The Life Discovery Canvas (v1.0) — Part 2: Spatial Structure

Published in

CALL4

15 min readFeb 28, 2022

From Thematic Space Canvas to Life Discovery Canvas

The above picture is the Life Discovery Canvas. I am going to introduce the new canvas and its context in the following four parts:

Part 1: Theoretical Background
Part 2: Spatial Structure
Part 3: Concepts
Part 4: Inspirations

Yesterday I wrote Part I and introduced six basic principles of the Project-centered approach which is the theoretical foundation of the canvas.

Today I’d like to share my design thoughts behind the canvas. It is all about spatial structure.

Part 2: Spatial Structure

Last year, I conducted a project called D as Diagramming and produced an integrated framework for studying knowledge diagrams and canvases. You can find more details from my book-in-draft: Diagramming as Practice (Book, version 1.0).

As an independent researcher who is passionate about connecting theory and practice, I really like testing my own knowledge by doing some projects. The Life Discovery Canvas is both an End for the Life Discovery Activity project and a Means for the Diagramming as Practice framework.

2.1 How to design a good canvas?

There is a difference between knowledge diagrams and knowledge canvases. A knowledge diagram is a representation of conceptualized knowledge while a canvas is an instrument of practical communication. The primary goal of diagrams is visually expressing knowledge frameworks while the primary goal of canvases is enabling situational interaction around data and concepts. See the diagram below.

Last year I did a small action research project about designing canvas. What I learned from the research is the following basic principle of design canvas:

A good canvas matches visual areas and conceptual spaces with a simple and unique style of spatial configuration.

This principle leads to four rules:

Rule 1: Separate several visual areas clearly with lines. Make sure each visual area is identified easily.
Rule 2: Adopt a special and unique perspective to develop conceptualized knowledge for building conceptual spaces. The more unique the perspective, the greater the value of the canvas.
Rule 3: Make sure the layout of visual areas matches with the structure of conceptual spaces. Take the visualization radically.
Rule 4: Develop a simple and unique visual style that represents a spatial configuration. The uniqueness is the starting point of a knowledge brand.

You can find more details from the action research project: D as Diagramming: The Creative Work Canvas.

2.2 Life Discovery as Developing Tacit Knowledge

The “design thinking” behind the Life Discovery Canvas is pretty unique. It is both simple (for me) and complicated (for you).

For me, I just copy spatial structure from the Thematic Space Canvas for the Life Discovery Canvas because they share the same spatial structure. Thus, I don’t have to do the work of Visualization. What I need to do is replace old concepts with new concepts for understanding Life Discovery Activity.

The previous article The Life Discovery Canvas (v1.0) — Part 1: Theoretical Background introduced the theoretical background of the Life Discovery Activity. The major resource of the canvas is the Project-centered approach.

There is a deep analogy between the two projects, see the diagram below.

This deep analogy is based on the basic model of Activity Theory: Subject — Mediating Tool — Object. You can find more details on the Activity Analysis website.

I consider both “Developing Tacit Knowledge” and “Life Discovery” as Activities. From the perspective of Activity Theory, Thematic Space Canvas and Life Discovery Canvas are both Mediating Tools.

Moreover, what I found is that “Life Discovery” can be understood as a subcategory of “Developing Tacit Knowledge” if we consider the target of knowing as a person’s own life development. The process of discovering new insights for life development is a process of Developing Tacit Knowledge.

Can we directly apply the Thematic Space Canvas to Life Discovery Activity?

The above is the Thematic Space Canvas which is developed for Developing Tacit Knowledge. We can. However, we should translate the above concepts into some new concepts which are more relevant to Life Discovery Activity.

I can replace all the old concepts with new concepts without designing the visual-spatial structure.

2.3 The Thematic Space Canvas

The Thematic Space Canvas was initiated on Jan 6, 2022. During the past almost two months, I have tested the canvas with several case studies. The whole system could be transferred to Life Discovery Activity.

This section will review the whole system of the Thematic Space Canvas. Readers can directly translate it to Life Discovery Canvas.

The Thematic Space Canvas is not a simple 2x2 matrix for building a typology, but a multiple-dimension model for visualizing a holistic view in order to sense-make a dynamic meaningful whole. You can find more details here: The Notion of Thematic Spaces.

The uniqueness of Thematic Space Canvas is that it adopts the perspective of Activity Theory and considers the whole thing as an activity. Moreover, it uses inner space and outer space to represent the “Internalization — externalization” principle of Activity Theory.

For the Developing Tacit Knowledge, I call it “Objective — Subjective” Knowledge Curation. While Objective Knowing refers to outer space, Subjective Knowing refers to inner space.

The above OS Card is designed for recording a tiny mapping clue between Outer Space and Inter Space. The name “OS” stands for “Objective — Subjective”. You can find more details here: Mapping Thematic Spaces #1: OS Card and Mapping Clues.

Inspired by Activity Theory’s “Object-orientedness” principle, I used the Enter — Exit Trajectory to design a series of canvases and considered the Thematic Space Canvas as the center of the whole activity.

The Enter side connects to the Spark Canvas while the Exit side connects to the Statue Canvas. You can find more details here: Slow Cognition: Three Canvases for Developing Tacit Knowledge.

To be honest, I didn’t test the thematic space. I just used it! It was so fun for me to use it. The canvas led to a new practice/activity called “Mapping Thematic Space” which led to a new genre called “Thematic Space Reflection Report”. See the diagram below:

During the process of mapping thematic space and writing thematic space reflection reports, I found an essential point for my activity of Developing Tacit Knowledge. Finally, I can just put everything about one theme together without a linear structure which is required by traditional writing theories.

Traditional writing theories tend to turn a web of ideas into a structural text in order to service the linear reading habit. However, the Thematic Space Reflection Report is a new genre that breaks the traditional writing rule.

For example, the below diagram is for mapping my “Platform” thematic space. I attached different meanings to the same word “Platform” for different tasks and coined several platform-related terms. My “Platform” thematic space looks chaotic, but I can understand these terms because I can remember their original contexts. The meaning of a word depends on its context. For my “Platform” thematic space, “Platform” is the name of a thematic space.

This is a new genre because it is a new mediation between our minds and formal text. Once we have such a mediating tool, we can work effectively with our minds and formal texts. In other words, the Thematic Space Canvas is not for producing final products, but for preparing final production.

An interesting thing to note here is that we can share our processes of Mapping Thematic Spaces and Thematic Space Reflection Report publicly. This will accelerate the development of Collective Tacit Knowledge.

There are many ways to use the Thematic Space Canvas. For example, the above example (Mapping Thematic Space #4: The “Center” Thematic Space) is about starting a thematic space from scratch.

The example below is about visualizing an idea that should be considered as a strategic decision. However, I just made it immediately.

Before: the focus of my mind is on the “Heuristics” block which belongs to the Practice Field. See the red dot (1) Life Discovery Toolkit.
After: the focus of my mind moves to the “Approaches” block which belongs to the Theory Field. See the red dot (2) Theories about Life Development and Strategy.
Then: the new focus led to a new project which is on the “Projects” block. See the red dot (3) The Life Strategy Project.

You can find more detail about it in Thematic Space: The “Strategy” thematic space.

2.4 How Does Deep Analogy Work?

As mentioned above, there is a deep analogy between the Thematic Space Canvas and the Life Discovery Canvas. See the picture below:

The red words refer to Thematic Space Canvas while the blue words refer to Life Discovery Canvas. I have to point out that Life Discovery Canvas is not a direct application of Thematic Space Canvas. They just share the same spatial structure.

We don’t have to check the one-to-one mapping relationship between concepts from two canvases. From the landscape view, these concepts share the same spatial configuration.

If we want to test the spatial configuration, we can use the following method:

Change positions of two concepts.
Compare new configuration and old configuration.
Which one makes the most sense?

For example, let’s switch “Think” and “Do”, then we get the following mappings:

old configuration: Think > Theory + Do > Means
new configuration: Do > Theory + Think > Means

I think the old one is better than the new one. In fact, the above solution was just made with my initial inspiration without the above testing. Since I am the creator of the Thematic Space canvas and I knew all concepts behind Life Discovery Activity, I am satisfied with my initial inspiration. At least, I can consider it as version 1.0 for sharing publicly.

2.5 Four Significant Areas

The Life Discovery Canvas is not a simple 2x2 matrix, but a multiple-dimension model for visualizing a holistic view. However, the 2x2 matrix is a subset of the canvas.

I divide the canvas into four areas from the view of the 2x2 matrix:

THINK: What should I Think for myself?
SAY: What should I Say to others?
LEARN: What should I Learn for my life?
DO: What should I Do for others?

The THINK area echoes the Theory area of the Thematic Space Canvas. For Life Discovery Activity, I consider two pairs of concepts for the THINK area:

Supplies — Demands
Aspirations — Situations

I will offer more details for each pair of concepts. For the present discussion, I only focus on Spatial Structure.

The LEARN area echoes the PRACTICE area of the Thematic Space Canvas. For Life Discovery Activity, I consider two pairs of concepts for the LEARN area:

Skills — Knowledge
Themes — Contradictions

The SAY area echoes the END area of the Thematic Space Canvas. For Life Discovery Activity, I consider two pairs of concepts for the SAY area:

Resources — Opportunities
Results — Contributions

The DO area echoes the MEANS area of the Thematic Space Canvas. For Life Discovery Activity, I consider two pairs of concepts for the DO area:

Concepts — Ideas
Solutions — Problems

The above pairs of concepts are inspired by the Project-centered approach.

2.6 Two Subspaces

The Life Discovery Canvas is divided into two subspaces: Inner Space and Outer Space.

The Inner Space contains the following concepts:

Supplies — Skills
Aspirations — Themes
Resources — Results
Concepts — Solutions

The Outer Space contains the following concepts:

Demands — Knowledge
Situations — Contradictions
Opportunities — Contributions
Ideas — Problems

2.7 A Multiple-dimension Model

I have emphasized that the Life Discovery Canvas is not a simple 2x2 matrix for building a typology, but a multiple-dimension model for visualizing a holistic view in order to sense-make a dynamic meaningful whole.

Now let’s look at more dimensions.

2.7.1 The Self — Other Relevance

There is a dimension behind the “Left — Right” direction: the Self — Other Relevance.

I have introduced the Relevance of Zone in the Life Discovery Toolkit (v1.0). See the diagram below:

The above diagram is the new idea which is called the Relevance of Zone. It considers four keywords: Self, Other, Thing, and Think. It was inspired by the iART Framework and the Typology of Relevance. You can find more details from Mapping Thematic Space #5: The “Relevance” Thematic Space.

2.7.2 The Practice — Theory Dialogue

For the vertical direction, I consider the Practice — Theory Dialogue.

The Practice—Theory Dialogue refers to my primary project: the Knowledge Curation project. The diagram below is one of the models of the project.

You can find more details about the above model from The Diagramming as Practice Framework.

2.7.3 The Production Chain

One of the theoretical resources behind the Life Discovery Activity is Activity Theory which is originally about “Production”.

The “Think — Do” connection refers to the Production Chain. The term “Chain” refers to “Think — Do — Think — Do — Think — DO” which is about a network of projects.

2.7.4 The Communication Chain

I also consider Relevance Theory as one of the theoretical resources for the Life Discovery Activity. The Relevance Theory is more about communication.

The “Learn— Say” connection refers to the Communication Chain. The term “Chain” refers to “Learn — Say— Learn— Say— Learn— Say” which is about communities, platforms, or other social contexts of projects.

2.7.5 The Feedforward Chain

The Life Discovery Activity also adopts the Anticipatory Activity System framework for its theoretical resources.

A person has an expectation of her or his life achievement in the future. This is called Anticipation. For example, a friend of mine made a vision for her ideal life in general and a life plan for the coming three years. This anticipation inspires her to make some decisions that lead to some actions. This is called Feedforward. Her life vision and short life plan guide her to design an adult development program which became her primary project last year.

The above diagram is the iART Framework which is the early version of the Anticipatory Activity System framework. You can find more details about the iART Framework here.

2.7.6 The Experiment Chain

The last dimension is called the Experiment Chain which is defined by the “Anticipation — Performance” complexity.

The “Anticipation — Performance” complexity refers to a sub-model of the Anticipatory Activity System framework.

