4 ms·

There are other downsides with Obsidian as well. The thought development Luhmann experienced is watered down in the instantiation of Zettelkasten that obsidian

There are other downsides with Obsidian as well. The thought development Luhmann experienced is watered down in the instantiation of Zettelkasten that obsidian provides. If you’re interested in an alternative approach, I’ve been using the Zettelkasten system the way Luhmann did for the past year. Here’s a behind the scenes look at writing a book using a physical Zettelkasten: https://youtu.be/fRgIX4azYOs https://youtu.be/fRgIX4azYOs

igorkraw 5y ago
Could you be more specific what's missing?
- for_i_in_range 5y ago
  It’s not analog (writing by hand and doing things the hard way pays off. It did for Luhmann and continues to do so for many others who use notecards). Second, numeric-alpha addresses per card with strict character count restrictions. Third, tree-like structure for branching thoughts infinitely. Fourth, an index that forces one to neuro-imprint keyterms in their mind to act as cues for thought. All of these create a unique structure Luhmann communicated with. Obsidian = bubbles that connect markdown files. Completely different concept. It’s not a zettelkasten even though people have hijacked the term and ensconced it with digital notetaking apps. This is my opinion.
  - kd5bjo 5y ago
    Obsidian is just a tool, like notecards are; you set your own process and organization. With the exception of handwriting in place of typing, it's entirely possible to set up an Obsidian workflow with all of the properties you list here. My Obsidian vault, for example, is organized into 2 parts: Ad-hoc notes and an organized zettelkasten. This latter part is a single flat directory with Luhmann-style alphanumeric hierarchical addresses as file names. My first task every day is to split up the previous day's ad-hoc notes and file them in the zettelkasten, which naturally leads to a review of the existing material as I look for the proper place in the sequence.
  - igorkraw 5y ago
    Do you think it is possible to recreate a digital version of this by basically handcoding your own tool for thought organisation, but coding it yourself needs to be part of it? Like writing a cheatsheet being the main point, and you might not even look at it in the exam?

igorkraw 5y ago

Could you be more specific what's missing?

for_i_in_range 5y ago
It’s not analog (writing by hand and doing things the hard way pays off. It did for Luhmann and continues to do so for many others who use notecards). Second, numeric-alpha addresses per card with strict character count restrictions. Third, tree-like structure for branching thoughts infinitely. Fourth, an index that forces one to neuro-imprint keyterms in their mind to act as cues for thought. All of these create a unique structure Luhmann communicated with. Obsidian = bubbles that connect markdown files. Completely different concept. It’s not a zettelkasten even though people have hijacked the term and ensconced it with digital notetaking apps. This is my opinion.
- kd5bjo 5y ago
  Obsidian is just a tool, like notecards are; you set your own process and organization. With the exception of handwriting in place of typing, it's entirely possible to set up an Obsidian workflow with all of the properties you list here. My Obsidian vault, for example, is organized into 2 parts: Ad-hoc notes and an organized zettelkasten. This latter part is a single flat directory with Luhmann-style alphanumeric hierarchical addresses as file names. My first task every day is to split up the previous day's ad-hoc notes and file them in the zettelkasten, which naturally leads to a review of the existing material as I look for the proper place in the sequence.
- igorkraw 5y ago
  Do you think it is possible to recreate a digital version of this by basically handcoding your own tool for thought organisation, but coding it yourself needs to be part of it? Like writing a cheatsheet being the main point, and you might not even look at it in the exam?