// ABOUT ME Site: https://nicolevanderhoeven.com Mastodon: https://pkm.social/@nicole The Grafana Labs YouTube channel (my work): https://youtube.com/@Grafana // APPS I USE - Obsidian: https://obsidian.md - Readwise: https://readwise.io/nicole - Shortform: https://shortform.com/nicole - Reclaim: https://go.reclaim.ai/eg0tgbamp7cb - Snipd: https://link.snipd.com/Cx7S/nicole - Napkin: https://napkin.one/?via=nicole // GEAR https://nicolevanderhoeven.com/gear/ // WANT TO SUPPORT ME? ❤️ Join my Patreon and get my sample vault with templates: https://patreon.com/nicolevdh ☕ Buy me a coffee: https://ko-fi.com/nicol..." --- A Real Zettelkasten Workflow in Obsidian  ## Metadata - Author: [[Nicole van der Hoeven]] - Full Title: A Real Zettelkasten Workflow in Obsidian - Category: #articles - Document Note: --- tags: * \#zettelkasten * \#obsidian * \#pkm Author: Nicole van der Hoeven Source: YouTube Live Stream “A Real Zettelkasten Workflow in Obsidian” Reference: Transcript timestamps date created: {{date:2025-07-07}} {{time:10:00}} --- # 📝 Title: A Real Zettelkasten Workflow in Obsidian ## 🌐 Table of Contents: * [📝 Summary](#📝-summary) * [📖 Main Content](#📖-main-content) * [🗒️ Notes](#🗒️-notes) * [🗣️ Paraphrase](#🗣️-paraphrase) * [📰 Newsletter](#📰-newsletter) * [✅ Action Items](#✅-action-items) * [🧪 Hypotheses](#🧪-hypotheses) * [📊 Methodology](#📊-methodology) * [❓ Questions](#❓-questions) * [🔮 Future Research](#🔮-future-research) * [💡 Implications](#💡-implications) * [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#🧠-learning-styles-assessment) * [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#📊-accessibility-assessment) * [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#🌍-deib-assessment) * [✅ Logical validity](#✅-logical-validity) * [🔍 DARVO Analysis Prompt](#🔍-darvo-analysis-prompt) * [🔍 SEO Evaluation](#🔍-seo-evaluation) * [🎯 Conclusion](#🎯-conclusion) ### References: * Nicole van der Hoeven et al., YouTube Live, June 2025. * “A System for Writing” by Bob Dodo. ## 📝 Summary: The session explores Zettelkasten’s four phases: fleeting notes, permanent notes, linking, and output. Guests discuss digital vs. paper IDs, plugins in Obsidian, and personal workflows. They emphasize bottom-up thinking and organic connections at key timestamps like [06:50](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=410) and [19:54](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=1194). ## 📖 Main Content: Zettelkasten links single-idea notes to form a dynamic network for writing and thinking. * Fleeting notes capture raw impressions. * Permanent notes distill ideas into clarity. * Links forge non-hierarchical idea connections. * Structure notes and output draft writing. Guests share distinct approaches: * Bob uses alphanumeric IDs for context and memory cues. * Trish leverages Obsidian’s plugins like Breadcrumbs for navigation. * Nicole balances links and contextual notes, adding detail when needed. ## 🗒️ Notes #### 📝 Intro & Guests [00:06](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=6) * Nicole, Bob, and Trish introduce backgrounds. * Bob’s five-book authorship spans spirituality to poetry. #### 📖 Zettelkasten Definition [06:50](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=410) * Non-hierarchical note network. * Idea linkage sparks novel insights. #### 🛠️ Writing & Thinking [09:08](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=548) * Writing equals thinking. * Some use Zettelkasten purely for cognition. #### 🔄 Four Phases [15:44](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=944) 1. Consume & fleeting notes 2. Permanent notes 3. Link ideas 4. Make output #### 🧩 Plugin Debate [25:26](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=1526) * Paper vs. digital IDs. * Folgezettel vs. plugin-based linking. #### 🔢 Identifiers’ Value [27:26](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=1646) * IDs reveal train-of-thought clusters. * Sidebar scanning aided by ID length. #### 📄 Structure Note Example [30:57](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=1857) * Pratihara note in Obsidian. * Links to yoga and Christian introspection. #### 🔗 Linking & Visualization [32:47](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=1967) * Uses structured note template with metadata. * Visualizes connections via Excalibrain. #### 🔍 Revisiting & Relevance [36:59](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=2219) * Historical notes inspire new ideas. * IDs evoke personal reflections. #### 🤖 Algorithms & Meaning [42:29](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=2549) * Algorithms craft context through links. * Organic linking over exhaustive automation. #### 🌳 Bottom-Up Thinking [54:44](https://youtu.be/HzmFooRRtAw?t=3284) * Rejects top-down Dewey/Johnny Decimal. * Addresses as labels, not hierarchies. ## 🗣️ Paraphrase: > **Original \[06:50]**: “Zettelkasten is at very basic… a network of single idea notes.” > **Paraphrase**: At its core, Zettelkasten forms a web of standalone idea cards linked freely, enabling unexpected concept collisions. > **Original \[42:29]**: “Algorithms create their own meaning…” > **Paraphrase**: Through exploration, algorithms generate context and significance uniquely, mirroring human sense-making. ## 📰 Newsletter: Hey folks! 🚀 This week’s deep dive covers Zettelkasten in Obsidian. We unpack four key phases—fleeting notes, permanent distillations, idea-linking, and output drafting. Learn how alphanumeric IDs serve as train-of-thought markers and how plugins like Breadcrumbs boost navigation. Plus, discover why bottom-up thinking beats top-down hierarchies. Try syncing your highlights with Readwise into Obsidian literature notes and watch your creative workflow transform! 🔗 [Get started with Bob’s “A System for Writing”](https://example.com) and join our community chat for live tips. ## ✅ Action Items: * Tell me to **review my current Zettelkasten IDs** and verify at least one link per new note for the next month. * Search for **Obsidian Breadcrumbs plugin tutorials** and summarize best practices. ## 🧪 Hypotheses: 1. Consistent use of IDs increases idea recall by 30%. 2. Regular linking sessions yield 20% more writing productivity. 3. Bottom-up note creation improves retention over hierarchical indexing. ### 📊 Methodology: * Recruit 20 PKM users. * Randomize between ID-use and no-ID groups. * Track note retrieval time and writing output over 8 weeks. * Analyze via mixed-methods (usage logs + interviews). ### ❓ Questions: * How much linking is optimal before note overload? * Do paper-only users feel less creative than digital users? * What cognitive load arises from ID assignment? ### 🔮 Future Research: * Study long-term burnout in Zettelkasten communities. * Compare structured note vs. free-form linking impacts on creativity. ### 💡 Implications: Better ID systems could streamline academic writing workflows and inform PKM tool design. Plugins could integrate smart suggestions without bypassing human insight. ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment: * **Visual**: Limited diagrams. *Improve*: Add flowcharts of the four phases. * **Aural**: Live discussion audio. *Improve*: Provide an audio summary. * **Verbal**: Rich examples. *Improve*: Add analogies for kinesthetic tie-ins. * **Physical**: Few interactive tasks. *Improve*: Suggest hands-on note-linking exercises. * **Logical**: Step-by-step process. *Improve*: Include problem-solving mini-cases. * **Social**: Live chat involvement. *Improve*: Add breakout group prompts. * **Solitary**: Reflection on personal workflows. *Improve*: Offer journaling questions. * **Naturalistic**: Minimal. *Improve*: Use nature-based linking metaphors (e.g., root networks). ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment: * **Screen Reader**: Uses semantic headings. *Improve*: Ensure alt-text for plugin screenshots. * **Keyboard**: Obsidian supports it. *Improve*: Include keyboard nav guide. * **Contrast**: Clear dark text on light. *Improve*: Verify plugin UI contrast. * **Text Resizing**: Responsive markdown. *Improve*: Test on mobile zoom. ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment: * **Cultural**: Yoga and Christian examples. *Improve*: Add non-Western knowledge workers’ perspectives. * **Inclusive Language**: Uses gender-neutral terms. *Improve*: Define technical jargon. * **Neurodiversity**: Breaks content with bullets. *Improve*: Shorten blocks further. * **Representation**: Three diverse practitioners. *Improve*: Include more voices. * **Psychological Safety**: Encouraging tone. *Improve*: Add disclaimers for sensitive workflows. ### ✅ Logical validity: * **Strong Inductive**: Linking IDs fosters productivity (data pending). * **Logical Flow**: Clear four-phase outline. * **Sound Deduction**: IDs → clusters → recall. * **Fallacy Check**: No **false dilemma**; authors note multiple tools. * **Enhancement**: Provide empirical support for claimed benefits. ### 🔍 DARVO Analysis Prompt * **Deny**: No denial of critique. * **Attack**: No personal attacks. * **Reverse Victim**: Absent. Tone stays collaborative, not defensive. ### 🔍 SEO Evaluation: * **Keywords**: “Zettelkasten,” “Obsidian” appear in title and headers. * **Meta Description**: Absent; add “Learn four Zettelkasten phases in Obsidian…” * **Title Tag**: Clear, under 60 characters - Summary: I talk to Bob Doto (author of A System for Writing), Tris Oaten (from the YouTube channel No Boilerplate) about what a zettelkasten is and how to build a real zettelkasten workflow in Obsidian... sustainably. We're discussing concrete tips to make a digital zettelkasten system that works for real people who make stuff on the internet. // TIMESTAMPS 00:00:00 Introductions to Bob Doto and Tris Oaten 00:07:07 What is a Zettelkasten? 00:16:44 Overview of the Zettelkasten workflow 00:18:37 Connecting ideas in a Zettelkasten 00:21:51 Demo - What Bob's structure notes look like 00:25:04 Folgezettel: Is it useful? 00:32:57 Demo - What Nicole's structure notes look like 00:37:20 Demo - Bob's main notes 00:40:56 Q: What links do you add to a main note? 00:46:13 Demo - How Tris uses Breadcrumbs plugin as Folgezettel 00:58:23 Q: Do you create a note for a connection or link directly? 01:06:32 What's one thing someone can do to get started with Zettelkasten? // ABOUT BOB 📕 A System for Writing: How an Unconventional Approach to Note-Making Can Help You Capture Ideas, Think Wildly, and Write Constantly: https://amzn.to/469VQOF Site: https://writing.bobdoto.computer/zettelkasten/ Mastodon: https://pkm.social/@bobdoto // ABOUT TRIS YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@NoBoilerplate Site: https://www.namtao.com/ Mastodon: https://namtao.com/@noboilerplate --- // ABOUT ME Site: https://nicolevanderhoeven.com Mastodon: https://pkm.social/@nicole The Grafana Labs YouTube channel (my work): https://youtube.com/@Grafana // APPS I USE - Obsidian: https://obsidian.md - Readwise: https://readwise.io/nicole - Shortform: https://shortform.com/nicole - Reclaim: https://go.reclaim.ai/eg0tgbamp7cb - Snipd: https://link.snipd.com/Cx7S/nicole - Napkin: https://napkin.one/?via=nicole // GEAR https://nicolevanderhoeven.com/gear/ // WANT TO SUPPORT ME? ❤️ Join my Patreon and get my sample vault with templates: https://patreon.com/nicolevdh ☕ Buy me a coffee: https://ko-fi.com/nicol... - URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzmFooRRtAw And we're live. Hello everyone. Welcomeback to the channel. It feels like I wasjust talking to you last week because Iwas. But today I have different friendson the show with me. Um, first Ithink I actually met you first, TrishOton. Welcome.Thank you so much. Uh, it's lovely to be here.My first live stream, Nicole. Can youbelieve it?First live stream ever. Thatis kind of difficultto believe.Thank you so much for having me.Yeah, thank you for being here. And then alsoover here is Bob Dodo.Welcome to the channel.Thank you. Thank you. Imet Trish first, I think virtually, but I've neveractually met in person yet.That must be arranged.And funnily enough, Bob and I live way further awayfrom each other, and we've mettwice already:once in New York and once in theNetherlands for PKM Summit. Mhm. That's right.Well, I am not a real PKMYouTuber, content creator, what haveyou. I'm a fraud, an imposter.You know what? People are going to callYou all sorts of things regardless. So,you know, just own it. Um, Bob is the author of five differentbooks over a variety of subjects. Ithink it's very luminescent actuallybecause I was looking through the titles,and it was like one on settlement, whichof course is what we're talking about.There's one on acupressure, on stretching,on spirituality, and on poetry. Like, what is happening here?Are you really that interested in allthose things? Sure. Yeah. I, I uh, I'mkind of a, um, if I'm interested insomething, I need to write about it, kindof person, um, in most cases. So, it's notuncommon for me to be jumping around different subjects. I mean, thosesubjects are subjects that Iactually explored quite extensively to someregard, you know, like I, I was a, andstill am to some degree, a, um, like a bodyworker, you know, doing Chinese sportsmedicine called Twina. Um, I went tograduate school for poetry at the JackKerouac School of Disembodied Poetics atNaropa. Um, Zettelkasten obviously is what Ido a lot of these days. Um, and themargins of spirituality have been my kind of bread and butter writing. For, I mean, since I was 15 or so, a longlong time. So, yeah, there should be morebooks coming out on different subjects,but right now, I'm kind of stuck in myZettelkasten reading and writing phase.Well, that's good to hear because weneed experts, and you are definitely anexpert. You know, you have the book, sothat makes you an expert, right? Ofcourse. Yeah. Yeah. Without a book, whoknows what you are? And Tris, do you want to introduceyourself a little bit for those who whodon't recognize you because you'reshowing your face? What?Right. Yes. This is a bit of a big step for me. So,I have a YouTube channel called NoBoiler Plate, which started off beingprogramming focused, and then veryquickly went off the rails into anythingthat I was interested in. Um, I've donevideos on ADHD and autism, which I'mparticularly proud of. Um, but anythinganything that I'm so passionate aboutthat I keep talking to my friends aboutand boring them, that seems like a goodvideo topic to do. Um, so, did you evenmention your channel?Uh, the channel is called No BoilerPlate. Um, it's very generous ofYou know, I’m also—I've also got four podcasts, by which I mean audiofiction podcasts. I’m not used todoing talking heads without a scriptstuff, so this is all very terrifying;but I’m delighted to be herenonetheless. Before that, I was asoftware engineer for 15 years. It will definitely show, I think, inthe course of our conversation that I ama software engineer at heart.There’ll be lots of technical things,especially if we talk about Obsidian. But I've always wanted to be amusician, and I think now that I’m sortof a performer, I sort of am. Atleast, I’m certainly in the creative spaceI’ve always dreamed of, so I’m delighted to be here.I’m already hearing that that’s asimilarity between the three of usbecause we have a lot of interests.Yeah, and we all use Obsidian as ourprimary tool of choice. Is that right? It is. It’s your fault that I useObsidian, Nicole. Your videos are veryIs it really? Wow. That’sactually an honor.A pleasure. It’s, uh, I thinkI've—I've gone off the rails with umWith Obsidian. Perhaps I need some sortof intervention. Maybe that's what wecan do tonight. Yeah, absolutely. So, the reason thatwe're actually here is because Trisand I were talking and Tris said, "I'vefigured out Zettelkasten." I'm like,whoa,that is a bold claim. I mean, thatZettelkasten is one of the things that got meinto Obsidian and PKM and Romeresearch at the time. But I would notsay I figured it out. And Trissaid, "Oh, you know, have you read thisbook, A System for Writing?"How embarrassing. Sorry, Bob. Oh, yeah.Yeah, it's funny. Bob doesn't have acopy of his own book.We do have my signed copy, though,special edition. Yeah. And Isaid absolutely. I reviewed it. Iloved it and I got my signed copy assoon as I could.So I feel like I wanted to get the threeof us together because I think we'rein very different places. You know,Bob is the expert, literally haswritten the book on Zettelkasten. Tris is arelatively recent convert, but superpassionate about it. I'm a bit of aSkeptic. I've read the books. I may not have read allof the books, but I've read the books.I'm a little bit more skeptical. Andyou know, let's just talk a littlebit about Zettelkasten, shall we? Let's do it.Fantastic. I think it was only rightthat Bob do the intro. Oh boy.Yeah. Yeah. No pressure or anything. Nopressure. Yeah. I mentioned this talk inmy newsletter the other day and Isaid, "Look, I did no preparation for thisand I intentionally did it. I actuallyreally like to just kind of be off thecuff a lot of these times. So thiswould be that very much. So what wouldyou like to know about the Zettelkasten? Well, what is the Zettelkasten? What doyou think the goal is? I mean, I'm kind of asking aleading question because I've read yourbook, but you know,it's a fun topic, like all things thatpeople get very passionate about. Eventhis question can be hard to answer orat least hard to answer in a way thatmakes everybody happy. Uh, right. So aZettelkasten is very basic; it could beconsidered a note-making or note-takingsystem that is utilizingNon-hierarchy, non-hierarchy, orleveraging non-hierarchy through theconnection of single idea notes tocreate a network, a vast network for alot of people to think and createfrom, think in, and create out of. I was thinking about this today. It's kind of like defining a chairand you end up defining a stool, achair, a table. That definition I gavecould define many different things,especially today with the platformswe have and the way we think about howinformation is connected and leveraged. But for me, the Zettelkasten