Zettelkasten Numbering is so Damn Confusing (I Think I Can Help)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.พ. 2025
- I was so stuck on how to order my cards that I gave up on Zettelkasten. I get it now.
📧 Check out my Substack: readordieaslav...
📚 Bob Doto's book: geni.us/H3rAVQ
📚 Scott Scheper's book: www.scottschep...
-----------------
Check out my other channels
Read or Die a Slave: / @readordieaslave
Curly's Curated: / @curlyscurated
I am neurotipical and have been struggling to grasp how a top-down tree would create links I would not think of on my own. I appreciate your description very much and look forward to your future videos.
Okay, I’m gonna read Doto’s book because of this video.
This is the lightbulb moment for me. You just spoke directly to my neurodivergent brain and forced the idea into my head, and thank you for it!
The store example is EXACTLY the issue I've been hitting repeatedly. In my ZK, I've been trying to figure out a way of sliding 1.1b1 in before 1.1b, without it relating to 1.1a, and so I've been so bogged down with trying to figure out the right numbering and ended up wiping the numbers out, renumbering, etc, that I've just lost interest.
This cleared it up for me... I already knew it, but having someone explain it as a conversation rather than a Tree of life -> Big subject area -> smaller subject area -> detail -> finer detail, etc, makes so much more sense. And at the end of the day, the index is the entry point into the ZK, so that should help connect those disparate cards in other locations within the ZK - which is the whole point of it... to find those weird and wonderful connections and similarities that give you those "aha!" moments
Thank you so much for this!
I stumbled across this video and I'm so glad I did! I've only taken notes so far because I didn't understand the numbering, so I haven't made any cards yet. Thanks to you, now I understand! Thank you!
I had a similar confusion to you when trying to wrap my head around the numbering. For me it didnt click until i realized that the numbering was there to help you identify a trains of thought.
Something Luhmann said (in German) is that you add the note where it feels familiar to it surroundings, the indexing is just a way to find it again for connecting in an analog world, where the surrounding isn't fix but changes. This neighbourhood of a card is what brings the purpose (In German the discussion is about the Folgezettel)
I definitely think the "neighborhood" terminology is more useful than "tree". Tree causes a lot of confusion.
This feels like the piece I was missing. Thank you!
You’re absolutely right. Someone I read called the system “rhizomatic.” It’s not “top down” or “bottom up” (which is also vertically oriented), but connecting _horizontally_ in all directions, like the roots of some plants (rhizomes). Also like the synapses in our brains, I suppose! Like you said, there’s no point in assigning meaning to the numbers. I started out with about eight categories based on areas of interest I want to develop in my writing, and used the alphanumeric numbering system suggested by Kathleen Spracklen. There’s still some funky phenomena, and I think some areas are going to lay dormant for a while, but it doesn’t matter as long as i can locate my cards. I’m mostly linking them through the index, but I do have a couple of collection guide type cards that perform this function as well.
I think we have been spoiled in a way by digital technologies it that they teach us to expect everything to be organizable and structured. It's extremely hard to click out of the mindset that tells you everything in a system is there for retrieval. The less I expect to find a specific thing in my ZK, the more powerful it becomes. It slowly accepting, then rejecting, then accepting again that the ZK is for usefully getting lost not for finding.
Good to see you back. Doto´s book seems to be an excellent addition to our little niche indeed!
He really did an excellent job of making something apporachable.
What is the book name
Thanks, this was useful. Let me add a few observations. Luhmann created at least 2 Zettlekastens. In the first one, there were root cards or main categories of ideas which he started filling out based on his reading. But this did not lead to a hierarchy. Why? At least (2) reasons: a) there were loops of ideas, you could get from A to B to C back to A again; b) there were many paths from idea A to idea B. So having certain cards as roots doesn't imply that the rest of the links between the cards form a hierarchy or tree like structure. (Which means both you and Scott are right - you can have root cards, but no you don't have a tree.)
Very good video, opening an angle worth to be explored. Here my thought: Each card is an entity in itself. Think of it as a record in a relational database with its unique identity number. The numbering system chosen should be one that allows a card to be found easily, not one that identifies the card. The tricky part comes when establishing relationships, and that is more of an art or a difficult skill to acquire. For some it may come naturally, but for the vast majority it will be the product of constant work, of practice. Afterwards, but not before, the full potential of the system will be unleashed.
This video makes so much sense. I've bought everything I need to start a Zettlekasten, but I was confused and that freezed me in place. Like you, I have watched tons of videos... Thank you so much for this!!
Ah! Conversation, this makes so much sense! Thank you!
This puts a big smile on my face. I was hoping it would click something for someone else the way it did for me!
I get the impression you are telling a story with the initial order of your notes and then you can retell it in a different way later by ordering the id numbers in a new blank note.
best video from you Ive seen so far thx
Great to see you back! Thank you for sharing once again!
It's good to be back, good to be working in the ZK again.
This feels like it will revolutionize my ZK if i can only figure out what it means! Here goes watch #3
I really appreciate the idea of a conversation partner. I'm thinking about those times when I have a thought that in a hierarchy would need to fit between two cards (e.g. Trees > Oaks > Acorns and I then learn that Oaks are a kind of tree called deciduous along with maples, etc.) If I was in a conversation with someone over a period of time I might say "remeber last week when we were talking about Oaks? Turns out..."
In this way I would throw it in wherever I wanted and just say "see 1.2" or whatever makes sense and put "see 3.5" on the original conversation- linking these two convos in my cards like i would in the conversation. I am recognizing that these conversations are connected to each other but not necessarily dependent on each other.
Using the letters that Scott (I think) calls variations is still a little unclear to me. Is that more like "this is where our conversation could have gone a different direction" or more like "this is another way I could have said this"?
I feel like you're saying it could be random and it would still work.
In some ways it would work better. The great benefit of the system is making connections you would not think of. A hierarchy would not do that.
The numbering system is not an outline. I guess we all are very much used to "outline-thinhing", just because it´s so prevalent. To differentiate the two, one can remember that it is possible to integrate outlines into your ZK through "Hub Notes" or "structure notes" (Bob Doto). So there is a way to combine the two in an extra step, but the fundamental structure of a ZK is NOT outlinish.
Yeah, in a way outline is the enemy isn't it. Then we are just building an analog wiki and not a conversation partner.
I went down the same road you did and come to the same conclusion. You can't create hierarchy unless you have all the information first. To make matters worse you will never have all of the information you need to make a perfect hierarchy because new discoveries are always made and there is no one set way of organzing. Compounded by the fact that, unless you are in an academic situation, most information you acquire will not come in a linear or timely manner. It can take years or a lifetime to gather complete information to build a robust hierarchy.
IMO the numbering system should be taken with a grain of salt. It is just a way to lightly organize (cluster) your notes to find them later. This is because the work isn't in the Zettelkasten itself. It is just the holder of notes.
The work happens when you lay them out on the table. You organize them and play with them changing relationships, making different connections thus meaning of information on the cards. At the same time you find gaps in captured knowledge and discover new lines of thought you want to persue.
How you organize and play with your notes is influenced by your goal. Your goal could be just to see what you can discover or for a specific output.
BTW I am subscibing. I like how you explain things with examples in a super simple way. Not like others I have watched where you need a PHD to understand WTH they are talking about.
Yeah I think we get so caught up the idea of organizing knowledge rather than diving is and swimming in the mess of it all.
I'm glad my explanations made sense! You're never sure when you post something.
Yes! I’m super neurodivergent too and my brain is the same way. I have to understand or I can’t move forward. Thanks for this!
All cards are equal but some are more equal than others. Animal Farm slip box.
Welcome back!
Thank you!
Super helpful, thanks!
