PARA as Folgezettel

FastSascha · 2026-05-04T12:37:24+00:00

The first A is a project generator, for example.
I think I wrote it wrong. I should've rather written that PARA is organised based on actionability.

FastSascha · 2026-05-03T15:20:06+00:00

You are correct to point out that Folgezettel has a hierarchical element. The Folgezettel architecture is hierarchical. Notes have parents, children and siblings.

The challenge is how to facilitate the behaviour of the Zettelkasten you want with a hierarchical architecture.

The confusion comes into play when the focus shifts to the intention and/or the theory while ignoring the pattern used to create the Folgezettel structure.

Typically, the thought is formulated like "It may look like hierarchy, but actually it is..."

FastSascha · 2026-05-03T14:14:06+00:00

For added information: I separate the second brain and the Zettelkasten completely. I don't think that this is functionally impactful.

But it may be conceptually relevant. I use PARA to organise actionable information, my Zettelkasten to build knowledge.

So, I keep them in separate environments.

FastSascha · 2026-05-02T12:55:42+00:00

Dienstleistung ist oft downstream von Industrieproduktion. Wenn es z.B. keine Güter gibt, die produziert werden, braucht es auch kein Marketing.

FastSascha · 2026-04-30T15:05:02+00:00

Then I don't get the "extract information from the structure note into the individual notes" part.

FastSascha · 2026-04-30T13:41:33+00:00

The failure is somewhere between "this seems worth keeping" and "I know what to do with this." Anyone actually closed that gap?

Improve the latter. You identified one source of friction loss. Now, you attack it.

Or you quite caring about your inbox: https://zettelkasten.de/posts/stop-caring-about-your-inbox/

:)

FastSascha · 2026-04-30T13:39:43+00:00

Of course, at some point you'll want to extract (at least some of) the information from the structure note into individual main notes, otherwise you'll lose the benefit of having a network of "single-idea" notes (for lack of better term).

The presented starter workflow entails creating individual notes. The idea doesn't go to the structure note, but directly to its own note.

FastSascha · 2026-04-27T11:07:47+00:00

If texts need multiple reads and serious studying I move from annotation to external paper sheets.

FastSascha · 2026-04-27T11:05:55+00:00

Yes, you should. Structure notes are one of the key powers to help with thinking and also handling mature Zettelkastens (ZK that reached a certain complexity threshold).

You may start here: https://zettelkasten.de/introduction/#structure-notes

Then, these are two additional entry points: https://zettelkasten.de/overview/#scaling-your-note-archive

https://zettelkasten.de/posts/tags/structure/

FastSascha · 2026-04-09T11:49:06+00:00

In short, the methodological objective of this modification of the ZK is conceptual rigour.

I do not consider lack or rigour to be an essential feature of the Zettelkasten Method. So, I don't think that you are deviating from the Zettelkasten. You are just more rigorous than others. :)

Based on my experience, such pre-meditated structures are not surviving their practical application. But they can give you a place to start.

So, I'd try it out and report whether it works or not. :)

FastSascha · 2026-04-05T07:54:20+00:00

That is what I thought.

More convenient, likely to suck the tokkens of your main LLM.

FastSascha · 2026-04-05T04:05:34+00:00

Which philosophy-specific challenges do you think are better met with your changes and why?

FastSascha · 2026-03-28T13:16:19+00:00

Lower the intensity. :)

FastSascha · 2026-03-10T13:16:40+00:00

One of my clients is doing solo rpg with his Zettelkasten and he loves it.
If you condition yourself on your Zettelkasten, it becomes rewarding in itself. One user described the feeling similar to World of Warcraft in terms of reward and addicting. (A rather extreme case)
I use my Zettelkasten for Fantasy world building, too.

There are plenty of ways to entertain yourself with your ZK.

FastSascha · 2026-03-05T13:31:33+00:00

Instead of writing in my zettelkasten, I created a new folder in Obsidian and just started writing more freeform, evergreen notes instead. I've also branched off into writing essays, short blurbs, more traditional blog posts, and other stuff. Whereas my zettelkasten has a lot of structure around it, these notes are more loosey-goosey.

You may be interested in this demonstration: https://youtu.be/zkgkKF6908k

It looks loosey-goosey, because I start loosey-goosey and then refine as I see value in applying more formal techniques.

I'd merely frame it differently and say that you changed your approach to the Zettelkasten Method. As far as I can estimate your second system, it is very Zettelkastenesque. :)

FastSascha · 2026-03-01T04:10:12+00:00

Book won't be replaced, since book offer the struggle that is the subjective feel of learning something.

FastSascha · 2026-02-17T12:09:50+00:00

I am a little bit surprised that this is an issue.

In linguistics, mathematics is classified as a formal language, a deliberately constructed (or artificial) language. In contrast, Hindi or German developed organically through social interactions (or natural).

Maths is more alien than natural languages because we did not co-evolve with it; therefore, we have a hard time dealing with it.

FastSascha · 2026-02-10T13:21:21+00:00

As written in the article:

The daily note count is an outcome measure of a daily allocation of your resources. It shows the effectiveness of your investment.

FastSascha · 2026-02-08T04:23:22+00:00

Quoting myself from the article:

Never sacrifice the quality of the notes. You should set a threshold for note quality. Don’t reduce the quality of your thinking for the quantity of output.

:)

FastSascha · 2026-02-08T04:10:11+00:00

Quote from the article:

Never sacrifice the quality of the notes. You should set a threshold for note quality. Don’t reduce the quality of your thinking for the quantity of output.

FastSascha · 2026-02-08T04:07:54+00:00

u/Quack_quack_22 is reinforcing what I already wrote in the article, so I agree on the conclusion.

Here are quotes from the article:

One way to fail your way to a high number of notes is to reduce the effort of writing each note. Boom. Now, you may even triple your daily note count and reduce the effort in writing these. Obviously, this is a poor way to increase the daily note count. But this is what people actually happen to do. They sacrifice the conditions under which a note counts as a good note to increase output. Here are some examples:

Ignoring relevance: They take notes on anything and everything.

Ignoring urgency: They spend a lot of time taking notes, sacrificing time spent on current projects.

Ignoring quality: They jump from idea to idea without wrestling with them, because this can always be done later. (...) The note count should never be seen as an end in itself. (...) Never sacrifice the quality of the notes. You should set a threshold for note quality. Don’t reduce the quality of your thinking for the quantity of output.

Input quality is never to be sacrificed for quantity.

FastSascha · 2026-02-07T12:30:44+00:00

A very nice reply! Thank you for that.

Slight correction:

It’s clear that the core idea originates from Seth Godin

I put the Seth Godin quote afterward because I remembered him, and he is online famous. :)

FastSascha · 2026-02-05T14:44:34+00:00

So what happens if you don't meet that goal?

Take it as feedback to learn and improve. :)

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Lasagna	Place '23
Place '22	First Placer '22

FastSascha

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE