a table I often use in talks and which gives you an overview of the

main differences between this approach and the traditional way of

A lot has happened since this book was first published in 2017. Most
importantly: it found its audience. I discovered to my delight that I
was not alone in finding the interconnected, decentralized, bottom-up
approach of the Zettelkasten much more natural to work with than
the linear, top-down approaches most of us learned in school and
which are still baked into the majority of writing and note-taking tools.
Now, four years later, after the rise of a new generation of digital
tools that enable bi-directional linking and the establishment of a
growing community of note-taking enthusiasts, the idea of the
Zettelkasten has spread across disciplines, professions and
language borders.
With the rapidly changing landscape of available tools, I decided
to keep the book as tool-agnostic as possible and stick with the
example of Luhmann’s paper-based Zettelkasten. Software can
make things considerably easier and it is exciting to explore their
features. But it also brings the risk of losing sight of what is most
important and drawing us into a game of catch-up with the latest
development. Books on note-taking have a different life cycle and
should focus on the more timeless aspects of the topic – that’s their
advantage.
The audiobook and most of the translations are already based
on this revised edition of 2022, which you hold in your hand. There
are a few changes compared to the original 2017 edition. Firstly, I
corrected a few mistakes some observant readers pointed out to me.
In one case, I had a metaphor from chemistry wrong; in the other
case, I embarrassingly repeated a story about pencils in space
without realizing that it was debunked as an urban myth long ago.
Thanks to everyone who wrote to me kindly and pointed that out!
Along with some typos, there is actually a third small factual mistake
I corrected, but as nobody has noticed it yet, let’s pretend there was
none. Secondly, I added a small appendix, which I hope will give you
a better idea of what Luhmann’s Zettelkasten looked like and what is
crucial to keep in mind when we use digital tools. The last addition is
 smallest part of its development. This book aims to fill this gap by
showing you how to efficiently turn your thoughts and discoveries
INTRODUCTION into convincing written pieces and build up a treasure of smart and
interconnected notes along the way. You can use this pool of notes
Everybody writes. Especially in academia. Students write and not only to make writing easier and more fun for yourself, but also to
professors write. And nonfiction writers, who are the third group of learn for the long run and generate new ideas. But most of all, you
people this book is aiming to help, obviously write as well. And can write every day in a way that brings your projects forward.
writing doesn’t necessarily mean papers, articles or books, but Writing is not what follows research, learning or studying, it is
everyday, basic writing. We write when we need to remember the medium of all this work. And maybe that is the reason why we
something, be it an idea, a quote or the outcome of a study. We write rarely think about this writing, the everyday writing, the note-taking
when we want to organise our thoughts and when we want to and draft-making. Like breathing, it is vital to what we do, but
exchange ideas with others. Students write when they take an exam, because we do it constantly, it escapes our attention. But while even
but the first thing they do to prepare even for an oral examination is the best breathing technique would probably not make much of a
to grab pen and paper. We write down not only those things we fear difference to our writing, any improvement in the way we organise
we won’t remember otherwise, but also the very things we try to the everyday writing, how we take notes of what we encounter and
memorise. Every intellectual endeavour starts with a note. what we do with them, will make all the difference for the moment we
Writing plays such a central role in learning, studying and do face the blank page/screen – or rather not, as those who take
research that it is surprising how little we think about it. If writing is smart notes will never have the problem of a blank screen again.
discussed, the focus lies almost always on the few exceptional There is another reason that note-taking flies mostly under the
moments where we write a lengthy piece, a book, an article or, as radar: We don’t experience any immediate negative feedback if we
students, the essays and theses we have to hand in. At first glance, do it badly. But without an immediate experience of failure, there is
that makes sense: these are the tasks that cause the most anxiety also not much demand for help. And the publishing market working
and with which we struggle the longest. Consequently, these “written how it works, there is not much help in supply for this lack of demand
pieces” are also what most self-help books for academics or study either. It is the panic in front of the blank screen that brings students
guides focus on, but very few give guidance for the everyday note- and academic writers to turn to the bookshelves full of self-help
taking that takes up the biggest chunk of our writing. books on writing, a market publishers meet in droves by focusing on
The available books fall roughly into two categories. The first how to deal with this horse-has-already-left-the-barn situation. If we
teaches the formal requirements: style, structure or how to quote take notes unsystematically, inefficiently or simply wrong, we might
correctly. And then there are the psychological ones, which teach not even realise it until we are in the midst of a deadline panic and
you how to get it done without mental breakdowns and before your wonder why there always seem to be a few who get a lot of good
supervisor or publisher starts refusing to move the deadline once writing done and still have time for a coffee every time we ask them.
more. What they all have in common, though, is that they start with a And even then, it is more likely that some form of rationalization will
blank screen or sheet of paper. But by doing this, they ignore the cloud the view of the actual reason, which is most likely the
main part, namely note-taking, failing to understand that improving difference between good and bad note-taking. “Some people are just
the organisation of all writing makes a difference. They seem to like that,” “writing has to be difficult,” “the struggle is part of the deal”
forget that the process of writing starts much, much earlier than that are just a few of the mantras that keep too many from inquiring what
blank screen and that the actual writing down of the argument is the
exactly distinguishes successful writing strategies from less make a significant difference along the whole intelligence spectrum
successful ones. is something else: how much self-discipline or self-control one uses
The right question is: What can we do differently in the weeks, to approach the tasks at hand (Duckworth and Seligman, 2005;
months or even years before we face the blank page that will get us Tangney, Baumeister, and Boone, 2004).
into the best possible position to write a great paper easily? Very few It is not so important who you are, but what you do. Doing the
people struggle with their papers because they don’t know how to work required and doing it in a smart way leads, somehow
cite correctly or because they suffer from a psychological issue that unsurprisingly, to success. At first glance, this is both good and bad
keeps them from writing. Few struggle to text their friends or write news. The good news is that we wouldn’t be able to do much about
emails. The rules of citation can be looked up and there is no way our IQ anyway, while it seems to be within our control to have more
that there are as many mental issues as papers postponed. Most self-discipline with a little bit of willpower. The bad news is that we do
people struggle for much more mundane reasons, and one is the not have this kind of control over ourselves. Self-discipline or self-
myth of the blank page itself. They struggle because they believe, as control is not that easy to achieve with willpower alone. Willpower is,
they are made to believe, that writing starts with a blank page. If you as far as we know today,1 a limited resource that depletes quickly
believe that you have indeed nothing at hand to fill it, you have a and is also not that much up for improvement over the long term
very good reason to panic. Just having it all in your head is not (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, and Tice, 1998; Muraven, Tice,
enough, as getting it down on paper is the hard bit. That is why and Baumeister, 1998; Schmeichel, Vohs, and Baumeister, 2003;
good, productive writing is based on good note-taking. Getting Moller, 2006). And who would want to flog oneself to work, anyway?
something that is already written into another written piece is Luckily, this is not the whole story. We know today that self-
incomparably easier than assembling everything in your mind and control and self-discipline have much more to do with our
then trying to retrieve it from there. environment than with ourselves (cf. Thaler, 2015, ch. 2) – and the
To sum it up: The quality of a paper and the ease with which it is environment can be changed. Nobody needs willpower not to eat a
written depends more than anything on what you have done in chocolate bar when there isn’t one around. And nobody needs
writing before you even made a decision on the topic. But if that is willpower to do something they wanted to do anyway. Every task that
true (and I wholeheartedly believe it is), and the key to successful is interesting, meaningful and well-defined will be done, because
writing lies in the preparation, it also means that the vast majority of there is no conflict between long-and short-term interests. Having a
self-help books and study guides can only help you to close the barn meaningful and well-defined task beats willpower every time. Not
door correctly and according to official rules – not just a moment, but having willpower, but not having to use willpower indicates that you
many months after the horse has already escaped. set yourself up for success. This is where the organisation of writing
With that in mind, it is not surprising that the single most and note-taking comes into play.
important indicator of academic success is not to be found in
people’s heads, but in the way they do their everyday work. In fact, 1 Everything You Need to Know
there is no measurable correlation between a high IQ and academic
success – at least not north of 120. Yes, a certain intellectual Until now, writing and note-taking techniques were usually taught
capacity helps to get into academia, and if you struggle severely with without much regard to the overarching workflow. This book aims to
an IQ test, it is likely that you will struggle to solve academic change that. It will present you with the tools of note-taking that
problems, too. But once you are in, a superior IQ will neither help turned the son of a brewer into one of the most productive and
you to distinguish yourself nor protect you from failure. What does revered social scientists of the 20th century. But moreover, it
describes how he implemented them into his workflow so he could insight, which, by definition, cannot be anticipated? It is a huge
honestly say: “I never force myself to do anything I don’t feel like. misunderstanding that the only alternative to planning is aimless
Whenever I am stuck, I do something else.” A good structure allows messing around. The challenge is to structure one’s workflow in a
you to do that, to move seamlessly from one task to another – way that insight and new ideas can become the driving forces that
without threatening the whole arrangement or losing sight of the push us forward. We do not want to make ourselves dependent on a
bigger picture. plan that is threatened by the unexpected, like a new idea, discovery
A good structure is something you can trust. It relieves you from – or insight.
the burden of remembering and keeping track of everything. If you Unfortunately, even universities try to turn students into
can trust the system, you can let go of the attempt to hold everything planners. Sure, planning will get you through your exams if you stick
together in your head and you can start focusing on what is to them and push through. But it will not make you an expert in the
important: The content, the argument and the ideas. By breaking art of learning/writing/note-taking (there is research on that: cf.
down the amorphous task of “writing a paper” into small and clearly Chapter 1.3). Planners are also unlikely to continue with their studies
separated tasks, you can focus on one thing at a time, complete after they finish their examinations. They are rather glad it is over.
each in one go and move on to the next one (Chapter 3.1). A good Experts, on the other hand, would not even consider voluntarily
structure enables flow, the state in which you get so completely giving up what has already proved to be rewarding and fun: learning
immersed in your work that you lose track of time and can just keep in a way that generates real insight, is accumulative and sparks new
on going as the work becomes effortless (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975). ideas. The fact that you invested in this book tells me that you would
Something like that does not happen by chance. rather be an expert than a planner.
As students, researchers and nonfiction writers, we have so And if you are a student seeking help with your writing, the
much more freedom than others to choose what we want to spend chances are that you already aim high too, because it is usually the
our time on. Still, we often struggle the most with procrastination and best students who struggle the most. Good students wrestle with
motivation. It is certainly not the lack of interesting topics, but rather their sentences because they care about finding the right expression.
the employment of problematic work routines that seems to take It takes them longer to find a good idea to write about because they
charge of us instead of allowing us to steer the process in the right know from experience that the first idea is rarely that great and good
direction. A good, structured workflow puts us back in charge and questions do not fall into their laps. They spend more time in the
increases our freedom to do the right thing at the right time. library to get a better overview of the literature, which leads to more
Having a clear structure to work in is completely different from reading, which means that they have to juggle more information.
making plans about something. If you make a plan, you impose a Having read more does not automatically mean having more ideas.
structure on yourself; it makes you inflexible. To keep going Especially in the beginning, it means having fewer ideas to work
according to plan, you have to push yourself and employ willpower. with, because you know that others have already thought of most of
This is not only demotivating, but also unsuitable for an open-ended them.
process like research, thinking or studying in general, where we Good students also look beyond the obvious. They peek over
have to adjust our next steps with every new insight, understanding the fences of their own disciplines – and once you have done that,
or achievement – which we ideally have on a regular basis and not you cannot go back and do what everyone else is doing, even if you
just as an exception. Even though planning is often at odds with the now must deal with heterogeneous ideas that come without a
very idea of research and learning, it is the mantra of most study manual on how they might fit together. All that means is that a
guides and self-help books on academic writing. How do you plan for system is needed to keep track of the ever-increasing pool of
information, which allows one to combine different ideas in an There is no need to build a complex system and there is no need to
intelligent way with the aim of generating new ideas. reorganise everything you already have. You can start working and
Poor students do not have any of these problems. As long as developing ideas immediately by taking smart notes.
they stick within the boundaries of their discipline and read only as Complexity is an issue, though. Even if you don’t aim to develop
much as they are told to (or less), no serious external system is a grand theory and just want to keep track of what you read,
required and writing can be done by sticking with the usual formulas organise your notes and develop your thoughts, you will have to deal
of “how to write a scientific paper.” In fact, poor students often feel with an increasingly complex body of content, especially because it
more successful (until they are tested), because they don’t is not just about collecting thoughts, but about making connections
experience much self-doubt. In psychology, this is known as the and sparking new ideas. Most people try to reduce complexity by
Dunning-Kruger effect (Kruger and Dunning, 1999). Poor students separating what they have into smaller stacks, piles or separate
lack insight into their own limitations – as they would have to know folders. They sort their notes by topics and sub-topics, which makes
about the vast amount of knowledge out there to be able to see how it look less complex, but quickly becomes very complicated. Plus, it
little they know in comparison. That means that those who are not reduces the likelihood of building and finding surprising connections
very good at something tend to be overly confident, while those who between the notes themselves, which means a trade-off between its
have made an effort tend to underestimate their abilities. Poor usability and usefulness.
students also have no trouble finding a question to write about: they Thankfully, we don’t have to choose between usability and
lack neither opinions nor the confidence that they have already usefulness. Quite the contrary. The best way to deal with complexity
thought them through. They also won’t have trouble finding is to keep things as simple as possible and to follow a few basic
confirming evidence in the literature, as they usually lack both principles. The simplicity of the structure allows complexity to build
interest and skill to detect and think through disconfirming facts and up where we want it: on the content level. There is quite extensive
arguments. empirical and logical research on this phenomenon (for an overview:
cf. Sull and Eisenhardt, 2015). Taking smart notes is as simple as it
Good students, on the other hand, constantly raise the bar for gets.
themselves as they focus on what they haven’t learned and
mastered yet. This is why high achievers who have had a taste of Another item of good news regards the amount of time and effort you
the vast amount of knowledge out there are likely to suffer from what have to put into getting started. Even though you will change
psychologists call imposter syndrome, the feeling that you are not considerably the way you read, take notes and write, there is almost
really up to the job, even though, of all people, they are (Clance and no preparation time needed (except for understanding the principle
Imes 1978; Brems et al. 1994). This book is for you, the good and installing one or two programs, if you go digital). It is not about
students, ambitious academics and knowledge workers who redoing what you have done before, but about changing the way of
understand that insight doesn’t come easy and that writing is not working from now on. There is really no need to reorganise anything
only for proclaiming opinions, but the main tool to achieve insight you already have. Just deal with things differently the moment you
worth sharing. have to deal with them anyway.
There is more good news. There is no need to reinvent the
1.1 Good Solutions are Simple – and Unexpected wheel. We only need to combine two well-known and proven ideas.
The first idea lies at the heart of this book and is the technique of the
simple slip-box. I will explain the principle of this system in the next
chapter and show how it can be implemented in the everyday work right in front of us without getting distracted by competing
routines of students, academics or other knowledge workers. thoughts. The principle is simple but holistic. It is not a quick fix or a
Thankfully, there are digital tools for all major operating systems fancy tool. It doesn’t do the work for you. But it does provide a
available that will help you to implement it, but if you prefer, you can structure for our everyday work that deals with the fact that most
also use pen and paper. In terms of productivity and ease, you will distractions do not come so much from our environment, but our own
still easily surpass those who are taking not-so-smart notes. minds.
The second idea is equally important. Even the best tool will not Unfortunately, Allen’s technique cannot simply be transferred to
improve your productivity considerably if you don’t change your daily the task of insightful writing. The first reason is that GTD relies on
routines the tool is embedded in, just as the fastest car won’t help clearly defined objectives, whereas insight cannot be predetermined
you much if you don’t have proper roads to drive it on. Like every by definition. We usually start with rather vague ideas that are bound
change in behaviour, a change in working habits means going to change until they become clearer in the course of our research (cf.
through a phase where you are drawn back to your old ways. The Ahrens, 2014, 134f.). Writing that aims at insight must therefore be
new way of working might feel artificial at first and not necessarily organised in a much more open manner. The other reason is that
like what you intuitively would do. That is normal. But as soon as you GTD requires projects to be broken down into smaller, concrete “next
get used to taking smart notes, it will feel so much more natural that steps.” Of course, insightful writing or academic work is also done
you will wonder how you were ever able to get anything done before. one step at a time, but these are most often too small to be worth
Routines require simple, repeatable tasks that can become writing down (looking up a footnote, rereading a chapter, writing a
automatic and fit together seamlessly (cf. Mata, Todd, and Lippke, paragraph) or too grand to be finished in one go. It is also difficult to
2010). Only when all the related work becomes part of an anticipate which step has to be taken after the next one. You might
overarching and interlocked process, where all bottlenecks are notice a footnote, which you quickly check on. You try to understand
removed, can significant change take place (which is why none of a paragraph and need to look up something for clarification. You
the typical “10 mind-blowing tools to improve your productivity” tips make a note, go back to reading and then jump up to write down a
you can find all over the internet will ever be of much help). sentence that formed itself in your mind.

The importance of an overarching workflow is the great insight of Writing is not a linear process. We constantly have to jump back and
David Allen’s “Getting Things Done” (Allen, 2001). There are few forth between different tasks. It wouldn’t make any sense to
serious knowledge workers left who haven’t heard of “GTD” and that micromanage ourselves on that level. Zooming out to the bigger
is for a good reason: It works. The principle of GTD is to collect picture does not really help, either, because then we have next steps
everything that needs to be taken care of in one place and process it like “writing a page.” That does not really help with navigating the
in a standardised way. This doesn’t necessarily mean that we things you have to do to write a page, often a whole bunch of other
actually do everything we once intended to do, but it forces us to things that can take an hour or a month. One has to navigate mostly
make clear choices and regularly check if our tasks still fit into the by sight. These are probably the reasons why GTD never really
bigger picture. Only if we know that everything is taken care of, from caught on in academia, although it is very successful in business
the important to the trivial, can we let go and focus on what is right in and has a good reputation among the self-employed.
front of us. Only if nothing else is lingering in our working memory What we can take from Allen as an important insight is that the
and taking up valuable mental resources can we experience what secret to a successful organization lies in the holistic perspective.
Allen calls a “mind like water” - the state where we can focus on the Everything needs to be taken care of, otherwise the neglected bits
will nag us until the unimportant tasks become urgent. Even the best notes to existing categories or the respective texts, he wrote them all
tools won’t make much of a difference if they are used in isolation. on small pieces of paper, put a number in the corner and collected
Only if they are embedded in a well-conceived working process can them in one place: the slip-box.
the tools play out their strengths. There is no point in having great He soon developed new categories of these notes. He realised
tools if they don’t fit together. that one idea, one note was only as valuable as its context, which
When it comes to writing, everything, from research to was not necessarily the context it was taken from. So he started to
proofreading, is closely connected. All the little steps must be linked think about how one idea could relate and contribute to different
in a way that will enable you to go seamlessly from one task to contexts. Just amassing notes in one place would not lead to
another, but still be kept separate enough to enable us to flexibly do anything other than a mass of notes. But he collected his notes in his
what needs to be done in any given situation. And this is the other slip-box in such a way that the collection became much more than
insight of Allen: Only if you can trust your system, only if you really the sum of its parts. His slip-box became his dialogue partner, main
know that everything will be taken care of, will your brain let go and idea generator and productivity engine. It helped him to structure and
let you focus on the task at hand. develop his thoughts. And it was fun to work with – because it
That is why we need a note-taking system that is as worked.
comprehensive as GTD, but one that is suitable for the open-ended And it led him to enter academia. One day, he put some of these
process of writing, learning and thinking. Enter the slip-box. thoughts together into a manuscript and handed it over to Helmut
Schelsky, one of the most influential sociologists in Germany.
1.2 The Slip-box Schelsky took it home, read what this academic outsider had written
and contacted Luhmann. He suggested that he should become a
It is the 1960s, somewhere in Germany. Among the staff of an professor of sociology in the newly founded University of Bielefeld.
administration office is the son of a brewer. His name is Niklas As attractive and prestigious as this position was, Luhmann wasn’t a
Luhmann. He went to law school, but he has chosen to be a public sociologist. He didn’t have the formal qualifications required even to
servant, as he did not like the idea of having to work for multiple become an assistant for a sociology professor in Germany. He
clients. Fully aware he is also not suited for a career in hadn’t written a habilitation, the highest academic qualification in
administration, as it involves a lot of socializing, he excuses himself many European countries, which is based on the second book after
every day after his 9-5 shift and goes home to do what he liked most: the doctoral thesis. He had never held a doctorate or even obtained
reading and following his diverse interests in philosophy, a sociology degree. Most people would take the offer as a huge
organizational theory and sociology. compliment, but point out the impossibility of it and move on.
Whenever he encountered something remarkable or had a Not Luhmann. He turned to his slip-box, and with its help he
thought about what he read, he made a note. Now, many people obtained all requirements in less than a year. He was chosen to
read in the evening and follow their interests, and some even take become professor of sociology at the Bielefeld University shortly
notes. But for very few is it the path to something as extraordinary as after, in 1968 – a position he would hold for the rest of his life.
Luhmann’s career.
In Germany, a professor traditionally starts with a public lecture
After collecting notes for a while in the way most people do, presenting his or her projects, and Luhmann, too, was asked what
commenting in the margins of a text or collecting handwritten notes his main research project would be. His answer would become
by topic, Luhmann realised his note-taking was not leading famous. He laconically stated: “My project: theory of society.
anywhere. So he turned note-taking on its head. Instead of adding
Duration: 30 years. Costs: zero” (Luhmann, 1997, 11). In sociology, a that extraordinary considering he had to raise three children on his
“theory of society” is the mother of all projects. own after his wife died early. Five warm meals a week, of course, do
When he finished the final chapter, almost exactly 29 and a half not explain the production of roughly 60 influential books and
years later, as a two-volume book with the title “The Society of countless articles.
Society” (1997), it stirred up the scientific community.2 It was a After doing extensive research on Luhmann’s workflow, the
radical new theory that not only changed sociology, but stirred German sociologist Johannes F.K. Schmidt concluded his
heated discussions in philosophy, education, political theory and productivity could only be explained by his unique working technique
psychology as well. Not everyone was able to follow the discussions, (Schmidt 2013, 168). That technique has never been a secret –
though. What he did was unusually sophisticated, very different and Luhmann was always open about it. He regularly mentioned the slip-
highly complex. The chapters were published individually, each book box as the reason for his productivity. From as early as 1985, his
discussing one social system. He wrote on law, politics, the standard answer to the question of how anyone could be so
economy, communication, art, education, epistemology – and even productive was: “I, of course, do not think everything by myself. It
love. happens mainly within the slip-box” (Luhmann, Baecker, and
In 30 years, he published 58 books and hundreds of articles, Stanitzek 1987, 142). But few gave the slip-box and the way he
translations not included. Many became classics in their respective worked with it a closer look, dismissing his explanation as the
fields. Even after his death, about half a dozen more books on modest understatement of a genius.
diverse subjects like religion, education and politics were published His productivity is, of course, impressive. But what is even more
in his name – based on almost finished manuscripts lying around in impressive than the sheer number of publications or the outstanding
his office. There are more than a few colleagues I know who would quality of his writing is the fact that he seemed to achieve all this with
give a lot to be as productive in their whole lifetime as Luhmann was almost no real effort. He not only stressed that he never forced
after his death. himself to do something he didn’t feel like, he even said: “I only do
While some career-oriented academics try to squeeze as many what is easy. I only write when I immediately know how to do it. If I
publications out of one idea as possible, Luhmann seemed to do the falter for a moment, I put the matter aside and do something else.”
opposite. He constantly generated more ideas than he was able to (Luhmann et al., 1987, 154f.)3
write down. His texts read as if he is trying to squeeze as much Until recently, almost no one really seemed to believe it. We are
insight and as many ideas as possible into one publication. still so used to the idea that a great outcome requires great effort
When he was asked if he missed anything in his life, he that we tend not to believe that a simple change in our work routines
famously answered: “If I want something, it’s more time. The only could not only make us more productive, but the work also more fun.
thing that really is a nuisance is the lack of time.” (Luhmann, But doesn’t it make much more sense that the impressive body of
Baecker, and Stanitzek, 1987, 139) And while some academics let work was produced not in spite of the fact that he never made
their assistants do the main work or have a team that is writing the himself do anything he didn’t feel like, but because of it? Even hard
papers to which they add their names, Luhmann rarely had any work can be fun as long as it is aligned with our intrinsic goals and
assistance at all. The last assistant who worked for him swore blind we feel in control. The problems arise when we set up our work in
that the only help he was able to give was to spot a few typos in his such an inflexible way that we can’t adjust it when things change and
manuscripts here and there. Luhmann’s only real help was a become arrested in a process that seems to develop a life of its own.
housekeeper who cooked for him and his children on weekdays, not
 The best way to maintain the feeling of being in control is to stay As far as the technology is concerned, there is no secret. It has
in control. And to stay in control, it's better to keep your options open all been in the open for more than three decades now. So why is not
during the writing process rather than limit yourself to your first idea. everybody using a slip-box and working effortlessly towards
It is in the nature of writing, especially insight-oriented writing, that success? Is it because it is too complicated? Certainly not. It is
questions change, the material we work with turns out to be very rather surprisingly simple. The reasons are much more mundane:
different from the one imagined or that new ideas emerge, which
might change our whole perspective on what we do. Only if the work 1. Until very recently, when the first results from the research on the
is set up in a way that is flexible enough to allow these small and file system were published, some crucial misunderstandings
constant adjustments can we keep our interest, motivation and work prevailed about how Luhmann actually worked, which led to
aligned – which is the precondition to effortless or almost effortless disappointing results for many who tried to emulate the system.
work. The main misunderstanding stems from an isolated focus on the
Luhmann was able to focus on the important things right in front slip-box and a neglect of the actual workflow in which it is
of him, pick up quickly where he left off and stay in control of the embedded.