I have introduced the above model in the Life Discovery Toolkit (v1.0). You can find more details in D as Diagramming: The Defining Zone.

2.8 Four Thematic Fields

In order to highlight four themes of the Life Discovery Activity, I also define four thematic fields. Each field contains four blocks with two pairs of concepts.

2.8.1 The Attachment Field

The Attachment Field echoes the ENTER field of the Thematic Space Canvas. It contains the following concepts:

Skills — Knowledge
Supplies — Demands

2.8.1 The Achievement Field

The Achievement Field echoes the EXIT field of the Thematic Space Canvas. It contains the following concepts:

Results — Contributions
Solutions — Problems

2.8.3 The Anticipation Field

The Anticipation Field contains the following concepts:

Aspirations — Situations
Resources — Opportunities

2.8.4 The Performance Field

The Performance Field contains the following concepts:

Themes — Contradictions
Concepts — Ideas

2.9 Spatial Structure as Ecological Knowledge

The “design thinking” behind the Life Discovery Canvas echoes my ideas about meta-diagrams, diagram blending, and diagram networks.

On Dec 16, 2021, I closed the D as Diagramming project (Phase 1) with the Diagramming as Practice framework. The project is both a research project and an experimental project. One of the outcomes of the project is the following book-in-draft: Diagram Blending: Building Diagram Networks (Introduction, Table of Contents).

In order to highlight four themes of the Life Discovery Activity, I also define four thematic fields. Each field contains four blocks with two pairs of concepts.

The Life Discovery Canvas is not a simple 2x2 matrix for building a typology, but a multiple-dimension model for visualizing a holistic view in order to sense-make a dynamic meaningful whole. This view emphasizes the Spatial Structure of the canvas.

The above discussion sees each block which refers to a concept as an independent entity as a layer and the spatial structure as the other layer. In this way, a concept can be understood as a member of more than one dimension. More ever, a concept can be a member of many Areas, Chains, Fields, and other spatial configurations.

From the perspective of ecological psychology, a canvas is an environment. The spatial structure of a canvas refers to a piece of the spatial structure of our environments. Thus, we should consider spatial structure as ecological knowledge.

According to the ecological psychologist Harry Heft, “…some of the things we have come to understand about the effects of certain actions on the environment we have subsequently built into environmental structures themselves. These latter constructed embodiments of what is known — which include tools, artifacts, representations, social patterns of actions, and institutions — can be called ecological knowledge.” (2001, p.330)

Life Discovery Canvas offers an environment for discovering new potential life possible actions with a dynamic holistic view. As a model of the Life Discovery Activity, it is also a creative space, an environment for exploration.

This article is part of the Life Strategy project. On Jan 28, 2022, I introduced the idea “the Life Strategy framework (v1.0)” to a new friend who read the article about D as Diagramming: Strategy as Anticipatory Activity System and wondered if she could use it for her projects.

I curated the Anticipatory Activity System framework and several related frameworks together, and named them “Life Strategy”. I considered it as multiple theory curation:

Anticipatory Systems Theory: Present — Future
Relevance Theory: Self — Other
Activity Theory: Object — Outcome
Project-oriented Activity Theory: Theme — Identity
Curativity Theory: Pieces — Whole

I use a dialogue knowledge curation approach to develop the Life Strategy project. While I am applying the Anticipatory Activity System framework and the Project-center approach to the Life Discovery project, I am also using the project to test these two theoretical approaches.

You can find the Life Discovery Toolkit and the canvas on the following board on Miro:

The Life Discovery Toolkit

Edit description

miro.com

Below is a list of related articles:

For the Project Engagement approach, you can visit the Activity Analysis website to find more relevant information about Activity Theory.

For the Anticipatory Activity System framework, you can read Strategy as Anticipatory Activity System and its early version iART Framework.

You are most welcome to connect via the following social platforms:

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/oliverding
Twitter: https://twitter.com/oliverding
Polywork: https://www.polywork.com/oliverding
Boardle: https://www.boardle.io/users/oliver-ding

References

Harry Heft (2001) Ecological Psychology in Context: James Gibson, Roger Barker, and the Legacy of William James’s Radical Empiricism. Psychology Press.