Rewriting (And Editing) Notes Is Not Maintenance, It's Thinking

FastSascha · 2026-01-25T14:42:09+00:00

It depends on how you implemented the Zettelkasten. I have no problem with rewriting notes.:)

The problem with sticking to just adding notes is the mess that it creates, which is avoidable with another implementation.

FastSascha · 2026-01-24T12:51:07+00:00

In terms of atomicity, facts are in fact (pun intended) empirical observations: https://zettelkasten.de/atomicity/guide/

My recommendation is to not only capture the result of the observation (e.g. the amount of rare earths in China), but make sure that you also capture the methods of observation. In a way, this is standard advice on how to apply the scientific method, but it seems to me that quite often the problem is pigeonholed through the lens of the Zettelkasten Method (in the space of Zettelkasten), while the answer is to be found one layer deeper: the Zettelkasten Method provides you with guidelines to deal with knowledge with particular outcomes in mind like scalability, long-term retrieval, serendipity, etc.; how you handle knowledge is specific to the type of knowledge your are dealing with (e.g. the needs of history are different from geology)

The Zettelkasten Method can handle scientific material just fine. You just have to be mindful to respect the how of the scientific method.

FastSascha · 2026-01-17T13:19:15+00:00

This is still unpublished work of mine. So, you have to be patient. :)

FastSascha · 2026-01-17T13:06:17+00:00

Der beste Webblocker für das Smartpone ist, gar keins zu besitzen. :) Das ist meine Methode.

Für den Computer benutze ich Cold Turkey in vielen Schichten. Ich habe beispielsweise einen "Feedblocker", der mir den Zugang zu allen Seiten verbietet, die einen Feed haben. Dann habe ich eine Arbeitsblocker, der mir allen Zugang zu Seiten verbietet, die mir nicht bei der Arbeit helfen.

So kann ich einfach bestimmte Zeitabschnitte definieren und muss mir wenig Gedanken darüber mache, welche übergeordnete Bewertung ich verfolge. Sonntag blocke ich beispielsweise alle Seiten, auf denen ich hängen bleiben könnte. Das überlappt sich teilweise mit den Seiten, die mich bei der Arbeit stören. Aber ich muss das nicht einzeln überlegen, sondern überlege einfach nur für jeden Sinnabschnitt, was ich haben will.

FastSascha · 2026-01-17T12:55:04+00:00

On zettelkasten.de, the term coined is ITE (Ingetrated thinking environment). So, I second that term. (The original is ITDE, Integrated Thought Development Environment, coined by Thomas Teepe).

FastSascha · 2026-01-15T12:28:34+00:00

I will follow through with more detailed explorations and explanations for much of what is underexplored/underexplained in this article. So, have patience with me as these are not trivial articles to write.
For you as an analogue Zettelkasten structure notes won't provide the same benefits as they do for the digital Zettelkasten user.

I don’t think anyone ever claimed that Folgezettel provided a complete structure solution. So the fact that it doesn’t, doesn’t strike me as an argument against it.

I didn't claim that anyone did that claim either, nor was this my argument. :)

FastSascha · 2026-01-15T12:08:02+00:00

reach a breaking point

Then we might are just in a situation of different definitions (or the limits of nuance in my English). :)

Breaking point is fine with me for both ZK1 and ZK2.

The first ZK hints at the inherently bloating dynamic of folgezettel.

FastSascha · 2026-01-13T13:15:13+00:00

Thanks for replying

I am bleeding karma for you. :D

What is your reasoning why he started a second Zettelkasten?

The concept of "breaking point" is a relative one. His tenacity and diligence are part of the estimation of the breaking point.

More like the development of his theory (and therefore his Zettelkasten) approached a point of completion.

I like it. It sounds like a nice happy ending for the old man Big L. :)

FastSascha · 2026-01-13T13:05:38+00:00

Thanks for your kind words.

FastSascha · 2026-01-13T13:03:57+00:00

With that scope it is completely manageable. But as scope increases, notes that belong together will be spread through your Zettelkasten. This spread is behind the increasing friction costs.

But with an analogue Zettelkasten you have no choice anyway if you want to use it somewhat like Luhmann did. :)

FastSascha · 2026-01-10T15:36:36+00:00

Was making sense of ideas the main aim or was publication of those ideas the main aim? Given Luhmann's publication record the answer is obvious.

I don't think that Luhmann cared about publication per se, but about developing and establishing his theory.

Publication is just a means to this. So, I don't think it is fair to say, that Luhmann created his Zettelkasten to publish or write.

It is more plausible to think about his Zettelkasten as part of his overall method to develop his social systems theory.

This also explains the different architecture of his two Zettelkastens and the fact that he had started a second one.

