Part of the problem with these collections of notes, whether you call them Zettelkasten, Second Brain, PKM or whatever, is the expectation that something unique, amazing, or earth-shattering emerge from the process of using it. The expectation is strongest in the Zettelkasten community where they trot out the story of some academic sociologist of old who invented the system and cranked out tons of publications. Never mind that those publications have practically zero impact on the field currently. There is also the apparent expectation that you follow a specific and arcane method, with specific types of notes that evolve in a certain prescribed way. I’m a reasonably smart person and the ZK ontology perpetually escapes me. Maybe because it’s needlessly reductive. Yes maybe Luhmann used the system to generate a lot of publications. But the academics I know have never even heard of this. My spouse has a few hundred published papers and her process is nothing like this.
Anyway, I don’t see the point in destroying one’s notes. It seems performatively symbolic; and if that helps you get past a block of some sort, more power to you. My own notes are half-organized, half-chaotic. Vestiges of a dozen different systems live on in it. It shows that I suffer from collector’s fallacy. I don’t care.
Performances and symbols are meaningful; the way you act influences the way you think. It is pretty well known that an effective way to enact change in your life is to act as if your goal was already true and it will change your mindset to actually make it so. As a small example, forcing (i.e. performing) a smile can improve your mood.
> I don’t see the point in destroying one’s notes. (…) if that helps you get past a block of some sort, more power to you.
Looks to me like you do see the point. Maybe it’s not something you’d need personally, but everyone is different.
> Luhmann is still one of the most cited, grappled-with and thought-about sociologist across a number of disciplines.
Unfortunately (though I think this is a regional thing also - Luhmann's still pretty strong in Europe, especially in Germany where "systems theory" has become synonymous with Luhmann's systems theory, but not so much in the USA, I think).
One of the problems with Luhmann stems directly from his Zettelkasten: His tendency to tear citations out of their original contexts and name drop witnesses for his own point of views where the original text did not support his view at all.
You can see the system at work actually: He truly made a lot of stuff his own in ways never intended by the original authors - boon and bane at same time.
You may not like Zettelkasten (same here), and you may not like Luhmann, but saying "those publications have practically zero impact on the field currently" is just uninformed. He was one of the most influential continental sociologists of the last century. Sure, he's no Durkheim, but he still managed to surpass a level of international relevance that 99.9% of humanity will never even reach.
Anyway, I don’t see the point in destroying one’s notes. It seems performatively symbolic; and if that helps you get past a block of some sort, more power to you. My own notes are half-organized, half-chaotic. Vestiges of a dozen different systems live on in it. It shows that I suffer from collector’s fallacy. I don’t care.