Mental Moves #5: The Attachance of Rediscovery and Diagram Development

Published in

CALL4

23 min readJun 9, 2023

How to turn experiences into developmental resources?

This post is part of the Mental Moves knowledge project that aims to collect related articles about the concept of “Attachance” and more examples about “Moving between Thematic Spaces” in order to edit a book. You can find more details in the following links:

March 4, 2023 — Creative Action: The Chance-configuration Theory and Beyond
March 8, 2023 — Creative Action: The Attachance of Moving Mental Elements
March 10, 2023 — [Knowledge Engagement] How to develop a concept called “Attachance”?
March 10, 2023 — #TalkThree 19: The Art of Semantic Awareness
March 23, 2023 — The Knowledge Engagement Framework (v4)
March 24, 2023 — TALE: A Possible Theme called “Mental Moves”
March 24, 2023 — The Concept of Attachance (A list of articles)
March 30, 2023 — Mental Moves #1: The Transformation of Mental Elements
April 27, 2023 — Creative Swapping of Mental Elements
April 29, 2023 — The “Mental Moves” Knowledge Project (Digital Board)
April 27, 2023 — Mental Moves #2: Creative Swapping of Mental Elements
May 2, 2023 — Mental Moves #3: Attachance, Thematic Space, and Framework
May 22, 2023 — Mental Moves #4: Attachance and Creative Dialogue

I coined the term Attachance by combining Attach and Chance in 2018 to discuss some ideas related to Affordance, a core idea of Ecological Psychology.

In 2022, the development of Attachance was tied to the development of Thematic Space which refers to a specific type of container: cognitive container. You can find more details in [Slow Cognition] The Development of the concept of “Thematic Spaces”.

On March 10, 2023, I wrote a short post about the development of “Attachance” on Linkedin. On March 24, 2023, I collected a set of articles about the concept of “Attachance” and “Moving between Thematic Spaces”.

The Concept of Attachance (A list of articles)

I coined the term Attachance by combining Attach and Chance in 2018 to discuss some ideas related to Affordance, a core…

medium.com

I also launched a board for the Mental Moves knowledge project on Milanote.

I adopted Dean Keith Simonton’s Chance-configuration theory as the foundation and expanded his theory to a new model. You can find the basic model here.

The Attachance of Rediscovery

Today I am going to use the “ARCH” diagram as an example to discuss a special type of Attachance: Rediscovery.

In general, the Rediscovery of Attachance means detaching mental elements from the Past and attaching them to the Present.

Detach [Mental Elements] from The Past
Attach [Mental Elements] to The Present

What are mental elements?

I adopted the term from Dean Keith Simonton’s Chance-configuration theory (Scientific Genius,1988) for the Mental Moves project.

According to Simonton, “In scientific creativity, the predominant mental elements are cognitions of some kind, such as facts, principles, relations, rules, laws, formulae, and images. Yet immediate sensations may also play a role in laboratory experimentation and field exploration, and feelings may figure in scientific thought and discourse as well (Mahoney 1976). Sometimes these mental elements can be evoked voluntarily (e.g., the deliberate retrieval of a stored fact from memory); at other times these elements enter mental processing involuntarily (e.g., via a conditioned emotional association). Moreover, these mental elements do not have to be fully conscious, but rather, many enter information processing at the periphery of consciousness. ” (1988, p.6)

For knowledge creators, mental elements are important developmental resources because they could contribute to many creative knowledge projects.

If we can discover some mental elements from projects we worked on in the past, we can turn them into creative sparks for our present projects. In this way, our past becomes the ultimate creative resource of our present.

This idea is one of my important creative themes. You can find it in my 2022 book (draft) Creative Life Curation: Turning Experiences into Meaningful Achievements.

You can find it in a recent thematic conversation: How to turn “Intellectual Experience” into “Developmental Resources”?

This article will discuss an example of mental elements: the “ARCH” diagram.

From “ARCH” to “Spontaneous Concept System”

In 2019, I reflected on my work experience in digital social interaction design and developed a framework called Social Engagement Theory (SET). My primary interest was person-to-person social interactions.

I developed four diagrams for the SET framework. The ARCH diagram is the primary one of them. The diagram below is the basic model of ARCH diagram. It is the foundation of a method for discussing interpersonal interactions.

After 2019, I moved to develop a meta-theory framework called the Ecological Practice Approach (1, 2) and stopped developing the SET framework.

However, I continuously detached mental elements from the original SET framework and attached these mental elements to my new projects. For example, I used the word “SET” to name an Ecological — Activity Hybrid Approach in 2020. The difference is the full name between the original SET framework and the 2020 framework.

2019: Social Engagement Theory
2020: Structured Engagement Theory

Why did I love the word “SET”? Because it refers to a connection between my knowledge enterprise and Roger Barker’s Behavior Settings Theory. I also directly adopt Barker’s ideas for the 2020 framework. You can find more details in The SET Framework [Hybrid Approach].

I also detached the ARCH diagram from the 2019 SET framework and attached it to the D as Diagramming project in 2020. Later, I named it “Interactive Zone” (1, 2) in 2021.

In 2021, I relaunched the ARCH diagram on the Activity Analysis site (1, 2) and further developed it as a visual language of interpersonal interactions and collaborative project engagement (3, 4, 5, 6, 7).

Last week, I also used the ARCH diagram to develop a model about the structure of “Spontaneous Concept System”, see the diagram below. You can find more details in TALE: A Possible Theme called “Spontaneous Concept System”.

The above diagram doesn’t use the form of the original ARCH diagram. Its content (Primary Theme/Focus/Landscape) was inspired by an ARCH-based model.

What a magical transformation!

The notion of “the Attachance of Rediscovery” is really powerful because it encourages us to see our past experiences from a new perspective. In this manner, we can detach some mental elements from some projects whether they were unfinished, dead, or successful, and attach them to our new projects.

2019: SET(ARCH)

In 2019, I developed a framework called SET which stands for “Social Engagement Theory” for understanding Social Interaction Design. It refers to a creative space between social software design and ecological psychology.

The unit of analysis of the SET framework is the pan-interpersonal level.

Traditional social psychological theories and sociological theories tend to use real interpersonal actions or social roles for units of analysis. Inspired by interaction design and digital social practices, I adopted the term “Persona” from the field of User Experience to define a middle entity between Person and Social Role.

Person
Persona
Social Role

In this way, we can research pluralistic social interaction in the age of digital platforms. See the diagram below.

I used the “Diagramming as Thinking” method for developing the SET framework. The ARCH diagram is the primary diagram for modeling various situations of social interactions.

2020: Doowit[D as Diagramming(ARCH)]

In 2020, I worked on a social action platform called Doowit and launched a channel called D as Diagramming on the platform. See the screenshot below.

The channel displays several meta-diagrams I designed in the past years.

It is a great collection and exhibition! I also designed a logo for this channel.

Later I realized this channel is the initial objectification of my passion for diagramming.

The ARCH diagram was part of my journey of D as Diagramming!

2021: Diagram Blending [D as Diagramming (Interactive Zone)]

In August 2021, I relaunched the D as Diagramming project as an independent research project.

The diagram is one of my essential three knowledge units. I love to dwell in thought with diagramming. I even wrote a 108-page thesis that develops a theory about diagrams and diagramming in 2018. I consider two groups of ideas for my theory about diagrams. The first group is “meta-diagram, diagram, and diagram system” and the second group is “diagramming as an activity of knowing, theorizing and reflecting”.

The notion of “meta-diagram” considers a special type of diagram as an independent thing that doesn’t have to be a representation of an existing theory or model. For example, the 2x2 matrix diagram is a meta-diagram that doesn’t refer to any concrete theory or model such as BCG’s Growth-share matrix. A diagram system is a series of diagrams that share an intrinsic spatial logic and a visual identity.