process because the structure of his work allowed him to do this. If 2. Almost everything that is published about this system was only
we work in an environment that is flexible enough to accommodate accessible in German and was almost exclusively discussed within
our work rhythm, we don’t need to struggle with resistance. Studies a small group of devoted sociologists who specialised in
on highly successful people have proven again and again that Luhmann’s theory of social systems – hardly the kind of critical
success is not the result of strong willpower and the ability to mass that would draw much attention.
overcome resistance, but rather the result of smart working 3. The third and maybe the most important reason is the very fact
environments that avoid resistance in the first place (cf. Neal et al. that it is simple. Intuitively, most people do not expect much from
2012; Painter et al. 2002; Hearn et al. 1998). Instead of struggling simple ideas. They rather assume that impressive results must
with adverse dynamics, highly productive people deflect resistance, have equally impressively complicated means.
very much like judo champions. This is not just about having the right
mindset, it is also about having the right workflow. It is the way The contemporaries of Henry Ford did not understand why
Luhmann and his slip-box worked together that allowed him to move something as simple as the conveyor belt should be that
freely and flexibly between different tasks and levels of thinking. It is revolutionary. What difference does it make to let the cars move from
about having the right tools and knowing how to use them – and very worker to worker instead of letting the workers walk from car to car? I
few understand that you need both. would not be surprised if some of them even thought of Ford as a bit
People still search for Luhmann’s “secret,” putting down his simpleminded and overly enthusiastic about a rather minor change in
remarkable output to him being a genius or even thinking they only work organization. It is only in hindsight that the scale of the
need his slip-box and they would be set. Sure, you need to be smart advantages of this small tweak became obvious to everyone. I
to be successful in academia and writing, but if you don’t have an wonder how long it will take until the advantages of Luhmann’s slip-
external system to think in and organise your thoughts, ideas and box and work routines become equally obvious to everyone. But by
collected facts, or have no idea how to embed it in your overarching then, everyone will already have known it all along the way.
daily routines, the disadvantage is so enormous that it just can’t be Whatever the reasons were: The word is out now and it has
compensated by a high IQ. spread fast.
1.3 The slip-box manual possible. Writing that an author struggles in one chapter to justify his
method can be a much more adequate description of this chapter’s
How does the slip-box, the heart of this system, work?
content than any quote from the text itself (this would call for an
Strictly speaking, Luhmann had two slip-boxes: a bibliographical explanation, of course).
one, which contained the references and brief notes on the content
The trick is that he did not organise his notes by topic, but in the
of the literature, and the main one in which he collected and
rather abstract way of giving them fixed numbers. The numbers bore
generated his ideas, mainly in response to what he read. The notes
no meaning and were only there to identify each note permanently. If
were written on index cards and stored in wooden boxes.
a new note was relevant or directly referred to an already existing
Whenever he read something, he would write the bibliographic note, such as a comment, correction or addition, he added it directly
information on one side of a card and make brief notes about the behind the previous note. If the existing note had the number 22, the
content on the other side (Schmidt 2013, 170). These notes would new note would become note number 23. If 23 already existed, he
end up in the bibliographic slip-box. named the new note 22a. By alternating numbers and letters, with
some slashes and commas in between, he was able to branch out
In a second step, shortly after, he would look at his brief notes and
into as many strings of thought as he liked. For example, a note
think about their relevance for his own thinking and writing. He then
about causality and systems theory carried the number 21/3d7a7
would turn to the main slip-box and write his ideas, comments and
following a note with the number 21/3d7a6 (cf. appendix).
thoughts on new pieces of paper, using only one for each idea and
restricting himself to one side of the paper, to make it easier to read Whenever he added a note, he checked his slip-box for other
them later without having to take them out of the box. He usually relevant notes to make possible connections between them. Adding
kept them brief enough to make one idea fit on a single sheet, but a note directly behind another note is only one way of doing this.
would sometimes add another note to extend a thought. Another way is by adding a link on this and/or the other note, which
could be anywhere in the system. This very much resembles, of
He usually wrote his notes with an eye towards already existing
course, the way we use hyperlinks on the internet. But, as I will
notes in the slip-box. And while the notes on the literature were brief,
explain later, they are quite different and it would be rather
he wrote them with great care, not much different from his style in
misleading to think of his slip-box as a personal Wikipedia or a
the final manuscript: in full sentences and with explicit references to
database on paper. The similarities are obviously there, but the
the literature from which he drew his material. More often than not, a
subtle differences are what makes this system unique.
new note would directly follow up on another note and would
become part of a longer chain of notes. He then would add By adding these links between notes, Luhmann was able to add
references to notes somewhere else in the slip-box, some of which the same note to different contexts. While other systems start with a
were nearby, others in completely different areas and contexts. preconceived order of topics, Luhmann developed topics bottom up.
Some were directly related and read more like comments, others He would then add another note to his slip-box, on which he would
contained not-so-obvious connections. Rarely would a note stay in sort a topic by sorting the links of the relevant other notes.
isolation. The last element in his file system was an index, from which he
He did not just copy ideas or quotes from the texts he read, but would refer to one or two notes that would serve as a kind of entry
made a transition from one context to another. It was very much like point into a line of thought or topic. Notes with a sorted collection of
a translation where you use different words that fit a different links are, of course, good entry points.
context, but strive to keep the original meaning as truthfully as
 That’s it. Actually, it is even simpler than this, as we now have that), no worries about finding things and coming up with ideas
software that makes it much easier: we don’t need to manually add (someone else already took care of that), you just focus on turning a
numbers on notes or cut out paper as Luhmann had to.4 string of ideas into a continuous text. Again, that is still serious work
Now that you know how the slip-box works, you only need to and you have to put some effort into it, if you want to make it great.
understand how to work with it. And the best way to understand this You might spot a missing step in an argument and have to fill it, or
is to understand a little bit about the way we think, learn and develop you might want to rearrange some notes or leave something out that
ideas. And if I were forced to boil it down to a single bullet point, it you regard as less relevant. But, again, this is not an overwhelming
would be this: We need a reliable and simple external structure to task and luckily, it doesn’t need to be perfect. No problem so far.
think in that compensates for the limitations of our brains. But first, Equally manageable is the task of bringing already existing
let me guide you through the process of writing a paper with the slip- notes into order, especially if half of them already are in order.
box. Searching through a file system with strings of discussions, plenty of
material and ideas is, believe it or not, fun. It does not require the
kind of focused attention you would need to formulate a sentence or
2 Everything You Need to Do to understand a difficult text. Your attention is rather at ease and it
Imagine you do not start with a clean sheet. Imagine instead some even helps to have a playful mindset. Only with a less narrow focus
friendly genie (or well-paid personal assistant – whatever is more will you be able to see connections and patterns. You see clearly
likely for you to have available) prepared a rough draft of your paper where long strings of discussions have already been built up – this is
for you. It is already a fully developed argument including all a good starting point. If you do look for specific notes, you have an
references, quotes and some really smart ideas. The only thing left index to turn to. No problem at all so far.
to do is to revise this rough draft and send it off. Make no mistake: At this point, it should become clear that you don’t need to wait
there is still work to do and it is more than just finding some typos. for a genie to appear, as each step is clearly not only within your
Editing is work that needs focus. You have to rephrase some abilities, but also straightforward and well-defined: Assemble notes
sentences, delete one or two redundancies and maybe add a couple and bring them into order, turn these notes into a draft, review it and
of sentences or even passages to fill some holes left in the you are done.
argument. But at the same time, it is a well-defined task: nothing that
couldn’t be done within a few days and certainly nothing you would Now, that’s all well and good, you might say, but what about
have trouble motivating yourself to do. Everybody is motivated when writing these notes? Obviously, it is easy to write a paper if the main
the finish line is within reach. No problem so far. part of the writing is already done and only needs to be turned into a
linear text. But isn’t that a little bit like saying: If you are short of
Imagine now you are not the one who has to edit the rough draft money, just take what you need out of your piggy bank? Everyone
and turn it into the final paper, but the one who has to prepare it. can make things look easy by leaving out the main part. So, where is
What would be helpful to achieve that quickly? It would certainly the genie for that?
make things a lot easier if you already had everything you need right
in front of you: The ideas, the arguments, the quotes, long developed Granted, writing these notes is the main work. It will take
passages, complete with bibliography and references. And not just enormous amounts of effort, time, patience and willpower, and you
readily available, but already in order, sorted by chapters that have will probably break under the weight of this task. Just kidding. It is
descriptive headlines. Now that’s also a clear assignment. No the easiest part of all. Writing these notes is also not the main work.
worries about perfect sentences (someone else will take care of Thinking is. Reading is. Understanding and coming up with ideas is.
And this is how it is supposed to be. The notes are just the tangible 2.1 Writing a paper step by step
outcome of it. All you have to do is to have a pen in your hand while
you are doing what you are doing anyway (or a keyboard under your 1. Make fleeting notes. Always have something at hand to write with
fingers). Writing notes accompanies the main work and, done right, it to capture every idea that pops into your mind. Don’t worry too
helps with it. much about how you write it down or what you write it on. These
are fleeting notes, mere reminders of what is in your head. They
Writing is, without dispute, the best facilitator for thinking, reading, should not cause any distraction. Put them into one place, which
learning, understanding and generating ideas we have. Notes build you define as your inbox, and process them later. I usually have a
up while you think, read, understand and generate ideas, because simple notebook with me, but I am happy with napkins or receipts
you have to have a pen in your hand if you want to think, read, if nothing else is at hand. Sometimes I leave a voice record on my
understand and generate ideas properly anyway. If you want to learn phone. If your thoughts are already sorted and you have the time,
something for the long run, you have to write it down. If you want to you can skip this step and write your idea directly down as a
really understand something, you have to translate it into your own proper, permanent note for your slip-box (see below).
words. Thinking takes place as much on paper as in your own head.
2. Make literature notes. Whenever you read something, make notes
“Notes on paper, or on a computer screen [...] do not make
about the content. Write down what you don’t want to forget or
contemporary physics or other kinds of intellectual endeavour easier,
think you might use in your own thinking or writing. Keep it very
they make it possible,” neuroscientist Neil Levy concludes in the
short, be extremely selective, and use your own words. Be extra
introduction to the Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics, summarizing
selective with quotes – don’t copy them to skip the step of really
decades of research. Neuroscientists, psychologists and other
understanding what they mean. Keep these notes together with
experts on thinking have very different ideas about how our brains
the bibliographic details in one place – your reference system.
work, but, as Levy writes: “no matter how internal processes are
implemented, (you) need to understand the extent to which the mind 3. Make permanent notes. Now turn to your slip-box. Go through the
is reliant upon external scaffolding.” (2011, 270) notes you made in step one or two (ideally once a day and before
you forget what you meant) and think about how they relate to
If there is one thing the experts agree on, then it is this: You
what is relevant for your own research, thinking or interests. This
have to externalise your ideas, you have to write. Richard Feynman
can soon be done by looking into the slip-box – it only contains
stresses it as much as Benjamin Franklin. If we write, it is more likely
what interests you anyway. The idea is not to collect, but to
that we understand what we read and remember what we learn and
develop ideas, arguments and discussions. Does the new
that our thoughts make sense. And if we have to write anyway, why
information contradict, correct, support or add to what you already
not use our writing to build up the resources for our future
have (in the slip-box or on your mind)? Can you combine ideas to
publications?
generate something new? What questions are triggered by them?
Thinking, reading, learning, understanding and generating ideas
is the main work of everyone who studies, does research or writes. If Write exactly one note for each idea and write as if you were writing
you write to improve all of these activities, you have a strong tailwind for someone else: Use full sentences, disclose your sources, make
going for you. If you take your notes in a smart way, it will propel you references and try to be as precise, clear and brief as possible.
forward. Throw away the fleeting notes from step one and put the literature
notes from step two into your reference system. You can forget about
them now. All that matters is going into the slip-box.
4. Now add your new permanent notes to the slip-box by: notes will already be in partial order), copy them into an outliner5
a) Filing each one behind one or more related notes (with a and bring them in order. Look for what is missing and what is
program, you can put one note “behind” multiple notes; if you use redundant. Don’t wait until you have everything together. Rather,
pen and paper like Luhmann, you have to decide where it fits best try ideas out and give yourself enough time to go back to reading
and add manual links to the other notes). Look to which note the and note-taking to improve your ideas, arguments and their
new one directly relates or, if it does not relate directly to any structure.
other note yet, just file it behind the last one. 7. Turn your notes into a rough draft. Don’t simply copy your notes
b) Adding links to related notes. into a manuscript. Translate them into something coherent and
c) Making sure you will be able to find this note later by either embed them into the context of your argument while you build your
linking to it from your index or by making a link to it on a note that argument out of the notes at the same time. Detect holes in your
you use as an entry point to a discussion or topic and is itself argument, fill them or change your argument.
linked to the index. 8. Edit and proofread your manuscript. Give yourself a pat on the
5. Develop your topics, questions and research projects bottom up shoulder and turn to the next manuscript.
from within the system. See what is there, what is missing and
These are the steps, presented as if you will write only one
what questions arise. Read more to challenge, strengthen, change
paper/article at a time. In reality, you never work on just one idea, but
and develop your arguments according to the new information you
many ideas in different stages. And that is where the system plays
are learning about. Take more notes, develop ideas further and
out its real strengths. We cannot help but think about more than one
see where things will take you. Just follow your interest and
question at a time and the chances are that you will think and write
always take the path that promises the most insight. Build upon
about those questions in the future as well. It might not be for
what you have. Even if you don’t have anything in your slip-box
academia or a publication, but certainly for your own intellectual
yet, you never start from scratch – you already have ideas on your
growth. Gather what you encounter along your way and don’t let any
mind to be tested, opinions to be challenged and questions to be
good idea go to waste. You might read a certain book in hope it
answered. Do not brainstorm for a topic. Look into the slip-box
could be useful for one of the papers you write. Maybe you are
instead to see where chains of notes have developed and ideas
wrong, but it still might contain some interesting thoughts worth
have been built up to clusters. Don’t cling to an idea if another,
keeping and useful for something else you haven’t thought about yet.
more promising one gains momentum. The more you become
interested in something, the more you will read and think about it, In truth, it is highly unlikely that every text you read will contain
the more notes you will collect and the more likely it is that you will exactly the information you looked for and nothing else. Otherwise,
generate questions from it. It might be exactly what you were you must have already known what was in there and wouldn’t have
interested in from the beginning, but it is more likely that your
had reason to read it in the first place.6 As the only way to find out if
interests will have changed – that is what insight does.
something is worth reading is by reading it (even just bits of it), it
6. After a while, you will have developed ideas far enough to decide makes sense to use the time spent in the best possible way. We
on a topic to write about. Your topic is now based on what you constantly encounter interesting ideas along the way and only a
have, not based on an unfounded idea about what the literature fraction of them are useful for the particular paper we started reading
you are about to read might provide. Look through the connections it for. Why let them go to waste? Make a note and add it to your slip-
and collect all the relevant notes on this topic (most of the relevant
box. It improves it. Every idea adds to what can become a critical gravity-independent pen, which pushes the ink onto the paper by
mass that turns a mere collection of ideas into an idea generator. means of compressed nitrogen. According to this story, the Russians
A typical workday will contain many, if not all, of these steps: faced the same problem. So they used pencils (De Bono, 1998,
You read and take notes. You build connections within the slip-box, 141). The story itself, unfortunately, is an urban myth, but the lesson
which in itself will spark new ideas. You write them down and add of it encapsulates the core idea of the slip-box: Focus on the
them to the discussion. You write on your paper, notice a hole in the essentials and don’t complicate things unnecessarily.
argument and have another look in the file system for the missing Academic writing in itself is not a complicated process that
link. You follow up on a footnote, go back to research and might add requires a variety of complicated tools, but is in constant danger of
a fitting quote to one of your papers in the making. being clogged with unnecessary distractions. Unfortunately, most
How focused you want to read depends on your priorities. You students collect and embrace over time a variety of learning and
don’t have to read anything you don’t consider an absolute necessity note-taking techniques, each promising to make something easier,
for finishing your most urgent paper, but you will still encounter a lot but combined have the opposite effect.
of other ideas and information along the way. Spending the little The whole workflow becomes complicated: There is the
extra time to add them to your system will make all the difference, technique of underlining important sentences (sometimes in different
because the accidental encounters make up the majority of what we colours or shapes), commenting in the margins of a text, writing
learn. excerpts, employing reading methods with acronyms like SQ3R7 or
Imagine if we went through life learning only what we planned to SQ4R,8 writing a journal, brainstorming a topic or following multi-step
learn or were explicitly taught. I doubt we would have even learned question sheets – and then there are, of course, the one thousand
to speak. Each added bit of information, filtered only by our interest, and twelve apps and programs that are supposed to help with
is a contribution to our future understanding, thinking and writing. learning and writing. Few of these techniques are particularly
And the best ideas are usually the ones we haven’t anticipated complicated in themselves, but they are usually used without any
anyway. regard to the actual workflow, which then quickly becomes a mess.
As nothing really fits together, working within this arrangement
Most people follow different lines of thought at the same time. They becomes extremely complicated indeed and difficult to get anything
might focus for a while on one idea, but then leave it alone for done.
another while until they see how to proceed further. It is helpful then And if you stumble upon one idea and think that it might connect
to be able to pick up on another idea and go back to the earlier to another idea, what do you do when you employ all these different
thought later. It is much more realistic to keep this flexibility and you techniques? Go through all your books to find the right underlined
don’t have to worry about starting all over. sentence? Reread all your journals and excerpts? And what do you
do then? Write an excerpt about it? Where do you save it and how
3 Everything You Need to Have does this help to make new connections? Every little step suddenly
There is this story where NASA tried to figure out how to make a turns into its own project without bringing the whole much further
ballpoint pen that works in space. If you have ever tried to use a forward. Adding another promising technique to it, then, would make
ballpoint pen over your head, you have probably realised it is gravity things only worse.
that keeps the ink flowing. After a series of prototypes, several test That is why the slip-box is not introduced as another technique,
runs and tons of money invested, NASA developed a fully functional but as a crucial element in an overarching workflow that is stripped
of everything that could distract from what is important. Good tools 2. The reference system has two purposes: To collect the references
do not add features and more options to what we already have, but (duh) and the notes you take during your reading. I strongly
help to reduce distractions from the main work, which here is recommend using a free program like Zotero, which allows you to
thinking. The slip-box provides an external scaffold to think in and make new entries via browser plugins or just by entering the ISBN
helps with those tasks our brains are not very good at, most of all or digital object identifier (DOI) number. Zotero also can be
objective storage of information. integrated into Microsoft Word, Google Docs, LibreOffice and other
That is pretty much it. To have an undistracted brain to think with editors, which allows you to insert quotations without actually
and a reliable collection of notes to think in is pretty much all we typing in the reference. That not only makes things easier, you
need. Everything else is just clutter. also mitigate the risk of messing things up when you add, edit or
delete additional references. You can also easily change the
format according to the standards required by your professors or
3.1 The Toolbox the journal you write for. You can add notes to each entry – but it
We need four tools: would also be fine to write your notes by hand and link them to the
reference if you prefer to write by hand at this stage. In that case,
• Something to write with and something to write on (pen and just give the notes a standardised title like “AuthorYear” and keep
paper will do) them in alphabetical order in one place. You can download Zotero
• A reference management system (Zotero, Citavi or whatever for free at zotero.org (Windows, Mac and Linux). You will find the
works best for you) links to all recommended programs on take smartnotes.com. If you
• The slip-box (paper or digital). prefer or already work with another, equally simple program, there
• An editor (Word, LaTeX, Google Docs or whatever works best is no reason not to use that.
for you).