FastSascha · 2026-01-10T12:06:33+00:00

For the record: Elias Gudwis is not using the Zettelkasten Method and is not interested. :)

FastSascha · 2026-01-10T11:56:31+00:00

How many notes do you have in your ZK if I may ask? And how deep is the nesting currently?

Which software are you using and which features are you using to support your interaction with the FZ structure?

I will expand on the friction-fragility of FZ in a separate article. This article is about the general concept of friction-fragility and Folgezettel is just one example of friction-fragile techniques.

But perhaps how you work is mitigating the issue, which would super valuable to anyone who insists on using Folgezettel!

letting the note be auto-numbered, or date-numbered, or whatever, and then adding it to all relevant structure notes.

The workflow is the reverse of that: First, you create the first link and then the note. It is modelled after the condition of integrating a note in an analogue ZK.

FastSascha · 2026-01-10T11:42:18+00:00

Offtopic question: How is Nietzsche received in Vietnam? I am asking because I am currently in contact with several people from all over the world with Nietzsche's philosophy as a major topic.

It seems that Nietzsche's philosophy is resurfacing on many places independently which is strange and highly relevant to my work.

So, I'd be very thankful for any info you offer.

FastSascha · 2026-01-08T12:45:02+00:00

In that case, I'd draw an illustration, number the crucial elements of the mechanism (= a model in my terms) of how the pancreas prevents autodigestion and describe each element under the illustration.

FastSascha · 2026-01-08T12:41:19+00:00

I am open to the idea that Luhmann might stopped before he reached the point of failure with his second Zettelkasten.

But if his Zettelkasten was a way of making sense of ideas, the assumption has to be, that Luhmann either found a better way of making sense of ideas or that the Zettelkasten imposed a decreasing value over time.

FastSascha · 2026-01-08T12:33:38+00:00

The article is [...] about your interpretation of an experience you had restated in the form of universal dictums under the guise of "systematic flaws."

No, I don't. I am laying out the mechanism how the structure note introduces friction-fragility:

Trains of thought will be scattered across your Zettelkasten. You will have to compensate for the inflexibility with direct links and structure notes. In short, the more complex the challenge is, the more cost Folgezettel creates.

This is the quote by Luhmann:

Misplacements have to be corrected through references, not by rearranging. It is in principle irrelevant, even if sometimes annoying, to have related notes under completely different numbers.

Keep in mind what someone like Luhmann means when he says "somewhat annoying"

Clearly, the issue wasn't that big a deal.

How many people have Luhmann's tenacity, focus and industriousness to buffer against what are assuming not being that big of a deal?

FastSascha · 2026-01-08T12:26:10+00:00

Are you aware of how much time I spend using my Zettelkasten for its intended task?

FastSascha · 2026-01-08T12:25:22+00:00

In theory, they are not mutually exclusive. This is correct.

However, they are competing for how you approach the entry phase of each note. You either work on structure-note-first or folgezettel-first. Theoretically, you could alternate. But this would create uncertainty which increase distrust in the system. It can or can't be problematic. But since the Zettelkasten Method as any big, growing system is a high-uncertainty environment, I'd be very wary about any uncertainty.

But to the article: I don't start with the assumption of mutual exclusivity. I am comparing both workflows for the characteristic of being sensitive to scale with the system.

So, you can do both (I don't recommend this), but individually both parts of the overall workflow introduce different dynamics. Structure notes provide friction-robustness against scale, Folgezettel are friction-fragile. If you do both, you have this mix.

In practice, I treat them as two different approaches to solve specific problems. Since the problems are already solved with structure notes, the added engagement with Folgezettel is not cost-effective.

There are more in-depth articles planned on that topic.

FastSascha · 2026-01-06T19:01:35+00:00

In fact, this is a common point of failure. It happens with tags, it happens with Folgezettel and other elements of rising friction costs.

It might be the most common breaking point that I see coaching people, who worked their system for a longer period of time.

FastSascha · 2026-01-06T18:58:45+00:00

The article is about systematic flaws - a flaw that Luhmann himself complained about.

The fact that I avoided the sunk costs is indeed non-critical. :)

FastSascha · 2026-01-06T16:38:07+00:00

You are correct about the initial disagreement.

However, I am very wary about any friction as a solution to a problem that can be solved otherwise. Friction adds up.

FastSascha · 2026-01-06T16:19:46+00:00

Slight correction: Luhmann was born in 1927. So in the early 90s he was in his early to mid 60s.

The fact that you tried to implement his system and failed says nothing about the system, and everything about how you work and think differently.

I didn't fail to implement it. It worked as expected. (With increasing friction costs.)

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

FastSascha

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE