in the existing folders or he can create new folders if he needs more space.

Steve: Can the software handle larger amount of information?

Brian: Sure, there is no limitation for the file size, it is possible to create notes which have 10 MB and more It is even possible to archive longer prose texts.

Steve: What is about search?

Brian: This feature is realized very well in the outliner program. The user types in a term and then he gets a list of all the hits.

Steve: Thanks for the explanation. I will implement the principle as soon as possible in my own note taking system.

Brian: This is recommended. Bye.

Linear note taking explained

 

Around the Luhmann note taking system there is a huge amount of confusion available. The reason is, that the Luhmann method is working the opposite of conventional note taking. Instead of trying to understand the advantages of index card and manual created registers, let us take a closer look how conventional linear note taking is working.

The idea is, that the user has a book in which he can write down notes. New information are put at the end. In the advanced setting, the book is divided into sections. But the idea is always, that new information are located only at the end of a section. This has to do with the underlying pipeline. The user is reading something in another book and writes down his ideas and comments into his own note taking book. Then the book gets formatted and will be published as a new scientific work.

Somebody may argue that this pipeline is so common, that there is no need to describe the principle in detail. The reason why it is so common is because the assumption is, that linear note taking is the only principle which is available. The advantage is, that the complexity is very little.

In the easiest case the note book has no sections so there is no decision needed at which position new information have to be added. They are put simply after the existing notes and if the book is full a new note book gets started. In a digital workflow the same principle is used. If the user tries to add something he scrolls with the cursor to the last paragraph, presses the enter key and adds a new paragraph.

If sections are used to structure the note book the pipeline is slightly more complex but not very much. In most cases, the user has created 2 up to 5 different sections so he has to decide at which section he likes to add something. In the example figure only 2 sections are available. The decision for the user is to add something at the end of section “brown fox” or at the end of section “lorem ipsum”.

Minimalist note taking

 

Steve: I would like to learn to create notes more efficient.

Benjamin: That's great, and i can tell you how.

Steve: Are you working with the Luhmann system?

Benjamin: Not exactly, I'm using my own principle

Steve: Tell me more about it.

Benjamin: It is hard to explain, but you can take a look. Here is a shoebox.

Steve: I see, there are hundreds of index cards in the box. How do you find something in the box?

Benjamin: I don't.

Steve: But, isn't it the idea of a note taking system that older information can be retrieved?

Benjamin: In the Luhmann system this is the case, but my shoebox is working the other way around.

Steve: Ok, let us make an example, which notes do you have about the LaTeX typesetting language.

Benjamin: LaTeX has at it's first letter an L. Unfortunately, i have no index ...

Steve: Luhmann was using in addition a thematic tree which is working with alphanumberical numbers. So perhaps we search in the cmputer section?

Benjamin: Ops, i have no sections and no IDs. There is no section about computers.

Steve: What?

Benjamin: Sorry, but the notes have no order at all, but i know there are some information about the TeX software in the box, but i doesn't know where exactly.

Steve: And how do you find it?

Benjamin: I will take the note number one from the box, scan the content and put it on a stack. Then i will take the next note from the box scan it and so on.

Steve: This will take endless amount of time.

Benjamin. No problem there is no need to hurry up. And perhaps we will find something else which looks interesting.

Steve: Thanks for the explanation.

Benjamin: See you later.

Small sheets or large sheets?

 

John: I'd like to know more about the Luhmann note taking system.

Robert: Are you a scientist?

John: Sure ...

Robert: I doesn't know much about the Luhmann system.

John: Come one, there was a card box, right?

Robert: Many of them.

John: And i have to put the index cards into the boxes?

Robert: Maybe.

John: Is this some sort of quiz?

Robert: Luhmann is death. He doesn't even used a computer, and his books have a low quality. So why are you trying to research the topic in detail?

John: I doesn't understand the advantage of using index cards over normal sheet of paper.

Robert: Can you be more specific?

John: A normal sheet of paper has the size of US-Letter or A4 which is 210mmx297mm. In contrast, an A7 index card has only 74mm by 105mm.

Robert: Luhmann has never used the A7 format but he was preferring A6.

John: The principle is the same. A single a4 paper can be divided into 4 individual sheets in A6. Why should somebody use the smaller size?

Robert: I understand what you mean. Smaller sheets are producing a mess by default.