is that, right? It's a network ofsingle idea notes that are connected ina non-hierarchical way. Sometimes wecall it a rhizomeor rhizomatically. And through the connection of theseideas, we encounter unique or sometimesnovel insights that we didn't expect tofind. And that, of course, informs how wethink about things. If you're acreative writer or a creative personwho does output, thisbecomes a very fertile ground foroutput. But yeah, ask any, you know, haveSomeone on tomorrow and they'll give youa different definition. So, would you say that the goal of aZettelkasten, at least yours, is to provideoutput, or do you think it's the thinkingitself?For me, I use it for writing, and becausewriting to me is thinking. It's where,you know, I think it was before we evengot on here, or maybe it was in my intro.I forget. But where the line was when westarted, and we're not started yet. But,uh, for me, I think throughwriting. If I'm interested in something,I will probably write something about itor at the very least I'll take notes onthe thing. Um, so for me, aZettelkasten is highly tethered to writing. For other people, it can be strictly athinking, ruminating, ponderingenvironment. And I know a number ofpeople who use it for that purpose.They have no intention of writing fromit. But for me, it is strictly forwriting again, which is through which Ithink, and that's why the book is calledA System for Writing, because that'smy primary focus.What about you, Tris? What is yourZettelkasten for? Well, Ioriginallythought that a Zettelkasten was a systemfor note-taking because that iswhat all of the other books talkabout—organizing notes, building asystem of linked thinking. As Bob said in the book, it's a system for writing.As soon as it was recommended to me, Ithought of the YouTuber who I saw a video on and who recommended itto me. As soon as it wasrecommended to me by him, I knewimmediately that this was the missingpiece for me because Bob chose a verygood title: it’s a system for writing. Now, compare that to other books in thearea—very good books such as AtomicNotes. Top Notes is a very good book.I've read it; I like it. But thefocus, by the very title, is on notetaking and only as sort of anafterthought. What are you goingto do with those notes? Whereas thethrust of Bob’s book and Bob’s way ofexplaining it worked very well for me because the goal is very clear from thefirst page.You’re using this to produce output, to produce writing. As a YouTuber who writes scripts all day andevery day, and as a fiction podcasterwho writes fiction all day and everyday, that’s exactly what I wanted.I wanted something to help with that andorganize my thoughts and so forth. So, Iwill say that my own understanding ofZettelkasten is as a system for writingjust as Bob has described. Um,whereasI think you see, you two have to be verycareful. You’re in the PKM space and youcan make, you don’t want to make enemies. But I do not work in that space. So Ican say things like other people arevery confused about what is and isn’tZettelkasten and what it should have. And Ithink the confusion—let me, let meback up and be more positive aboutBob instead of negative about otherpeople. It was clear to me readingyour book, Bob, that youunderstood what was going on because youhad almost nothing to say. It was, andwhat you did say was extremely clear.You didn’t talk around the subject. Youwere just like, “This is exactly whatworks.” And hearing what I read was newinformation to me: that you’ve written somany books. Attentive. That is wonderful seeing this.Seeing thisthat you have come to Zettelkastenthrough an interest in output, in writing,and so forth makes perfect sense.That gets me very confident and makes me very, very happy.You're not some other reviewers and creatives who said, "I've tried Zettelkasten for two weeks." Let me tell you what I think about it.Oh, I hate that. That's very understandable in the two-week cycle of YouTube that we live inside, butlike two years, I think, might be really what one needs.Just to allay any suspicions, ifyou do go back five years, you will see those same articles coming from me as well.It's just that I am far from that time.I have been far enough from that time to be writing different articles. Well, the truth is that you wrote a system for writing last year.That's true. Exactly.I did wait to write the book.That's for sure.Yeah. Well, I'm a little bit different because I thinka lot of people would say I have a Zettelkasten, and certainly there's someElements of it that are similar. I don’tpersonally say that, but that’s more todo with my almost allergic reactionto most methodologies. I don’t saythat I follow any methodology; Ireally just do what I need to do, and some ofthat is creating, but I still wouldn’tsay that my notes or my system is for the purpose of creating. I think thecreation of stuff itself is just astep along the process. Like I’mactually just trying to understand theworld; that’s actually what I’m tryingto do. And the best way to do that forme has been to create stuff, put it outthere, and then have feedback frompeople like, “Well, actually, you gotthis part wrong,” or “Did you think aboutthis?” That’s just a side benefit. So, for me, thelearning is an end in itself. The thinking is just that this isthe best way I’ve found to think. Um,and if there was anything that I wouldbe the most skeptical about Zettelkasten,it’s its rabid fan base. Like I’mjust so deeply suspicious of anythingthat gets that level of a cultish following. Do with the concept, right? It's, it'ssome of the people. It's some of the— oh, sorry, that note isn't atomicenough. It's just like, no. What isthis? The Zettelkasten police. That'swhat I don't like. But the concepts ofZettelkasten, like many, you know, likemany religions, the principles arepretty solid. Yeah, I mean, I've known and know manypeople who have gotten burned out,who've burned out on the same aspect ofit. Um, just can't hack it anymore. I, Ibeing 47 years old, being part ofdifferent subculture scenes since I was13. The same stuff I experienced in likehardcore music, art, or sub writingsubcultures or whatever exists here. The gatekeepers, the whole thing, the maweird machismo that shows up in thissort of stuff. Um, I, I have a lot ofexperience with that. So I, I recognizeit when I see it. These thingsyou're talking about—this kind of, uhpolicing of the environment. And youknow, it's, it's work to not ignore it butto kind of witness it and figure, like,constantly sort of figure out where toplace yourself within that. Um, but yeah,it can be, uh, labor laborious. Sometimes, um, but not—like I said—nothing new here. You'll find iteverywhere. I have at least found iteverywhere.Well, when we talk about theZettelkasten, um, there are kind of four partsto that process. And generally, the first part is consuming thecontent and then creating fleeting notesor, um, some sort ofreference note depending on whether it’sa book or a video or a podcast that you’ve heard. So you’re writing downnotes and really just toparaphrase or to get it out onpaper. And then, kind of, the second phasewould be—the second step would beturning those into permanent, or in yourterminology, “Bob main notes” that are alittle bit more considered. Then, the third part isconnecting those ideas, and then the lastbit is making stuff from them. Would youagree with that, by the way, just as ahigh-level overview of the process?Yeah, absolutely.Yeah. Starting withjust kind of raw material to get itout of your head, and, like you said,considered, I think is a good way tophrase it. Into something that's a little moreuseful and usable, which would be themain note, or the structure note, orwherever you take it inside the Zettelkasten.So I actually think that most people arethe two that are the most understood.The first two people already know how towrite stuff down, even if it, like mostpeople stop at that. Actually, that's howI took notes in school. You know, justtake notes and then never look at themagain. Um, that part is wrong, but people alreadyintuitively know that, you know, toremember something, you should write itdown.Then the second part, which iscreating the main notes, I think, at leastin this crowd,that also is a little bit moreunderstood. So I kind of want to focuson the last two: connecting the ideas andmaking stuff with it. I really wantto focus on practical stuff, likeexactly how do you connect these ideas.So the way we do it with the Zettelkasten is, um, typically, you have your singleidea note. So what became of thekind of mindvomit onto the page, sort of stuff. And you turn it into a single idea noteand within that, you will indicate insome way, which varies from person to person.But in some way, you indicate that thisidea can inform or relate to anotheridea that’s in your Zettelkasten, anddigital Zettelkasten that’ll be with alink. Paper-based Zettelkasten wouldbe referencing the ID or, you know, whichis typically how people identify theirnotes. They have like a numeric ID oralphanumeric ID, which