- May 2023
But I wouldn't call them a ZK® (stealing Andy's shorthand!) but they were a box of notes (Zettelkasten?).
It is unfortunate that the German word for a box of notes is the same as the methodology surrounding Luhmann.
reply to dandennison84 at https://forum.zettelkasten.de/discussion/comment/17921/#Comment_17921
I've written a bit before on The Two Definitions of Zettelkasten, the latter of which has been emerging since roughly 2013 in English language contexts. Some of it is similar to or extends @dandennison84's framing along with some additional history.
Because of the richness of prior annotation and note taking traditions, for those who might mean what we're jokingly calling ZK®, I typically refer to that practice specifically as a "Luhmann-esque zettelkasten", though it might be far more appropriate to name them a (Melvil) "Dewey Zettelkasten" because the underlying idea which makes Luhmann's specific zettelkasten unique is that he was numbering his ideas and filing them next to similar ideas. Luhmann was treating ideas on cards the way Dewey had treated and classified books about 76 years earlier. Luhmann fortunately didn't need to have a standardized set of numbers the way the Mundaneum had with the Universal Decimal Classification system, because his was personal/private and not shared.
To be clear, I'm presently unaware that Dewey had or kept any specific sort of note taking system, card-based or otherwise. I would suspect, given his context, that if we were to dig into that history, we would find something closer to a Locke-inspired indexed commonplace book, though he may have switched later in life as his Library Bureau came to greater prominence and dominance.
Some of the value of the Dewey-Luhmann note taking system stems from the same sorts of serendipity one discovers while flipping through ideas that one finds in searching for books on library shelves. You may find the specific book you were looking for, but you're also liable to find some interesting things to read on the shelves around that book or even on a shelf you pass on the way to find your book.
Perhaps naming it and referring to it as the Dewey-Luhmann note taking system or the Dewey-Luhmann Zettelkasten may help to better ground and/or demystify the specific practices? Co-crediting them for the root idea and an early actual practice, respectively, provides a better framing and understanding, especially for native English speakers who don't have the linguistic context for understanding Zettelkästen on its own. Such a moniker would help to better delineate the expected practices and shape of a note taking practice which could be differentiated from other very similar ones which provide somewhat different affordances.
Of course, as the history of naming scientific principles and mathematical theorems after people shows us, as soon as such a surname label might catch on, we'll assuredly discover someone earlier in the timeline who had mastered these principles long before (eg: the "Gessner Zettelkasten" anyone?) Caveat emptor.
- naming things is hard
- Dewey-Luhmann Zettelkasten
- note taking affordances
- Melvil Dewey
- Dewey Zettelkasten
- zettelkasten design
- named by others
- Aug 2022
ZKZur Kenntnisnahme (German: For Information)
On an acronym search for "what is a ZK?" # Google provides a mini chart of optings including
ZK for Zur Kenntnisnahme which translates from German as "for information".
Is this directly related to zettelkasten culturally, or just a broad cultural thing?
- Feb 2022
the systems theory is the 00:00:38 study of systems i.e cohesive groups of interrelated interdependent parts that can be natural or human made every system is bounded by space and time influenced by its environment defined by 00:00:51 its structure and purpose and expressed through its functioning
What is Systems Theory - how i relate it to note taking
- Aug 2021
So how can rollups win in the long run?To my mind, there are two ways: one is that a non-rollup sidechain catastrophically fails, and the industry learns a lesson à la Mt. Gox. And catastrophically fail doesn’t just mean “nodes can’t sync.” It means “the money is gone” or “the chain has completely halted.” That’s possible, but probably unlikely.So that leaves us with the other way: rollups have to actually become significantly better than the alternatives. Decentralization virtue signaling is not enough. For this, I personally only see one path forward, which is the promise of cryptography and zero-knowledge proofs.
How can rollups win?
- Sidechains fail.
- Rollups are significantly better.
(Note that ZK rollups don’t suffer from this issue, since their withdrawals are effectively instant.)