Can you use Zettelkasten in DEVONthink?

Zettelkasten can be implemented inside DEVONthink, but whether it fits a historian’s workflow depends less on the software and more on how a researcher turns sources into arguments. The core promise of Zettelkasten is a “web of thought”: instead of collecting notes of any size, it emphasizes creating many connected ideas so relationships and hierarchies become visible over time. That structure matters because human memory and recall are limited, and people struggle to build useful networks and hierarchies once information piles up.

In practice, Zettelkasten is built from individual notes (“zettels”) that link to one another, forming a knowledge web. The method has long roots in paper-based note cards, but modern tools can replicate the workflow digitally. DEVONthink is positioned as a natural home for this approach because it supports a database-like structure: a single DEVONthink database can function as the Zettelkasten “container,” while individual DEVONthink note files can act as zettels. The advantages over paper are concrete—no physical card boxes, integrated tagging, and full-text search (including the equivalent of “control F”) that makes retrieval fast and reliable.

DEVONthink also supports multiple ways to create connections among notes. Zettels can be linked through tags, organized into groups (DEVONthink’s equivalent of folders), and connected using wiki links (hyperlink-style relationships between notes). It can also store granular metadata, though the guidance is that users don’t need to get that complex to benefit.

Still, the transcript draws a clear line between “can” and “should.” One contributor notes that Zettelkasten isn’t especially compelling for her writing process because her arguments and narratives are built by linking archival sources and source clusters, not by linking individual thoughts. Her preferred setup keeps many ideas tied to a single origin document—journal articles, book chapters, or archival materials—inside a linked annotation file. When a source supports multiple lines of argument, she replicates or surfaces that source across multiple groups, and uses hyperlinks and tags to reach specific passages or related notes elsewhere.

That preference leads to a different organizing principle: note-taking doesn’t end when an idea appears. Instead, it continues iteratively until the writing is finished. The transcript names this ongoing, multi-pass approach “evolutionary sifting,” a phrase attributed to Jim Tobin. The process starts with a quick first encounter—reading to understand what a document is and whether it fits the topic—followed by preliminary tags and superficial notes. A second pass adds more detailed notes tied to a specific use (an argument, paragraph, or narrative role). The final stage happens during writing, when the researcher interrogates the source for silences, omissions, and limitations, and adds final notes to refine how the document will function in the finished work.

The takeaway is pragmatic: researchers can adopt Zettelkasten concepts in DEVONthink, but they should design a system that matches how their brain works. For some, that means many discrete zettels linked into a web. For others—especially historians working from archival collections—it means iterative, source-centered annotations that evolve as the draft evolves. Either way, DEVONthink’s linking, grouping, tagging, and search capabilities can support the workflow, and the transcript encourages viewers to build their own method rather than force a single system onto their research habits.