Interactive graph
GTD vs PARA
Table of Contents
GTD vs PARA runs tasks in one system and notes in another - cousins, not rivals.
Key Concept
- Tasks and knowledge need different homes.
- Getting Things Done runs what has a next action and a deadline; PARA Method sorts what I would cite with no finish line.
- Cousins, not competitors - same capture habit, two lanes.
- The failure mode is doubling admin: one inbox emptied weekly, tasks in the task app, notes in the garden.
Level 1 - Recognize
GTD vs PARA splits tasks and knowledge into different homes - actionable commitments and durable reference do not share one inbox.
Level 2 - Explain
Like groceries on the fridge list and recipes in a folder - mixing both buckets turns neither system clean.
Level 3 - Use
Keep actionable tasks in a trusted capture system and durable knowledge in PARA buckets - never the same inbox.
Level 4 - Connect
GTD processes commitments; PARA organizes reference - when they share one bucket, both systems rot.
Level 5 - Create
Design a two-lane workflow where Getting Things Done owns next actions and PARA Method holds durable reference, with one capture point feeding both.
Examples
- I tried running playbook principles through the task app and lost half of them in completed lists - tasks need GTD, principles need PARA.
- The fridge list holds what we buy this week; the filing cabinet holds school forms with no deadline.
Note Relationships
| Relationship | Wikilink | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| contradicts | PKM | when task inbox truth beats note-garden architecture |
| extends | Getting Things Done | Allen task-inbox system on the other side of the comparison |
| extends | PARA Method | GTD runs tasks and PARA sorts notes - here is how both work without doubling admin |