you can also havein a digital setting. Nevertheless, youindicate that look, you want to go, go check over here. When you come back tothis note, you see it says "see also" orsomething like that. This note on thissubject, it’s maybe, and then you givesome context. It’s speaking about thisin a different light or, you know, it’sentirely personal, right? So there aretimes when I write "see this other note,"it may not work, but it’d be good foodfor thought, you know, etc. And that’sthe linking, right? Or the referencingof other notes or other ideas moreso. And from there, you want to, if you're interested in going deeper, thereare a couple of ways to do that. One is toWrite. So, you start collecting yourideas and following these connectionsand pulling them into a separatedocument and saying, "Okay, here'ssome of the connections I'vemade. Which ones are most interesting tome now, or which ones are most relevantto the topic I want to talk about? Because not all of them will be right.Each note can branch off—that's thenetworking thing about it. They caneach branch off into differentdirections. You know, the example I use,which I think people are getting verybored of, understandably, is the appleexample, right? You know, a note on applescan take you into food deserts, intonutrition, into agriculture. It can takeyou wherever, but not all of them willnecessarily be relevant to what you wantto write about. So that's one way. The other way that dovetails into thisis creating higher level views. Um, whatsome people call a structure note is akind of note that many people usewhere you take your ideas that are inthe Zettelkasten kind of forked around, andyou structure them. You give some senseto them. You put them on the pagesimilar to a rough draft. Really just exploring what's in thesenotes, what the connections are. Arethere questions? Are there holes? Orthere, you know, it becomes a thinkingenvironment really at that stage. Isthere one? Could you show us a structurenote that you could show?Yeah, let me see here.Excellent.Sure. Yeah, I would love tosee what somebody else's structure noteslook like. Yeah, sure. Hold on. I'mgoing to pop your screen, your thingon the screen right now just so you cansee. Uh let's see. This was totallyunprepared by the way. So Oh, sure. Yeah. This is one that's in the book, soit might be familiar to people. Umthis is on a yogic concept calledPratahara.So I am not writing necessarily onPratiahara, but it is something that I'minterested in because I've had a yogapractice for decades now orsomething, two decades, a decade and ahalf, somewhere in there. And thisconcept of pratiahara, which in veryshort terms means like going inwards. Umand I had been taking notes on thistopic from a yogic perspective. A Hindu-Indus Valley perspective, as wellas from a Christian perspective.Um, Pratihara is not a term that isused in Christianity, but the concept ofgoing inwards, quote unquote, is. And so,as you can see here in the bluelinks, these are links to notes and someof the content that’s underneath it; thetext, or the copy, comes from those notes.Some of it’s just my own thinking in themoment. Um, some of them are quotes, andit’s starting to outline my thinking onthis topic. Right? So, at thetop, you’ll see Pratihara, which is justthe topic. I saw that Ihad a number of notes that kind ofdefine Pratihara. Uh, so I just created aheading that says, "What is Pratihara?" and thenyou can see some of the ideas and notesthere. Like I said, I was reading aboutthis idea of going inward inChristianity, so I created anothersubheading and said, "Okay, well,Pratihara also shows up in Christianity,and here are some notes that discuss that.Uh, there’s this concept or this ideathat Pratihara either takes effort, orPratihara should just be kind ofmanifest through non-effort. So I likedThat play. So I created a subheadingPratihar and effort. And again, youcan kind of see where this is going. What ultimately is happening here, though,is me saying, "Okay, I’ve got these ideas."I’ve created connections, or I’veestablished connections or relationshipsbetween them. But let’s unpack them.Let’s see what I really have to say onthe matter. Because the network insideyour Zettelkasten, while there it is anetwork, and while there are connections,those connections with context willbe revealing for me. It really takes kindof, okay, let’s start saying some thingsabout this stuff. Let’s get sometransitional words in here, and let’s seehow, you know, if I’m going to jumpfrom Pratihar to Pratihar and Christianity, well, there’s a culturaljump. Is that even right to do? Youknow, like I have to start asking thosequestions. So this is what a structurenote can be used for, and they can takemany forms. You can have tables andcharts, and it’s your own thinking space.So whatever you need can happen here, orwhatever you need to happen can happenhere. Um, but this for me is... sorry, gothis for me is the... I’ll just beBriefly, this for me is the beginnings ofa thinking environment, or, uh,the beginnings of a writing environment. This is super interesting. You dothese notes differently from me.Maybe I’ll show mine in a bit, but Iwanted to mention this because it issomething that Tris and I talked about:the weird letters and numbersat the beginning, the full kits at theum, so that you talked a little bit aboutthe alphanumeric, the unique alphanumeric ID, and this is something thatcame from Nicholas Lumen, right? Andsometimes it’s called full Gettle.Tris and I were talking about how to dothis. I think, Tracy, you told me about aplugin that you wanted to talk about orwanted to look into. Have you beenusing it? Nicole, you’ve blocked out a terrible, terribleinsight into my life. I’ve tried all of the plugins, and I’ve tried writing.Oh, wow. And because I’m a programmer,the curse of being a programmer isthat you can do everything. So maybeyou can write your own stuff, whichinvolves constant yak shaving and neverfinishing anything. Um, folktle, whichI’ll pass back to Bob in a moment toTell us about that. But I struggled alot trying to implement Folktale inmy Obsidian system. I see the value in it. I can't yet bringthat value into my system. It might be less needed in such asystem like Obsidian, but I wouldlove to hear Bob's thoughts on that whenyou have something where you can havethe hierarchy expressed through linksnatively in the system and IDs are nolonger needed because we're not usingpaper. I should say IDs are notessential because we're not using paper. What remainsuseful in Folktale for us.Yeah, thisis one of the great debates in the Zettelkastenworld. This is one of them.Uh, and it'sunfortunate that it is handled as adebate because there really isn't adebate. It's personal preferenceonce it gets to the level of digitalbecause you're right, you don't need tohave an identifier or an alphanumeric identifier for every note whenyou're using digital. When you're usingpaper, if you want to do this kindof non-hierarchical kind of rhizome. In a system, you do because you don't want tobe doing things alphabetically orhowever else. You want a way to link to show, like, "Hey, check outthis note." It's really hard to dothat if you don't have anidentifier. However, in the digital space,you don’t need them. Now, why do Iuse them? Well, for one thing, I’m 47years old. I’m quasi-Gen X, and I likeanalog, quote unquote, things. Mybrain thinks that way. It was sort of knee-jerk, to behonest. Right from the beginning, I justsaw Nicholas Luhmann do it. Itimmediately resonated with me; it was like,"That makes sense to do that. Let's doit." Very quickly, I sawthe benefits for myself. Now, the benefitsfor me have been that these identifiershave length to them. Theygrow, and as they grow, that sortof tells you something. It doesn't tell youeverything, but it tells you something. One thing it tells you is this ideais related to a bunch of other ones.It's saying that this idea ispart of a train of thought, at least atone level. There can always bemany trains of thought, but it’s tellingYou, at one level, there is certainly atrain of thought that has been developedhere. Um, and that has been extremelyuseful when I'm just sort of scanningthrough my sidebar, right? Wherethe notes are stacked and they areordered according to these alphanumericnumbers, I mean, alphanumeric IDs. So,when I'm just scrolling through, youknow, and I'm like, what was that noteon Nicholas Lumen and editing his ownwork, right? And I see that long identifier. I'm like, oh, I immediately know without opening itthat there's something goingon about Lumen and editing, or editing ingeneral, or writing in Lumen; something'sthere, and it just pulls me in. Itreally just, I can't say it any otherway. It pulls me into this smalllittle cluster world. Um, the other thing it does is I'vebeen calling it like a forcing function.By forcing myself, so to speak, togive an alphanumeric ID to everynote, it forces me to establish aconnection to something else. Now, can Ijust add the next ID and not do that?Absolutely. But