Each person receives information in different ways, and their cognitive processes, and previously organized bits of data, influence how new data is stored. While our brains may share organizing principals in how we store and retrieve information, they don’t share the inputs or the existing context. Sharing, however, points to the first problem with mind maps. Mindmaps also offer a good way to share notes with others. The mind map, which attempts to mimic the organic process of human memory, leverages visual and verbal associations to help the author’s mind associate and remember. Think about all the salient points of a book on a page as a study guide before a test. Mind mapping attempts to capture vast ideas on a single sheet of paper (or in a single space). Mind mapping becomes a lens for exploration and for focus.
While narratives, including this argument for mind mapping, may result from the chaotic mix, at least the content creator understands the limits of an individual presentation, blog or report and what can be used as a followup. Only electronic tools bring an infinite canvas and the ability to search and navigate large maps.Īs data and knowledge expand, and the chaos of relationships becomes ever more fluid, mind mapping becomes the essential tool for capturing the complexity of ideas in an accessible way. While simple mind mapping on paper works for note-taking and brainstorming, paper fails to offer a long-term solution to reorganization, sharing and scaling up of ideas. Mind mapping uniquely allows people to capture information and organize it in a way that makes sense to them. Grasping the complex ideas about gravity today requires a mind map to do it justice. And with the turmoil over quantum physics and gravity, even the physical sciences appear more like a quantum soup than a discovered plot all laid out in perfect detail. Those who tell stories that engage and intrigue do so often through minor characters and ancillary events that would show up in the periphery of a mind map, but perhaps offer an innovative path into the material. And that tends to lead to the dry histories of academia. Capturing the subtly of unfolding events, influences, personalities and other aspects of a narrative fit in a linear narrative only when the seemingly superfluous is pruned away. History was no less chaotic than the present. And that usually means history crafted to reflect a non-linear, non-referential flow.
Outlines only works with source material delivered via a linear path. Many educators still suggest outlines before writing a paper. Complement the mess of inputs with the need to capture the randomness of creation and recall, and no part of contemporary reporting-public, private or in business-justifies a false expectation for a linear narrative.
0 kommentar(er)
