Alman sosyolojist, araştırmacı ve yazar. [[Zettelkasten]] adlı bilgi yönetimi kavramının yaratıcısı. Aynı zamanda sosyal bilimler felsefecisi ve sistem teorisi alanında fikir üreten bir düşünür olan Luhman 20yy’ın önemli teorisyenlerinden biri olarak anılıyor. 70'den fazla kitap 400 akademik makale ile bilinen en çok kitap ve makale yazan akademisyen yazar olan Niklas Luhmann da benzer bir yöntem geliştiriyor ve adına da Zettelkasten diyor. --- **Anladığım kadarıyla** not alma ile ilgili önerdiği sistem şöyle: **Not türleri:** 1. Geçici (kalıcı hale gelince atılacak) 3. Kaynak (kısa, kaynağa referans veren - bibliografik) 4. Kalıcı notlar - bunlar daha sonra içerik üretmek için kullanılacak. **Nasıl saklanacağı:** 1. İki bilgi kutusu var: Referans (kaynakça/bibliografik) kutu ve Ana Bilgi Kutusu 2. Birbiriyle ilişkili olanlar birbiri ardına koyularak 3. Projeler için ayrı bir klasör'de (bitince arşive kalıcı olarak yerleşmek üzere) 4. Sabit bir format ve şekil ile 5. Sabit bir süreçten geçerek: Önce geçici, sonra kalıcı (kaynaklar ikinci gruba giderek vs) - bu süreçten geçirmek kullanıcıyı rahatlatıyor --- Luhmann [[Zettelkasten]] metoduyla yarattığı dış (ikinci) beynin nasıl işlediğini ve içindeki kategorizasyonu nasıl planladığını [Communicating with Slip Boxes by Niklas Luhmann](https://luhmann.surge.sh/communicating-with-slip-boxes) makalesinde anlatıyor Kategorizasyonla ilgili önemli gördüğüm kısmı alıntılıyorum: >For the inner life of the card index, for the arrangement of notes or its mental history, it is most important that we decide against the systematic ordering in accordance with topics and sub-topics and choose instead a firm fixed place (Stellordnung). A system based on content, like the outline of a book would mean that we make a decision that would bind us to a certain order for decades in advance! This necessarily leads very quickly to problems of placement, if we consider the system of communication and ourselves as capable of development. The fixed filing place needs no system. It is sufficient that we give every slip a number which is easily seen (in or case on the left of the first line) and that we never change this number and thus the fixed place of the slip. This decision about structure is that reduction of the complexity of possible arrangements, which makes possible the creation of high complexity in the card file and thus makes possible its ability to communicate in the first place. > Fixed numbers, abstracted from any content-based order relying on the entire structure has a number of advantages which, taken together, enable us to reach a higher type of order. These advantages are: > 1. The possibility of arbitrary internal branching. We do not need to add notes at the end, but we can connect them anywhere—even to a particular word in the middle of a continuous text. A slip with number 57/12 can then be continued with 57/13, etc. At the same time it can be supplemented at a certain word or thought by 57/12a or 57/12b, etc. Internally, this slip can be complemented by 57/12a1, etc. On the page itself I use red letters or numbers in order to mark the place of connection. There can be several places of connection on a slip. In this way, a kind of internal growth (Wachstum nach innen) is made possible, depending on what kind of material for thought occurs. The disadvantage is that the originally continuous text is often broken up by hundreds of intermediate slips. But if we systematically number the papers, we can find the original textual whole easily. > 2. Possibility of linking (Verweisungsmöglichkeiten). Since all papers have fixed numbers, you can add as many references to them as you may want. Central concepts can have many links which show on which other contexts we can find materials relevant for them. Through references, we can, without too work or paper, solve the problem of multiple storage. Given this technique, it is less important where we place a new note. If there are several possibilities, we can solve the problem as we wish and just record the connection by a link [or reference]. Often the context in which we are working suggests a multiplicity of links to other notes. This is especially the case when the card index is already voluminous. In such cases it is important to capture the connections radially, as it were, but at the same time also by right away recording back links in the slips that are being linked to. In this working procedure, the content that we take note of is usually also enriched. > 3. Register. Considering the absence of a systematic order, we must regulate the process of rediscovery of notes, for we cannot rely on our memory of numbers. (The alternation of numbers and alphabetic characters in numbering the slips helps memory and is an optical aid when we search for them, but it is insufficient. Therefore we need a register of keywords that we constantly update. The [fixed] numbers of the particular slips is also indispensable for the register. Another complementary aid can be the bibliographical apparatus. Bibliographical notes which we extract from the literature, should be captured inside the card index. Books, articles, etc., which we have actually read, should be put on a separate slip with bibliographical information in a separate box. You will then not only be able to determine after some time what you actually read and what you only noted to prepare reading, but you can also add numbered links to the notes, which are based on this work or were suggested by it. This proves to be helpful because our own memory—others will have similar experiences to mine—works in part with key words and in part with author’s names. > As a result of extensive work with this technique a kind of secondary memory will arise, an alter ego with who we can constantly communicate. It proves to be similar to our own memory in that it does not have a thoroughly constructed order of its entirety, not hierarchy, and most certainly no linear structure like a book. Just because of this, it gets its own life, independent of its author. The entirety of these notes can only be described as a disorder, but at the very least it is a disorder with non-arbitrary internal structure. Some things will get lost (versickern), some notes we will never see again. On the other hand, there will be preferred centers, formation of lumps and regions with which we will work more often than with others. There will be complexes of ideas that are conceived at large, but which will never be completed; there will be incidental ideas which started as links from secondary passages and which are continuously enriched and expand so that they will tend increasingly to dominate system. To sum up: this technique guarantees that its order which is merely formal does not become a hindrance but adapts to the conceptual development. > Similarly as epistemology has given up the idea that there are “privileged representations” that allow us to control the truth value of other representations or claims, we must give up the idea in preparing a card index that there should be privileged places or slips that have a special quality of guaranteeing knowledge. Every note is only an element which receives its quality only from the network of links and back-links within the system. A note that is not connected to this network will get lost in the card file and ill be forgotten by it. Its rediscovery depends on accidents and on the vagary that this rediscovery means something at the time it is found.