it feels weird not to doThis node in, I say, "Okay, wait. Where is this? What is this speaking to?Let’s take this and see how it relates to another thingwith Zettelkasten. Like if I wrote thisnote without thinking of anything elsein my Zettelkasten. So what I call inspite of writing notes, in spite of yourZettelkasten, which is not a negative. Itjust means not thinking of yourZettelkasten. I now go and take this noteand say, "Well, what does it relate to?Does it relate to anything in my Zettelkasten or is itstarting an entirely new thread? Thatmeans I have to go through and kind offigure out where it is. Does ittake time? Sure. Sometimes it takeslonger. Most of the time it takes lessand that just puts that note into themix. Right now, other people don’t usethese. A lot of people, I would say, maybeeven most digital Zettelkasten peopledo not use these. What they use insteadare these things called structure notes.And for them, when they bring a new notein, it just goes according to whatevertimestamp or something. In otherwords, it stacks according to a timestamp. But they say, "Okay, well I don’twant to lose this note. So what is itspeaking to?" Speaking to this topic, I have astructure note for. And so people whodon’t use Folazettle will often, as far as I can see, have lots of structurenotes because that’s the place wherethey’re showing how the note, how theidea relates. But I don’t use structure notes very limitedly. Idon’t leverage them to that degree, in part because I have this focus atall. I can go on and on in the course that I teach,which is, of course, on writing with theZettelkasten. There’s a whole class onjust what I am getting here, what amI seeing, because people inevitably arecurious about it. I can see thingslike, for example, when I bring—this is aniche example—but if you can imagine mesaying, "Oh, here’s a train of thought youknow that I want to bring into astructure note." I copy and paste all thosenotes just like you saw the links withthose numbers, and I bring them into thestructure note. There’s nothing elsewritten there. If I stop that, leave, andcome back a week later and I open thatup and I see all these notes areorganized according to the focal point, Iknow that I didn’t do anything becauseIt would never stay in that order. Right? That’s the part of themystery and magic of working with a Zettelkastenis that you don’t keep them inthe order you find them. You take themout, and you re—you do something withthem. So there’s a lot of these justkind of indicators, some overt, somevery subtle that I just find, uh,pleasurable even when they are a bit ofa lift, you know, as in like I got tofind where this fits. Um, but for me,I love it most of the time. So Grace has acomment here about that. Um, I used tohave a numerical system thingy. Itwasn’t for me. It made me think too topdown when I work. I find the same. Iused to have everything timestamped. Sounique ID, a timestamp, and thena unique ID afterwards. And I just likeyou, Bob. I felt like I had just done itbecause Lumen did it, and I was like,what am I supposed to do for that?And I get the point you weremaking about how it forces you to createlinks. Um, I just wanted to show likethis is how I create links. So this iswhat I would call like anequivalent of a structure note. This issomething on a tool called Loki. A lot of my notes already have metadata filledin. So this is a new note template, and Ialready have to create notes. So at thevery least, the date is going to bethere. So it links to my dailyjournal. And, um, then I have to fillin the children, the siblings, theparents, and stuff. And so maybe I'llpull up the outline here. Oh yeah,and this is also how I visualizeconnections. This is Excalibur Brain inthe bottom right here. Uh, it’s verytiny, but, you know, you can also zoomin and then click on the different notesthere, um, to kind of navigate thatvisually. But also, um, I do havemuch longer notes than I thinkyou do. This is very, oh, by the way,what is happening with Obsidian withembedded videos not showing in itbut showing when published? Anyway, um, soI have some links that are not, that arewithin a hierarchy, but I don’t actuallysay anything about it. And this might bebecause it’s a more technical topic. Andfor me, it’s self-evident whatit's for. Um, so I have a lot oflinks here but not as much actualtext. In from Fulgatel, it was actually thefirst one that you mentioned that it canbe a way to identify clusters ofthought. So, I already do that in otherways, but that is another way. Thatis an additional way. And I think themore ways I can identify whatthings I really care about, regardlessof what I think I care about. You know,if I have a lot of notes on D and D,it's like, well, you know, myObsidian vault is not predominantlyfor work anymore. It's actually forgaming. Um, but I really wanted toimplement it. But, you know, Tris told meabout this plugin, and it wascalled the, uh, note – okay now I don’t knowwhat it's called. It's called, uh, the noteID Obsidian note ID plugin. Do youactually have that implemented? No, now I don’t like it.You don’t like it?Now, okay, but I was looking at it and Iwas like, Chris told me about this, it'spretty cool, it's a thing all my friendsOkay. Well, I looked at it and Ihaven’t fully implemented it, but Ithink it shows progress because what itdoes is it doesn’t require you to putthe ID in the name. I hate that. II don't want to name it into some weird system that maybeI'm not going to use later on. Like, forget that. What this plug-in doesis it allows you to take a property like anObsidian property and then it displays it as if it were part of thefile name. And I like that — I'mlike, okay, I can possibly trythat then. And it indents the notesdepending on how deep into the hierarchy they go. It's very clever. Very clever. Yeah, I um, you know, admittedly, I don'tuse very few plugins. I useplugins for the look ofsomething. I don't use data view. Iessentially don't use any of it, you know. Oh, wow.Yeah, that stuff justslows me down, you know. I don'tlike relying on things like that. So Ihave a very basic setup; I use Obsidian as atext editor that can link things andthat has local files. Again, I use acouple of plugins for formatting the textor something, but nothing high functioning. But I wanted to show you, speaking of whatyou can see if you could, umBring my screen back. I brought up anote that might show something that I'mtalking about. So this is a basicnote. It's actually a rather shortnote with the exception of the quotehere, which is from Blumen. So thenote's meaning is circumstantial. It'stalking about how meaning is createdbased on circumstances andsituations. People can debatethat for the rest of their lives, butthat's what this note is about. WhatI wanted to show is that what you seehere, at the very top of the note, theID for this note is 43B 2 A2A. Okay? It doesn't have much meaning in and ofitself. When you scroll down, you see anote here. It says this is the previousnote. In other words, this is the notethat this note is kind of speaking to oris jumping off of at one level. Whatyou see below that are two other notes.It says C, and then there's somethingabout algorithms that create their ownmeaning. Below that, you see anote that says ancient practices removetheir lineage and lose their meaning. Okay.So what am I seeing when I open up thisnote? These alphanumeric IDs areindicators of something. Something is where this idea can betaken or spoken to as it relates todifferent areas of my Zettelkasten. Iknow that when the note starts with atwo, that that's somewhere in the AI, moreso tech algorithm area of my Zettelkasten.It's not the most robust area, but it'san early area of my Zettelkasten becauseI was writing a lot about social media.So when I look at this note about Lumen,which is a much later note or much lateridea, I'm like, "Oh, you know what? Youhaven't written about algorithms inabout five years, but this note couldinform that. Now, what am I—what'shappening even inside of me as I'm saying it right now? I'm thinking, "Oh,that's interesting. I could startbringing back this topic that I haven'twritten about in so long, but I wasreally, really interested at the time."So, there's a historical relevancy therethat I'm just seeing just from thenumber. I haven't even looked at likewhat's actually being said or what I'msaying about this. Uh, below that isanother link. It says, "C note 7-1 A2:ancient practices removed throughlineage," etc. I know that seven is a lotof spiritual notes, spiritual practice. Notes, yoga nodes. It's not the onlyplace they're found, which is how thetop-down that the commenter wasmentioning is subverted at all times,right? Yes, the number seven indicates Iknow there are a lot of spiritual noteshappening in there, but spiritualityshows up in all the numbers, basically.Nevertheless, just by looking at thisshort identifier 7-182,I'm immediately pulled in. Again, thisis kind of like almost likepsychosomatic, not psychosomatic, likeinventing issues. I mean like psychpsychology and soma body. Um, I am likepulled into this sort of history, personal history of my own writing onthis topic, and it's saying, "Hey, look,here's a new note that you've beenwriting about: meaning is circumstantialand you can actually pull that rightback into all that spiritual writing andthat spiritual thinking you werethinking about. So this is, for me, thisis the stuff that's kind of hard towrite about because I write about folksa lot. Not as an evangelist. I reallydon't care if people use it ornot. It's not that I don't feel like itis better by any means, but it is unique. Think. Um, but it's hard to write aboutthis kind of more subtle stuff, which isI'm looking at this and I'm just gettingall these feelings based on these alphanumeric even before I open up the noteand actually explore what's in them.Well, while you're here, um, let'stalk about this question fromShane. Would you typically link to everypossible topic like a Wikipedia page orare the links for practical purposes andfocused on your intentions? I believe in the subjectivity of all ofthis work. And by that I mean thetemporality of all this work. By that Imean my focus or my agenda is not tolink an idea to every single possibleidea in my Zettelkasten because I wouldI could do that and I could do thatprobably knowing the way my brain works.I could probably link one note to almostevery other note somehow. Not myobjective. My objective is to kind oflean into where my interestsare in the moment or where Ithink my interests might be in thefuture. So I'll give it a little bitof thought when I create a note. I'llsay okay, this is the note that I thinkit directly relates to, in whichIn a case that may be the only link, right? It may link just alphanumerically, right? Inthe kind of breaking down the breakingaway of all the alphanumeric. I’ll say I ask one other question,which I mentioned in the book. I say, "Whatdoes this note relate to at one level?"Then I say, "What’s another way thisnote might relate?" I give it a littlebit of time, maybe a couple of minutes, and Ithink, does it? Does it not? And if itdoesn’t, that’s okay. I’ve establishedone relationship. But if it startsgetting me thinking about, for example,that node, right? This thing about lumenand meaning is circumstantial. I would never have thought about algorithms,right? But I just took a few minutes andwas like, "Is there anything else I’vetalked about creating meaning?"I did a little search, and there it was.Algorithms create their own meaningthrough the process of XYZ. Um, and allof a sudden it was like, "Oh, that’sreally fascinating." Uh, so I createdthe connection, but I didn’t sit thereto answer the person’s question. Ididn’t sit there and go, "What’s everypossible connection?"It’s not—I'm a Taurus. I mention this often. Know, I'm kind of oxlike. You know, Ilike to move forward in a direction, and Ikind of do the things that feel right,but then anything outside of that is toomuch. You know, I just want to keepeating the grass for a while. Yeah. I would — I would actually really love tosee if you feel comfortable sharinglike maybe you could share a structurenote. I'd be delighted. I've got a fewthings to say on Shane P's question, if Imay. Sure. Yes. I think that, um,I have nothing to add in terms ofZettelkasten. I would have justlearned it from Bob's book and thenspoken it back at him. So I don't thinkthat's very practical. But I do know alot about Obsidian — probably too muchabout Obsidian. Um, perhaps like you,Nicole, our lives are wonderful andmade delightful by Obsidian, but perhapswe know a little too much. One of the things when I was experimenting withFolazettel and the highest benefit that I could seecompared to modern tools like Obsidianthat have good native linking and evenontological links. Thank you for namingthose for me, Nicole. I didn't know whatThe named links, ontological notes,and ontological links. Um, the chief benefitthat you get when you name your fileswith Folazettle is the alphabetical correctordering of the tree for free, in whatever view and whateverapp. You could look at it in your filemanager, and it would be in the correct tree order. In a thousand years itwill still be in its correct tree ordereven when Obsidian is long gone. ThatI think is huge. It speaks a lot tothe longevity of our data, which I care a lotabout as a plain text person, and Ithink for me that is the biggestbenefit that I can't reproduce withother methods. I can reproduce most elseusing the breadcrumbs plugin. Yes,if there is time, perhaps I'll demoand talk about that. Yeah, let's see it. All right. Okay. MaybeI use it aswell. Uh, oh, fantastic. Fantastic.Interesting. Then we'reI mean, this is your show, Nicole. I don't want to tellyou you're wrong, but that noteyou showed us had both parents andchildren, which is a little weird tohave. I'd love to learn a bit more abouthow you're using it. Let me share my letLet me share my screen here. Uh, let's see. Let's see if this goes right.Just give me a moment.Okay, that looks alright. Move thatover there.Uh, shall I add it? Yes, please. I'mready. I'm ready now. So, here is anexample. I hope you can see it. Okay.Um, here is. Can you increase the zoom abit if you can? We are at max zoom, butmaybe I can get the text. Are youworried about the graph? The graph issmall even on my screen.Oh, that's good. How's that?Okay, great. Um, what we've got here isa pretty straightforwardtemplate for my notes. Um, again,thank you, Bob, for the clearguidance in the book. You can tellI've read a system for writing becauseI've got C links. Now, I originally putthese up here in the frontmatter, uh, like up here. However,I thought to myself, well, I've improvedon Bob's system here. And ofcourse, I haven't because actually thegenius of the C links is you in your ownwords describing why this is somethingyou should go and see and go and go andreference. I got a link to a literature note.I'm using a plugin to givethat an icon depending on its tag formore discussion. So if I were to search for this, or if I were tolook at the backlinks for this, I would see that it islinked from this note for more discussion.So although there is nomachine property, there's no machine-readableproperty saying this is more discussion,it's a human reusing this system. I think that's a big revelation for me; automationcan only take you so far. My brain stillhas to do a lot of work, and actuallyshould do a lot of work. Sowhat we've got here is the breadcrumbsplugin at the top: Home, Zettelkasten, andIndex Fleet notes are designed fordestruction. And then this note here,which is a literature highlight,doesn't spark immediatemeaning; leave it unfiled and trust thesystem to resurface it later. If itsounds good, it's because I'mparaphrasing Bob. So, if I go allthe way, you can see that we'vegot a tree here leading up to the top. In a faith system, we might have home being one,settle caston index being B,and then fleeting notes of design being one again.And then this note might be 1 B. But the breadcrumbsplugin has given us not just the numbers,which you sort of have to know, but youknew that seven was philosophy andso forth that comes through practice, which one gets with the system.And if it doesn’t, what are you doing? ButI can see that here; I can see the namesdirectly, which is useful once we startto go down another view. So because I’vezoomed in so much, the text is a little cramped,but you can see here we’ve got, we’re five levels deep now.Um, and if I go back up one, back up one. This is the breadcrumbs plug-in hotkeys, by the way.I’ve mapped all these to a hotkey. Um,we’re now at the settle casten index.Now, as usual, the graph view has become useless,so don’t worry too much about that.But this is called the tree view in Settlecast.It takes these links here that you’ve seen in the previous onesthat you just point to the parent like,where is my parent? Settling cast on paper, that is where I amslotting this note. What am I slottingthis behind, so we can get a sequencegoing. And that’s the only thing youshould know. We’re doingbottom-up thinking; you should just knowwhere on the edge of the tree you areattaching this. That’s the genius.You don’t need to think down from thetop, which eventually becomes veryexpensive.This is the top of the tree, and thisis the down view on the left. Um, Nicole,this text is too small to readon the left. Uh, yes. Cool. Maybe you can just read out theones. Oh, of course I can. This tree,if you remember earlier, Nicholwas talking about the plugin that showed thefolktale IDs as a tree with indentation.Here we’vegot the indentation. Um, if you can’t readthe text, perhaps you can see theindentation. So, somewhere, we’ll have uhquite a lot of indentation. Um, herewe go, something like this. So, here we’vegot another five levels deep. But if I goup a couple, we just see the children, theones inside. I think this might be thebest way of doing settle caston. In Obsidian, if you don't use folk zettels,my recommendation is the breadcrumbs plugin. Unfortunately,it's extremely difficult to get started.Somebody, Nicole, you should do a video onbreadcrumbs. But notice that allthe even though this, uh, thisnote here has only a parent linked, it'sactually got a child that isautomatically detected, uh, which is thisone here in the down view. Returning toa thought or reference and developingthe idea is vital. Another thingI learned from Bob. So in that child,we've linked back up to the previousone. So you only link to parents; you don't link to children, you don’t linkto siblings. Uh, breadcrumbs calculatesthat if my brother and I have the sameparents, I know that we aresiblings by our one parental relation. Idon't also need to define the sibling relation. Um,the reason that Ido have the children and parents, by theway, is because I've used a lot ofsystems and a lot of plugins, right?There was some time when I was usingsolely Excalibur.And so it's just difficult to commit. To one plugin. And so I have both. Idon't have all of the parentseverywhere. And I don't alwayshave any metadata. Like some I stillhave notes where I don't have any.Though better to have children thannothing else. Got it. And Excalibraindoesn't infer those links.It can infer some things. Um, there area lot of settings on it, so you canget it to do that as well. Um,but there are still some notes where Ionly have childrenas a holdover from other plugins, notparents. Gotcha.That's the best feature ofbreadcrumbs, is that you've got theseimplied relations. Like, if oneway is parent, then it implies theother way is child, which is quitenice. Um, can I ask a question about thechild-parent relationship that'sestablished? Please, Bob, yeah.So when you're saying child-parent, are yousaying that the parent is in thisrelation to the idea or just the order? In which the notes were put in? In otherwords, you know, apples are fruit.The parent is always going to be the parentto Macintosh, which is a kind of apple.Is it a child? So, is it child-parentsemantically speaking, or is it childparent just the order of notes importation?It's the order of notes, which I believe iswhat folks at Zettelkasten talk about. Youmight have lots of parents, which isreasonable. This is the one I’m choosingright now as I’m inserting it, justbecause it has to go somewhere, just asyou would put it into a physical Zettelkastenor choose a number at the end of yourfiling system. It really doesn’t mattertoo much. We’re not building a stricthierarchy. I did start off using— um, let me, if you could unshare myscreen, Nicole, I’ll go back and look atthe question that was asked. Uh, where are we here?Was it the one by Shane?Yeah, that was it — aboutwhether you typically link to every possibletopic like a Wikipedia page, or are thelinks for practical purposes and focusedon your intentions.I’m sorry to make you read it that way.I was thinking of a previous question. I’m so sorry. Oh yes, Grace. Yes, Grace used to have anumerical system. It wasn't for me. Yes,thank you. It made me think too down.Yeah, I tried Dewey Decimal because Iread in "The House of Seven Librarians,"which appears in Uncanny Magazine,by Ellen Klages, and it's about this lovelyfantasy story about a child who grows upin a fantasy library. It's all about Dewey Decimal,and I thought, oh, this is going to be great. I can have a sortof a Dewey Decimal system of my own. Um,I learned, of course, that there is apersonalized Dewey Decimal system calledJohnny Decimal, where you start off and create your own categories. They both suffer from thesame problem, which is top-down thinking,which is not what we're here for. Um,I’m autistic. I definitely am not herefor top-down thinking. Bottom-upthinking really works for me and thismethod really, really works forme because I don’t think, "Okay, so we'regoing through philosophy and then we'regoing through Western philosophy, andthen we're going into Christianity, andthen we're going to this and that, andthat path takes too long. And if I'm doing my job right, it getslonger every week as my brain getsmore complex, as my magic gets morecomplex. No, I'm going right at the bottomwhere I've got Gnosticism, and I slot insomething right there or whatever.Notice how I'm dredging the bottomof my philosophy barrel to try andimpress Bob. Um,thetop down just doesn't work forme. And it sounds like it didn't workfor Grace either. Like we'rebuilding this bottom up. I think thatmight be how our brains work. Likebottom up, like putting ideastogether. Bob, you probably have thoughtabout this more than me.Um, not so much on how our brainswork because I think we're constantlycoming up with new frameworks for thatbased on what the new fancy tool is. ButI will say that, um, the idea of top downis such a common one in theZettelkasten community, and it is oftenrelated to this idea of forgetting. Theonly thing I'll say to that is that I try to emphasize a distinction betweenthe address, which is that focus thatis alphanumeric, and the idea containedInside, which is why I asked you aboutthe parent-child relationship. I stay away fromthose terms as often as I can becausethey tend to imply hierarchy to a lot ofpeople. Oh well, this idea is the parentbecause it's supposed to come first. Andas you mentioned, and as is mentioned inthe book, that’s not what’s happeningwith folks. Your ideas are stillcoming in as you think of them. And yourparent ideacan come in last, and it could be the last in the forgettable line, the alphanumeric line. It's just an address. Andthe way I describe it is likeaddresses on a street, right? OneMain Street, Two Main Street, Three MainStreet. These are not a hierarchy,right? And even more so, itdoesn’t imply the relationship betweenthe people living at each address. Itjust tells you that they do live on thesame street, but it doesn’t mean that oneMain Street is the parent of the literalparent of the child who lives at Two. Right. Go ahead. By the way, I wanted tomention that the names, like what youcall those relationships, you can totallychange in both Excalibur andBreadcrumb. So you don’t have toYou could use parent at all. You coulduse up or previous or whatever elseyou'd like. So maybe that would be asolution for that. Um, I do, there's aquestion here from Mike that I wanted toyou to hear both of your answers for. Um,Mike M says, "Is there value to puttingintermediate notes rather than linkingdirectly? For example, if you link Awith Zed, would you link A with Zeddirectly, or put an M note in there thatdetails that connection? Shall I go? Sure. I don’t know. Um, Ido not insert a note in between to state theconnection between the two. What I do isstate the relationship inside oneof those notes. If usually it’s thenote that came second, I think, but itcan vary, right? So if I have note A andthen I have, you know, 26 notes later came up with note Z or Zed,which I love hearing. Um,it always, yeah, all the littleballoons and bells go off in my ears,like who's that exotic? If I have 26 noteslater have note Z, then I justsimply say in that note somewhere, hey, Check out note A. This is how they wouldrelate to one another. And when I go towrite or when I go to open a structurenote or develop a structure note. Butusually, like I said in writing, I willoften pull that context out. Say, saythe train of thought is A, skip, BC, DD,etc., jump right to Z. I will bring inboth those notes and often will bring inthat little bit of text in the note Zthat says this is why they relatebecause it’s helpful. I may not use it,but I just pull that in. So, the connection is established inside thenote, not in a separate note itself,typically. What about you, Trez? I thinkMike is using electronic systems and Ithink it shows in the question. Um Mike,if you're still here, I'd love aconfirmation there because links don'thave metadata typically. So you can'tgive the context of what you're saying.So if you can't give the context there,well, it makes perfect sense to think,oh, I'd better have something else toadd some more context. This um this Mnote that's in the middle. Um orpossibly, possibly Mike is a datascientist who knows about SQL andlinking tables. Of having some S data in the middle. Butfor me, I demoed it earlier thatis solved by just writing in plainlanguage around the note instead of justlinking in a big list like, "Here arehere's a big list of all the links," or ifyou're using Forget all the IDs that arerelevant. You’ve got to say a bitmore about that. See this for a counterexample. See here for discussion on thematter, that sort of thing. Um, Iagain, I got this from Bob'sbook, but I started doing it withoutany natural language context, and I havegone back to doing it in just alist, just as you've seen in both my notes and Bob's notes. I wasdelighted to see that. Um, there are somethings that should be automated, andsome things that shouldn’t, and I thinkthis natural language of what therelationship is about is veryimportant.Though you can use whatuh, I what Nicole told me are calledontology links, where you can give a keyname to the link. So I started off doingthat, and it's