John: Exactly, Normal A4 paper can be stapled together into a book. The book is a single writing area with unlimited amount of space.

Robert: I will tell you something. The difference between A6 and Aa4 is low. It depends on the content somebody has written.

John: You mean, we can ignore index cards at all?

Robert: Sure, modern database systems and word processing software have replaced former index card. The real debate is around analog vs. digital.

John: Perhaps you're right.

Robert: Yes, I am. Best luck for you. Bye.

Note taking with a space limitation

 

Brian: What are you doing?

Steve: Nothing,, i have reorganized my note taking system.

Brian: Sounds interesting, you're using Obsidian right?

Steve: Not really, i have switched over to a Luhmann note box.

Brian: I have seen the clip yesterday. The guy was sitting in a complete mess with endless amount of sheets.

Steve: No, you haven't understood what Luhmann has done. There is a system!

Brian: Right, explain it to me, please.

Steve: At first, you have to write down every idea on a small “post it” note.

Brian: Sure, and then i can arrange them on a wall in a certain shape.

Steve: No, this is the wrong system which is called kanban. Here, you have to put the sheets into a box.

Brian: Ok, that sounds logical. Do i need a certain size?

Steve: Yes, i mean no. It depends on the notecards.

Brian: I prefer a normal outliner software, is this ok?

Steve: Maybe.

Brian: Ok, what's next?

Steve: If the notes are stored in a virtual box, you browse from first to the last one.

Brian: Wouldn't it be easier to write down the notes on a single sheet of paper?

Steve: Nope, hundreds of pieces are better than a single one.

Brian: But then, there is no structure available, for example sections.

Steve: I'm not an expert, but i think this is the goal.

Brian: What is about external literature, how can i cite them?

Steve: The references are stored on notes as well but they are put into a separate box.

Brian: So i will need two outliner files?

Steve: Exactly. It is not recommended to combine normal notes with bibliographic notes. This would produce a complete mess.

Brian: You mean in addition to the existing one ... Sorry for this.

Steve: Tell me something, which sort of project do you like to organize?

Brian: Nothing in special, perhaps I'd like to write a book about sociology, or something like this.

Steve: Very good. Sociology consists of topics like culture, religion and economy. You will have to read a lot of books.

Brian: Thanks for the advice, bye.

Analog note box for Wiki enthusiasts

 

Charlie: Hi Oskar, how are you?

Oskar: Fine. And you?

Charlie: I'd like to ask you something.

Oskar: You're the boss.

Charlie: I've heard, you're a proud owner of a Luhmann style ...

Oskar: [interrupts Charlie] ... analog slip card box. Yes its right. And you want to take a look?

Charlie. No, i mean yes. Can i?

Oskar: [opens a cabinet] In the current version the analog slip box contains of 5 slots.

Charlie: That is a lot, can i touch it?

Oskar: Of source, it is not a museum but i'm using the box., Sometimes ...

Charlie: That are a huge amount of cards. And the number on top are the ID numbers, right?

Oskar: The principle is adapted from page numbers but is more flexible.

CHarlie: But what about a full text search in the content.

Oskar: There is no ability to search.

Charlie: You mean, the note box is not digital and it is not possible to search in the content?

Oskar: Exactly, this is the idea.

Charlie: ... and what are doing, if you want to retrieve the information about a subject, do you have memorized all the IDs?

Oskar: No i haven't. The unique identifier of each card is more or less a random number. What I'm doing is to create a bug report in the search log.

Charlie: Can you give me an example?

Oskar: Suppose I'd like to search the word “toothbrush” in the note box. The situation is, that there is no register and the numbers are chaotic, so i have to create a new card that the term toothbrush wasn't found.

Charlie: What?

Oskar: This card is put into another slip box together with the other cards of failed attempt in searching something. Here, last week i have searched for many terms and none of them is in the box.

Charlie: This sounds not very efficient. In a wiki i can enter a term into the form and then the search engine will show me all the pages which are containing the word.

Oskar: In the analog system, you are your own search engine. It is your objective to return the page number.

Charlie: Thanks for the explanation

Oskar: Bye

The 500 byte capacity of index cards

 

An index card based notetaking system can be realized with many tools. It is possible to use physical flashcards or take advantage of a digital only workflow. Both systems have pros and cons and the shared similarity is that content is put always into frames.

A frame is a box which holds around 500 byte which is equal to 500 characters or 100 words (around). This definition allows to separate between note taking systems which have no upper limit and which one who has the 500 byte limit. The interesting question why it is important to restrict the amount of a text in a sheet?

Let us take a look into more classical and widespread methods of notetaking. What most students are using are empty books to write down notes. Other are prefering folders to insert new sheets at any position. If the idea is to use a laptop to make notes, that the average user will open a text editor and create a file. From a technical perspective there is no limitation in the file size. On a computer a text file can become 1 megabyte in size and on a physical paper it is possible to use office folders which can fold 500 sheet of papers. This provides for the user an unlimited amount of space.

The most obvious difference is, that physical index cards and hypercard like note taking systems have a strict size limitation. In the famous cardfile.exe program which was introduced for Windows 3.1 the size limit was 479 byte including the title. The user was not allowed to create longer cards which includes scrolling. This limitiation together with the limitation of physical index cards is the underlying secret of efficient note taking.

From a technical perspective a longer amount of information is split into smaller chunks which has 500 byte each. For practical reasons, most index cards are filled only with 400 byte or less which will increase the number of cards. And the unsolved question is, why exactly is there a need to create lots of smaller cards, instead of one huge one?

The reason is that smaller cards are producing automatically a network of thought. If the content is distributed over different locations there is need to connect the nodes in a graph. Otherwise important information gets lost. In contrast a text which is stored in a single file is not connected to anything. It is a linear text from top to bottom without internal cross references.

A limit of 500 byte for a single frame produces automatically some sort of hypertext. And the absence of a space limitation will avoid hypertext.

Let us make a small experiment for reason of better understanding. Suppose the idea is to use a very tiny sheet of paper. On each note only a single word can be written down but not more. An example sentence would look the following way:

[The] [quick] [brown] [fox] [jumps] [over] [the] [lazy] [dog.]

There are 9 sheet of paper and after writing it down the sorting order will become chaotic. If the cards are mixed the original sorting order gets lost. To reproduce the original sentence there is need to numbering the sheets.

If the same sentence is written down on a single sheet of paper there is no need for connecting the nodes together because they have a fixed sorting order.

Creating a Luhmann style Zettelkasten in an Outliner

 

The famous Zettelkasten from Niklas Luhmann was an analog device. Luhmann has written down ideas on physical sheet of papers and put them into a tray. This approach has cons and advantages. For sure, the approach is more time consuming than writing the notes into a computer. The following blog article describes a much faster way in making notes.

Instead of describing a concrete Zettelkasten simulator like Obsidian or the ZKN3 software the idea is to use an common of the shelf outliner software. Such programs are available for all operating systems and it is even possible to write such application from scratch. Outliner programs have evolved over the time. A modern software contains of a left pane and a right pane, and the user can enter text and images. The text can formatted wth rich style which includes colors, tables and different fonts.

The screenshot shows the interaction with cherrytree outliner which is available in he debian repository. The surprising situation is, that all the nodes are grouped on the same hierarchical level. Also they are numbered manual. This is perhaps the most obvious difference to a normal note taking file.

If the user likes to add a new note in between two existing one, the only way in doing so is to branch down. Branch down means to increase the depth of the numbering system. The principle is descriped in detail in the literature around the Luhmann zettelkasten and shouldn't repeated here.

For reason of convenience it is possible to add an index which has the number 0. The index works similar to the register in a book which is located at the end. Important keywords are listed and the jumping address is shown. Most outliner software have no ability to insert links directly, so the user writes down the link in square brackets. And then he has to scroll down in the left pane to find a certain node.

In a physical Zettelkasten a node is equal to a card. The idea is that the maximum size of a node is around 500 byte. More characters won't fit on an index card. If the user likes to write down more information he has to create a new node.

After a while, hundred of theses are crated by the user in the outliner software. The information can be requested with many ways. The easiest form is to scroll in the nodes, another option is to use the full text search or to take advantage of the manual created index.

There is no need to create a bibliography section. Instead, external www links and book references as well can be copied and pasted into the nodes directly. But nobody prevents that the user can create a separate bibliography similar to a bibtex file if he likes.

What is a Zettelkasten?

At foremost an index card is something which has become obsolete since the advent of computers. Index cards were used until the 1960s and where later replaced by electronic databases and word processing software. It is some sort of outdated non electronic medium which can't compete with the Internet.

