Replying to LO30337 --
At and group,
> I am of a similar opinion that flow charts employ some formalism which
> makes it difficult to produce them. I have used them extensively to keep
> track of progarmming a complex computer application. Tony Buzan's Mind
> Mapping has much less formalism because it focus only on the basic pattern
> - -- "becoming-being". It concerns liveness, one of the 7Es
Now you are confusing me!;-) To me a mindmap is about wholeness, not
liveness. A mindmap is about showing connections between concepts,
whatever their nature. Some of them have to do with time (liveness) but
some don't. To me a mindmap is about asking "What does this remind you of
or connect to?"
> The key to produce any "becoming-being" diagram is meticulous observation.
> Observe, observe and observe! Then adapt the diagram procedures to reflect
> what is observed rather than the other way around.
Exactly. I do not think that mindmaps are necessarily better than
flowcharts. Flowcharts are more powerful in clarifying time-sequence than
mindmaps. However, if you want to think about any kind of connection, not
only time-sequences, then Mindmaps are more appropriate. The best approach
to such concept maps in general, in my personal experience, is to
brainstorm ideas without worrying much about links, then link them
afterwards as appropriate. The end result will often be some kind of
"Terje A. Tonsberg" <email@example.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.