The notion of “diagramming as an activity of knowing, theorizing and reflecting” adopts a process view to understand Diagrams. In other words, it is “becoming.” That means we can use diagrams as a tool for our thinking. We don’t need to consider all diagrams as final outcomes.

The D as Diagramming project led to a set of meta-diagrams. See the diagram below. I renamed ARCH’s meta-diagram to “Interactive Zone”.

Also, I developed a method called “Diagram Blending: Building Diagram Network”. The “Interactive Zone” meta-diagram was used to build diagram networks.

How does it work?

For example, the picture below shows the iART Diagram Network.

The left diagram is the iART framework. We can use the right three meta-diagrams to build a diagram network for the iART framework.

The form of the ARCH diagram was detached from the ARCH diagram. I named the form “the Interactive Zone”. I also used terms such as “Corner”, “Center”, and “Themes” to describe “the Interactive Zone”. See the diagram below.

There are many possible Themes within an interactive zone. Also, some themes are close to one Corner. For example, Theme A1 and Theme A2 are close to Corner A.

By adopting the Diagram Blending method, I adopted the Theme U meta-diagram to discuss themes within an interactive zone. The diagram below is an example. The Theme U diagram uses six themes to connect two containers. The middle container is the third container which is considered a zone.

You can find more details about this example in D as Diagramming: Tripartness and Diagram Blending.

The major outcome of the D as Diagramming project is a book titled Diagram Blending: Building Diagram Networks.

In 2021, my primary focus was the brand new method: Diagram Blending. The “ARCH” diagram and its meta-diagram “the Interactive Zone” were used as examples for developing the method.

2022: Activity Analysis [Project Engagement (ARCH)]

In 2022, I relaunched the ARCH diagram on the Activity Analysis site (1, 2) and further developed it as a visual language of interpersonal interactions and collaborative project engagement (3, 4, 5, 6, 7).

The Activity Analysis site was designed as a knowledge center about Activity Theory and social practice theories in general. The ARCH diagram was relaunched in the category of “Diagrams”.

In 2020, I used the ARCH diagram to curate Alan P. Fiske’s Relational Models Theory and Clay Spinuzzi’s typology of Activity. See the diagram below.

On Aug 19, 2022, I introduced the above diagram on the Activity Analysis site.

On Sep 20, 2022, I used the ARCH diagram to conduct a case study. See the diagram below.

You can find more details in The ARCH of Synergy Effects.

The above two articles inspired me to take one more step. I realized that I can use the ARCH diagram to develop a Visual Language of Interpersonal Interactions and Collaborative Project Engagement.

What’s Collaborative Project Engagement?

In Jan 2021, I wrote a book (draft) titled Project-oriented Activity Theory to introduce Andy Blunden’s approach to “An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity”.

In order to develop the notion of “Project as a unit of Activity” as a theoretical foundation of the new interdisciplinary theory of Activity, Blunden adopts Hegel’s logic and Vygotsky’s theory about “Unit of Analysis” and “Concept” as theoretical resources. The process is documented in four books:

An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity (2010)
Concepts: A Critical Approach (2012)
Collaborative Projects: An Interdisciplinary Study (2014)
Hegel for Social Movements (2019)

Blunden also gives an archetypal unit of a project in his 2010 book An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity:

“Two people working together on a common project”

Source: An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity (2010, p.315)

He says, “The rich context of the notion of collaboration also brings to light more complex relationships. The notions of hierarchy, command, division of labor, cooperation, exchange, service, attribution, exploitation, dependence, solidarity, and more can all be studied in the context of just two individuals working together on a common project. And yet almost all the mysteries of social science as well as a good part of psychology are contained in this archetypal unit: two people working together in a common project.” (2010, p.315)

What Blunden suggested are that 1) We can use “Project” as a new unit of analysis for Activity Theory, 2) Project should be understood as formulation of a concept, and 3) The archetypal unit of “Project” is two people working together in a common project.

How can two people work together on a common project?

How does it happen?

The notion of “Collaborative Project Engagement” aims to answer this question and develop a framework and a toolkit.

The outcome is the following basic model and a series of ARCH diagrams.

The above model roughly uses a five-stage schema to describe the process. Each stage has its own ARCH diagram.

The first stage is Stay Together and its keyword is Openness. See the diagram below.

The second stage is See Together and its keyword is Opportunity. See the diagram below.

The third stage is Think Together and its keyword is Relevance. See the diagram below.

The fourth stage is Work Together and its keyword is Activity. See the diagram below.

The fifth stage is Change Together and its keyword is Achievement. See the diagram below.

As a meta-framework, the ARCH Framework is used to curate various theoretical approaches. As a new visual language, it can be used for discussing interpersonal interactions.

I used it to curate several frameworks as a meaningful whole called “Collaborative Project Engagement Toolkit”. You can find more details in ARCH: A Visual Language of Interpersonal Interactions and Collaborative Project Engagement.

2023: TALE [Slow Talk (ARCH)]

In the past several months, I worked on TALE project. TALE stands for Thematic Analysis Learning Engagement. It was launched as a new knowledge center for hosting the Thematic Engagement project.

On Jan 23, 2023, I shared a new theme called “Slow Talk”. You can see more details in TALE: How to develop a framework for a possible theme called “Slow Talk”?

The theme of “Slow Talk” was inspired by Mani Vannan’s question:

Hi Oliver, Which of your models will you use to improve communication and enhance understanding?

It inspired me to rethink my knowledge frameworks. In the past several years, I worked on theories about Activity, Relevance, Affordances, Concepts/Themes, and Anticipation. I didn’t directly work in the field of Communication Research.

However, I made some knowledge frameworks about thematic controversy, collaborative projects, slow cognition, etc. Mani Vannan’s question encouraged me to curate these frameworks together.

So, I made a new possible theme called “Slow Talk”. I also developed a framework for the theme. See the network of themes below.

By using the ARCH framework, I developed a working definition for the theme “Slow Talk”. The diagram below is a rough idea.

Finally, I used four stages to define “the Tendency of Slow Talk”. This idea gives a path to the “Slow Talk” thematic space.

We can use this path as a working definition to support further development.

On Feb 22, 2023, I used the “Think Together: Shared Theme” diagram to develop an advanced version. See the diagram below.

Based on the basic model of “Think Together: Shared Theme”, I expanded its unit of analysis from a single theme to a theme network.

In simple words, a theme is a meaningful keyword, and a theme network is a set of connected meaningful keywords.

In order to discuss theme networks, I add two terms to the model.

Initial Theme: a meaningful keyword that triggers a conversation
Focus: A person’s Situational Theme Network
Landscape: A person’s Relevant Theme Network

“Focus” is about situational conversations. For example, a conversation around a post on Linkedin, a discussion around a Twitter thread, an email conversation, etc.

Once a person particulate in a situational conversation, a set of themes from his/her life/work themes would be activated. These themes become a person’s Focus. We can detective a person’s Focus (Situational Theme Network) from comments, messages, etc.

However, it is not easy to see “Landscape” which refers to a person’s Relevant Theme Network. A person can’t say many themes in a situational conversation, but he/she always thinks about more themes than what he/she could say. Landscape (Relevant Theme Network) refers to a set of themes that have a direct connection with the Situational Theme Network.

In other words, we see a person’s thematic thinking and speech as a whole which has two parts:

Focus (Situational Theme Network): speech in the situation.
Landscape (Relevant Theme Network): thinking in the mind.

A deep thematic conversation requires each other to take two moves:

Move from My Focus to Your Focus
Move from Focus to Landscape

The first move aims to achieve a good situational thematic conversation on the surface. The second move could build a deep relevant thematic conversation.