So it is a bit surprising to recognize that since a while the index card has become a famous technology. Similar to the analog vinyl record there is a huge interest available for this medium. This interest can be seen in sold books about the topic at amazon. The book an position #1 at the bestseller list is about index cards and the underlying Zettelkasten method.

Before we can judge about the topic we have to explain shortly what an index card notetaking system is about. The main principles are that the amount of text for each card is limited to around 500 byte and that the cards are numbered in a complicated system. This elements are visible for electronic and analog Zettelkasten systems as well so we can assume that they are the blueprint for the system.

The main contrast between analog and electronic storage systems, is that analog media are limited in the amount of space. The US-letter format has a size of 8.5x11 inches while an index card has a size of 3x5 inches. This limitation is not available for electronic media. A HTML page doesn't know a border but the width depends on the webbrowser. A window can have a width of 800 pixels, or only 200 pixels on a smartphone. The direct result of a fixed size for example of an index card is, that the amount of bytes which can be stored is limited. Writing an index card by hand results into a size of approximately 500 byte but not more.

Let me give a concrete example to explain why this is important. Suppose a writer likes to a make notes. So he will create a text file, writes the content in the file and after storing the file on the hard drive he will recognize that the file is 300 kb in size.

In contrast, if the same author is using index card to make notes he will recognize quickly that after writing down the first sentence, the index card runs out of space. That means, it is not possible to squeeze 300 kb in a single index card. The logical consequence is to use a second and third card to write the text.

From a writing process this limitation has a huge impact and allows to create a different sort of text. If many index cards are used to store information some sort of sorting mechanism is needed which is mostly a numbering system. The combination of a size limit of 500 byte, plus a numbering system to overcome the bottleneck results into the well known Zettelkasten method.

There are some attempts available to simulate index cards on a computer. In the easiest case, the MS-Word software is used and a table holds the index cards. The table has three columns for the id, title and text and then the user can write the content he likes. If he takes care that each entry has a limit of 500 byte, it is a simulated Zettelkasten.

The open question is how to use such a table to make notes? In the past this problem was never asked, since the advent of the PC there is no such thing like a size limit of 500 bytes. That means in a normal word file it is possible to write down unlimited amount of words or bytes. A carefully formatted table or a physical zettelkasten is a step backward before the advent of the computer. This is what the Zettelkasten community is talking about. They want to explore how note taking was done with a size limit for an index card.

Outliner software

State of the art programs to make notes on a computer are outliner programs. On the first look they have much in common with a Zettelkasten but a closer look will show that the principle works different. In an outliner there are hierarchical sections available, also no space limit is there for a single section. Let me give an example. In a typical outliner the user creates some sections like:

section 1

____section B

section 2

____section 4

____section 5

And then he can write down in each section a text or a table. The principle has much in common with creating files in a folder but an outliner provides the features under single GUI. So it is a very comfortable way in writing. The interesting situation is, that writing with index cards is the opposite of an outliner. Because index cards have limitations while an outliner not.

Or let me formulate it differently. In an outliner there is no need to use a Zettelkasten method or learn how to use index cards.

Sorting cards in a box

Suppose somebody has written text onto a handful of index cars. The next step is to archive the cards in a box. But how? There are at least two competing ways in doing so. One easy to understand option is to give every index card a title and then sort the cards alphabetically.

A more complex approach is to number the cards and then use the number for sorting them. The Zettelkasten method is preferring the second approach. The reason why is a bit complicated to explain. A numbering system is mostly equal to a topic based category system. For example index cards about sport are starting with 1, index cards about music with 2 and so on. The number is used short for a category tree. in case of the Zettelkasten method a more complex system is used in which the numbers are determined on the fly without defining the category tree first. The idea is that a number can't changed later and that the position of the card in the sequential list is important.

The Zettelkasten elite

From the self understanding, the Zettelkasten community has much in common with owners of a fixed gear bicycle. A fixie bike is working different to normal bike. It has no breaks so a certain balancing technique is needed called skidding to stop the bike. A same approach is used in case of a Zettelkasten. If the amount of stored information gets larger a workaround is needed to get in control of the information.

A non zettelkasten user would ask why not simple use a computer to store the notes and use full text search to find something in the database. This is not an option for the community. They are using index cards because they want to manage the disadvantages. Similar to fixed gear bicycles there is a certain sort of social control to handle the situation For example it is not allowed to uses these bicycles on a normal road, and it is strictly forbidden to use a physical zettelkasten to write a book or paper. This rule is so obvious that there is no need to formulate it but everybody knows that Zettelkasten and bicycles without brakes are not wanted anymore. The result is the advent of a subculture which has defined rules in opposite to the mainstream understanding.

Public roads are not the right place for fixed gear bicycles, and libraries are the wrong starting point to make notes on a 3x5 index card. What is used instead to manage information is a modern laptop in combination with an outliner or a citation manager. This is what all the students are using.

There is an easy way to identify which tools are used in mainstream and which not. In so called library prank videos the idea is to create a funny unusual scene and record the reactions of the audience. If a student enters with a physical typewriter a library the other users will smile about it because a typewriter is recognized as an outdated technology. If the same student is using index cards he is using another unusual technology.

The reason why index cards were abandoned from libraries is simple. They have too many disadvantages over notebooks. A single notebook can store more information and is easier to use than a slip card box. Especially the combination of a pen plus index cards is a very costly way in storing information.

Modern information technology

A mainstream compatibly technology to store and retrieve information are laptops. These devices have a huge disc space. They can store easily one gigabyte and more of information. The software allows to search full text in the information so it is a great approach handle high demand. Especially students are using laptops to create bibliographic databases and write down texts.

From a laptop perspective there is no need for index cards. Current programs like outliner and word processing software are more than capable for academic writing. The uprraising of the Zettelkasten method has to be interpreted as some sort of anti-movement which is questioning if full text databases are needed and which alternative information storage options are available.

Footnotes with index cards

There is a youtube video available which explains how to create footnotes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNH2Nubcfh4 The Note Card System for Research The idea is to store the footnotes of an acadmic text on index cards. The index card is sometimes called a note card which is short for “footnote card”. And if the paper was written the cards gets archived in a box. This is the basic principle in academic writing.

Creating a Zettelkasten with Lyx

 

In a recent video the Zettelkasten (which is a german word for creating a catalog of index cards) of Niklas Luhmann was explained in detail. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUtCMdeqauE Somewhere in the Intenet there is a sophisticated Java software available which is mainly a relational database which has converted the idea into the digital age. But, both examples (the analog version and the software version as well) are not efficient enough. A more elaborated version of creating a Luhmann like Zettelkasten is explained next.

The idea is to a use a text file in an outliner tool like Scrivener or Lyx instead of using a database which provides different fields for date, keywords and references. The reason is, that database fields have to be filled and are not flexible enough. The main structure of a note taking app is based on keywords and keywords have much in common with sentences in a natural language.

Perhaps some explanations are helpful. New items are created in the add section. An item is equal to a paragraph and the title is shown in bold. Then some notes are enclosed also a reference is given. If the item was created in the add section it gets transferred into the main section into the correct category. This is done by simple copy&paste method of the outliner software.

Such a simplified pipeline is working closely with the original idea of a zettelkasten. The mechanism was known 300 years ago and it was not described by the index cards itself but by the workflow how to create new cards. What researchers and fiction authors have done in the past was the following.

1. They are going to the library and making notes into a normal book in a chronological order

2. At home, a scissors is taken to divide the page into sections

3. The sections (=items) are sorted by category into a card box

If the process is repeated frequently hundred of these cards are created. The card box is only the result the more interesting element is that scissor is needed to create the items from the written notes. In the screenshot this workflow can be emulated with an outliner tool much easier. New items are added only in the add section and the main section is the archive.

How to make hierarchical notes

Creating a text file in the Linux operating system is a well known task for all computer programmers. In addition it is possible to create text files which are structured hierarchically. This is done with the markdown syntax. A good texteditor is able to render the structure in an outline pane. This allows to jumps easily to any position in the text file.

Somebody may ask what is the reason for creating hierarchical notes in contrast to a normal text file? The reason is located in theh left pane. Similar to a list of methods in a python file,, the left pane shows the overview. All the details are hidden and only the sections and subsections are shown. This is some sort of mind mapping feature in which a problem is split into sub-topics. In contrast to a drawing on a sheet of paper, a markdown formatted text file is much easier to create and modify.

Another interesting feature is, that English text can be mixed with short notes. There is no need to enter full sentences but a section can be filled with 3-4 words long lines.