possible. Um, Nicolewho told you that they wereontology links you mentioned. Talking to Jolt, jolts, of course, that'swhat you call the developer ofExcalibur and Excalad for Obsidian.It's a great name. It's a great name, soit's basically naming a link. So youcould name the link counter example; youcould name the link whatever, but youstill can’t name it a nice big sentence.And that's why language still worksvery well for me. Um, so I, I, sorry, goon. Not at all. Um, I just wanted topoint out that Grace is doing aphilosophy degree, and that's extremelyfunny. Um, and, uh, Grace, you shouldlook at Morgana on YouTube, one of ourcolleagues in the PKM space. She is doing a bit of a PhD and talkingabout Zettelkasten. I learned alot from her. Yeah, talkingvery well about Zettelkasten. I'll sayshe's one of the best out theredoing it, and also one of the peoplewho's talking a lot about it in such aclear way, but also not reallyparticipating as far as I can tellunless she's going under a differenthandle in the other satellitediscussions, which is also really nice tosee, staying out ofMike did confirm that they’re usingObsidian. Um, I wanted to say my I’m alittle bit different here from bothof you because I sometimes do one andsometimes do the other. I always startwith just links. Andat some point I find that it’snot enough. And so the thing that immediately came up is I have a note onobservability. So, like, software systemobservability and monitoring, becausemost people think they’re the samething. At first, I just had a linkthat referred to monitoring and then itmade me think like this is enough of aquestion that I really want to flesh outthe differences between the two, um,and how exactly they’re linked and howthey're not linked. And so now I have anote that describes that connection. Soit’s not, it’s not, it’s not an ontologicallink. It is aseparate note because, for me, thatdistinction was important enough, but Idon’t, I don’t normally start with that. Istart with just a link and then when Istart wanting to add more and more, I’mlike, okay, this should be a separate note. Right? I think what, if I can jump into what you’ve just described aboutthinking about the linking process is aGreat example of where this systemshould not be automated any further. IfObsidian, or a plug-in, or an LLM, orwhatevertold you all of the pagesthat were linked, that were similar, andlinked to the note you'recurrently editing, you would have lostsomething. And that, that, and what youwould have lost is the process of makingthe connections in your own brain. Andactually, that is where a lot of theideas come from. If you had a magicsystem that just showed you where all ofyour notes were linked and how they werelinked, and said, "Oh, this relates to this or whatever," you wouldhave some value, but you would have lostthe process of doing that and thinking,now what, where are these links here? What is going on there? Because nosystem, either stochastic or a languagemodel, has your interpretation of theworld, and seeing the links betweenthings that nobody else would havethought of, or at least the average ofthe entire internet's language might notthink of it this way. Like with, uh, Ithink that in my experience of beingvery into the computer science space,Being very into music and YouTube and soforth, like now I'm in the creativespace. That gives me, even just withthose two things, unique insights that Idon't think other people think aboutbecause of my experience. And we all havehundreds and thousands of other aspects of our lives that make usunique. So that I just wanted to stop there, and the way youdescribed making that link and thinkingabout what the links were and thinkingabout our observability and monitoring,whether different or the same, that mentalexercise is the whole thing. Yeah. Well, we are out of time. We'realready a little bit over. But maybe wecan end on a question. Um, a briefquestion: just what's one thing that youwould recommend that people do if theywanted to get started with creating aZettelkastenor whatever system you call your system? Oh, is that really yours, Tris? There isone book that I recommend after havingread the others. Great, I've got lots ofvalue in, but Bob's bookis terrific. Um, Obsidian is the besttool for the job. I've tried them all.Um, it's very good. I would recommendGoing through reading a book, you couldread this one or maybe read the oneafter you've read that. Makehighlights, sync them with Readwise,import them into Obsidian using the official Readwise plugin, andyou've got the start, the basics of literature notes. And then you canstart to pull out atomic ideas, thinkingto yourself, "Why did I highlight thiswhen I was reading? What was Ithinking?" That sort of thing. And thereyou have it. You've started to buildatomic nodes, but you do have to keepdoing it for about a year before there'sany value. It's a long, long process. Uh, that's a big disadvantage because it seems uselessat the start. It's like the opposite ofa large language model which seemsbrilliant, yet useless at the end.That's my opinion. Um, I must say I dothink the book is a great place to start,and it's strange to say that. I mean, Igrew up at a time when you were really notsupposed to say those sorts of things. Um, you know, you don't becomesuccessful. You don't want to sell outand all that stuff. But I will say from apractical standpoint that, you know, I amI wrote the book for people who are tryingto figure this out and are just havingmore questions. Every time they getinformation online, it contradictssomething else. I really tried togive a broad perspective withintent so that you could get asense of what's being said, but here’show you can start somewhere. Practically or physically speaking, Iwould say not to start withObsidian. Not unless I will say unlessyou are comfortable and familiar withthat world. I remember when Idownloaded Obsidian and I didn’t use itfor a year because Iremember how bizarre it looked to me.It didn’t make any sense. I thought,“What is this?” What I wouldhonestly say is if you’re comfortable withthat and you want to go in thatdirection and you want to use digital,Obsidian is, from my perspective, the wayto go. I would say start with anote. Start with one note, one idea, andthen when you have another one, see ifit relates to that idea. If it does,create your new note and state why itrelates to the other. If you’re uncomfortable with thesePlatforms like Obsidian, Notion, Rome, Logseq, and all the rest are valid, but I certainly suggest starting withpaper. Paper is valid. It will be here along time. You can't go wrong withjust writing a note and writing anotherone. Even if you don't stick with paper,people say, "I don't want to start asystem that I can't finish at the end ofmy life because I'll have to changethings." I've changed my system so manytimes. It's okay. Sometimes, yeah. Sometimes it takes a month of menial work to just change or redosomething. It's okay. You'llbe fine, is what I'll say. So startsimply. If paper works for you, startwith paper. You can always transcribethem into Obsidian later. Um,just start with that one note,and once your second note comes in, seeif it relates, and if it does, state why,and you're off and running. I think my practical advice would be to never create a notewithout linking to another, even if thatnote hasn't been created. I do this allthe time, and if I don't havethat note, it’s still a link. When I docreate that note, then it will have allOf those links to the other notes thatreferred to it. So it’s not lost. Those connections are not lost justbecause the node itself does notexist yet. And I have a data viewquery for finding all of those, liketo find things that I’ve referred toa lot but haven’t actually made. Andsometimes I don’t even need to make thatnote. Sometimes just the fact that itdoesn’t exist is already like areally insightful clue as to what I shouldlook into next. And even if it doesn’t exist,I sometimes will create it just to lookthrough what else has linked to it. Sage advice from all participants.Paper worked very well for me as I wastrying to figure out what was going on.Like you, there’s a lot, like I just didone or two notes and I was like, "Oh,wait. I get it now. Okay, paper. Yes.Right." And then I switched back toObsidian and I figured it all out. Verygood. Very good advice. Yeah. Okay. Well, we’re gonna have toend this here. I could keep talking toyou both and have talked to you a lotmore. Um, but thank you both forcoming on and talking to you. IReally, there's a lot that I wantto incorporate from our conversationhere that I at least want to try. Great. Thank you so much. This waswonderful. Thank you so much for settingit up. What a treat. Yeah, it's beengreat. All right. Thank you everybodyfor watching, whether you're herelive or you will watch this whenit's not live anymore. Umthanks for watching and have a greatrest of your week, everybody. Bye folks.Bye., A Real Zettelkasten Workflow in Obsidian, Nicole van der Hoeven, 01jzjmwx3g2b333r274rhrseff.