Great to hear!
your videos are great. Thank you!
Excellent 😻 makes so much sense
I’m interested in using the zettelkasten method for making a digital garden, yet unsure what I should write about 😅
The value should be placed on the linking, not the numbering. The ID itself is besides the point, it's how one links those ID (the individual ideas / notes / comments / observations, etc.) that contains value. Like coordinates on a map - the numbers refer to locations, they are useful in the sense that they help us navigate from one point to another, but that's it. If you're traveling from point 'x' to point 'Y" how you get there isn't a straight line (unless you want it to) - you could take a number of different routs, and make numerous stops in between. They don't even need to be made in order. If I wanted to travel from the US to Australia, then go to Guatemala, and then go to Japan - I can do that (money and time not withstanding). As long as I have the locations, and I can make the connections - how I get there is irrelevant. That's why you can have two totally irrelevant numbers connect to the same idea. Just make sure you're connecting ideas (by linking numbers), that way you can have a much more flexible and interesting conversation (with your Zettelkasten).
And... I'm just gonna say it... Scheper's book is a mess!! Doto is a superior writer, and educator.
Scott's book is certainly overwhelming. I think Bob has really created a great entrance for people who are curious about ZK. He offers very little pressure, and I think that's extremely valuable.
This made a lot of sense to me, but not 100% sense. I think of the numbering not as a way of organizing or arranging my notes, but as a way of identifying them, like barcodes or social security numbers. I want them to have unique identifiers so that I can refer to notes in a way that is precise and reliable. I don't know if that's "Zettelkasten" or "not Zettelkasten", and I don't really care, I just need something that works :)
Categories emerge through dividers with tabs, in ways that seem appropriate to me at the time. Categories can always change. I don't care "where" in the grand scheme of things my note exists, I just want to know that when I'm referring to THAT note, then I can *find* THAT note and not some other note. If there is a card with a quote, I want to be able to tell where that quote came from, without having to do the full citation every single time. Having a card with all of the publication information and perhaps a *short* blurb of the text, that has an unique identifier, that I can refer to whenever I quote the text or think thoughts about the text, is just quicker. It also makes for more precise referencing that going "Author Title" on every card (because I can't be bothered to write a full Harvard style citation on every single card) and then in 10 years time having to guess which edition or translation I used.
Anyways, I really enjoyed your video, and will be going back in your archive to watch more of them :)
You've cracked the code. It's not a tree. It's not an outline. It's not a hierarchy. It's not a top-down system based on categories. One of the (very) few vids on the alphanumeric system that gets it right.
I'm humbled. Your book clicked it all into place for me brother. Thank you!
Wow, that's exactly how I feel. I think I might have ASD (a friend thinks so)!
Have you tried kathleen spracklen videos or courses she tries to explain in adifferent way.
I haven't but I recognize her name from the cover of Scott's book.
Great video. Is there a way I can contact you directly? I might have a suggestion for you.
Are you on X? You DM me there (@drunkonideas) :)
btw in the digital part of the community they came up with the "compass" pattern to have this neighborhood you described
If you have stupid thoughts, there is no way to rearrange them to make any sense. Zettelkasten was made to organize learning, useful books, research, etc. In that case, it is easy to organize the data in a hierarchy.
Who says these disembodied hands is a good thing? So distracting and silly.
I'm sorry, but this is SO much rambling on and on about trifles and more trifles, it just so badly ground my guts. That's exactly why I am always suspicious about the multitude of videos on ZK where people talk about ZK while all they gotta show for themselves are a measly 100 or so cards of which of course most come straight out of the pack. Sheper's got a system up and running, so does Kathe, so do many, many others. And some of us don't. Alright. But noeone's gonna learn anything by ramblings. Really sorry to say. If you wanna teach people about ZK, you gotta have something to show for. Just like if you want to talk to people about reading, you need books; if you wanna teach recipes, you need ingredients.