3. The slip-box. Some prefer the old-fashioned pen and paper
More is unnecessary, less is impossible. version in a wooden box. That's fine – computers can only speed
up a relatively minor part of the work anyway, like adding links and
1. You need something to capture ideas whenever and wherever formatting references. They can’t speed up the main part of the
they pop into your head. Whatever you use, it should not require work, which is thinking, reading and understanding. All you would
any thoughts, attention or multiple steps to write it down. It can be need are sheets of paper about the size of a postcard (Luhmann
a notebook, a napkin, an app on your phone or iPad. These notes used the DIN A6 size, 148 x 105 mm or 5.83 x 4.13 inches) and a
are not meant to be stored permanently. They will be deleted or box to keep them in. And even though there are clear benefits of
chucked soon anyway. They only function as a reminder of a handwriting (cf. below chapter 3.2.1), I recommend using the
thought and are not meant to capture the thought itself, which digital version, if only for mobility. Even though you could basically
requires time to phrase proper sentences and check facts. I emulate the slip-box with any program that allows setting links and
recommend having pen and paper with you at all times. It is really tagging (like Evernote or a Wiki), I strongly recommend using one
hard to beat a notebook in its simplicity. If you use other tools, that allows backlinking like Obsidian or Roam Research, or is
make sure everything ends up in one place, a central inbox or especially designed for this system (like Zettlr or ZKN3). I keep a
something like that, where you can process it soon, ideally within a list of recommended programs updated on my website.
day. 4. Finally, the editor: My only recommendation is to choose an editor
your reference manager is compatible with (Zotero, for example,
 works with Microsoft Word, LibreOffice, LaTeX and more). It not only to know how it works or how to work with it, but also why it
makes life a lot easier if you don’t have to type in every reference works. Only then will you be able to tweak it for your own needs. And
manually. Except for that, everything works fine – no editor can this is what this book is for: To give you all the resources you need to
improve an argument. work in the best possible way with the best technique available. By
keeping just a few basic principles in mind and with an
If you have pen and paper, an editor, your slip-box and reference understanding of the logic behind the file system, I see no reason
system at hand, you are ready to go. why anyone should not be able to replicate Luhmann’s formula for
successful learning, writing and research.
4 A Few Things to Keep in Mind
Getting the tools ready shouldn’t have taken more than 5-10
minutes. But having the right tools is only one part of the equation. It 1 The research on willpower or “ego depletion” is in a bit of turmoil at the moment.
is easy to get fooled by their simplicity. Many “tried them out” without But it is safe to say that using willpower is a terrible strategy to get things done
really understanding how to work with them and were expectedly in the long run. For an overview cf. Inzlicht/Friese 2019.
disappointed with the results. Tools are only as good as your ability 2 The introduction to his theory was published in 1987 in the form of a book with
to work with them. Everybody knows how to handle a flute (you blow the title “Social Systems” and the book series number “666.” Those who were
into one end and press your fingers on the holes according to the not aware of his note-taking system might have been tempted to think that this
notes you are playing), but nobody would try it out once and then was not by chance, as his productivity could only have been explained by a deal
judge the instrument on what they hear.9 with the devil.
But with tools like the slip-box, we sometimes forget that the 3 https://youtu.be/qRSCKSPMuDc?t=37m30s (all links are on
handling is as important as the possibilities of the tool itself. If we try takesmartnotes.com)
to use a tool without putting any thought into the way we work with it,
even the best tool would not be of much help. The slip-box, for 4 On the back of his notes, you will find not only manuscript drafts, but also old
bills or drawings by his children.
example, would most likely be used as an archive for notes – or
worse: a graveyard for thoughts (cf. Hollier 2005, 40 on Mallarmé’s 5 Or, if you use pen and paper, just shuffle around the actual notes on your
index cards). Unfortunately, there are quite a few explanations of desktop.
Luhmann’s technique on the Internet that focus in a misleading way
6 This problem is known as Meno’s paradox (Plato, Meno 80e, Grube translation).
on the technicalities of the slip-box. This has led to plenty of
misconceptions about its abilities. But things are changing: 7 SQ3R is the acronym for “Survey, Question, Read, Recite, Review,” developed
Luhmann’s slip-box is currently the object of a long-term research by psychology professor Francis Pleasant Robinson for the U.S. Army during
project at the Bielefeld University, and their first results have already World War II (Robinson, 1978).
given us a comprehensive understanding about how Luhmann really
8 SQ4R, “Survey, Question, Read, Reflect, Recite, Review” will most certainly be
worked with it. You can look up for yourself some of his notes on replaced soon by SQ5R – whatever that will stand for.
their website.10 Soon, you will be able to access the whole digitalised
slip-box online. Add to this understanding recent psychological 9 Google Monty Python “How to Play the Flute”.
insights about learning, creativity and thinking, and we also get a
10 Unfortunately most of it is in German: http://ds.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/
pretty good picture why it works. And it is indeed crucially important
THE FOUR UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES
5 Writing Is the Only Thing That Matters
For students, the need for writing mainly appears in the form of
examination. In this understanding, the written work represents a
preceded performance, namely learning, understanding and the
ability to analyse other texts critically. By writing, students
demonstrate what they have learned and show their ability to think
critically and develop ideas. This understanding is related to the idea
that students prepare for independent research. In this mindset, the
writing of a paper is just another skill to be learned. It is
compartmentalised from the other tasks – it is seen as one task
among others. Students should not only learn to write papers, but
also learn facts, be able to discuss their ideas in seminars and listen
carefully to lectures. Writing papers is seen as a task in itself with a
beginning and an end. Almost all books written on academic writing
start from this assumption. And almost all of them proceed
accordingly, describing an idealised process in certain consecutive
steps.
First, the task to write is given, then there is the challenge to find
a topic or a specific angle on a problem, the research to do, starting
with the collection of the relevant literature, followed by reading the
material, processing it and coming to a conclusion. Writing is what
follows: In the beginning stands the question to be answered,
followed by an overview of the literature, the discussion of it and the
conclusion. This, according to this thinking, prepares you for doing
independent research. Alas, it does not. If you become successful in
your research, it was not because you learned to approach writing in
this way, but despite it.
This book is based on another assumption: Studying does not
prepare students for independent research. It is independent
research. Nobody starts from scratch and everybody is already able
to think for themselves. Studying, done properly, is research,
because it is about gaining insight that cannot be anticipated and will