Based on a deep thematic conversation, two people can build a great mentionship which refers to mentioning each other relevantly and accurately. This is a small step to building social capital, at least for professional workers.

By using the model, I conducted two case studies. The first case study is about a thematic conversation about “Social Affordance”. You can find more details in Slow Talk: The ARCH of Thematic Engagement.

The second case study is about a thematic conversation about “Intellectual Experience”. You can find more details in Slow Talk #2: A Thematic Conversation about “Intellectual Experience”.

The above diagram and second case study was published on May 25, 2023.

Two days later, I uses some elements of the advanced version of the “Think Together: Shared Theme” diagram to develop a model for understanding the structure of “Spontaneous Concept System”.

2023: Platform Ecology [Concept System (ARCH)]

In May 2023, I also worked on two projects. One is a Strategic Design Research project about a web3 platform. The other one is a Creative Life Study project about Ping-keung Lui’s theoretical sociology.

While the first project is about technological innovation, the second project is about theoretical innovation. From the perspective of Activity Theory, these two projects refer to different types of concert actions and operations. However, I adopt the Platform Ecology approach to understand their similarity.

Both projects aim to develop an innovative platform to support others’ activities, I use the following frameworks of Platform Ecology for my research.

During the process of working on these two projects, I started developing some new ideas and reorganized my mind about these ideas.

A configurational theory of Platform Ecology — May 8, 2023
Concept Choices — May 22, 2023
Spontaneous Concept System — May 27, 2023

On May 26, I wrote an article about the thematic conversation about “Intellectual Experience”. The primary theme of the conversation is “Intellectual Experience”. It refers to the following question:

How can we turn “Intellectual Experience” into Developmental Resouces for Advanced Life Strategy?

I used the method of “Mapping Thematic Conversation” to make several diagrams about our thematic maps. The diagram below is about Grace’s Focus and Landscape.

Initial Theme/Primary Theme: Initial Theme refers to a meaningful keyword that triggers a conversation while Primary Theme refers to a primary theme of a conversation.
Focus: A person’s Situational Theme Network
Landscape: A person’s Relevant Theme Network

The above diagram was originally developed for the ARCH model.

I used the following elements to explore the structure of Spontaneous Concept System.

Primary Object
Situational Theme Network
Relevant Theme Network
Deep Theme Network

In simple words, a Spontaneous Concept System is a set of theme networks. The diagram below is a demo of a model of the structure of Spontaneous Concept System.

I also used my real experience of testing the web3 platform to conduct a case study of the model of the structure of Spontaneous Concept System.

You can find more details in A Possible Theme called “Spontaneous Concept System”.

The Situational — General Attachance

There is a simple pattern in the above six stories. From the first story to the fifth story, we only see changes in the visual aspect of the ARCH diagram. However, we see a different type of change in the transformation between the fifth story to the sixth story. I detached some content from the ARCH diagram and used them to develop a new diagram. See the picture below.

In Mental Moves #1: The Transformation of Mental Elements, I used the diagram below to identify three aspects of mental elements.

I detached the following terms from the fifth story and attached them to the sixth story:

Primary Theme/Object
Situational Theme Network/Focus
Relevant Theme Network/Landscape

I also added a new term called “Deep Theme Network/Backstage” to the sixth story.

There is a special type of Attachance behind this move:

Detaching from a Situational context
Attaching to a General context

The fifth story is about a method called “Mapping Thematic Conversation” which is about a Situational context.

In contrast, the sixth story is about a general model of the concept of “Spontaneous Concept System”.

The Hierarchy of Diagrams

The journey of moving from the first story to the fifth story is all about the changes in a diagram.

How to understand these moves?

We can use “the Hierarchy of Diagrams” to understand the attachances between these moves.

In 2018, I wrote a 108-page personal thesis titled Diagram Explained. I developed a framework for understanding multiple layers of diagrams.

Layer 1: Schema of spatial relationships
Layer 2: Models of domain cognition
Layer 3: Application of models
Layer 4: Artifact of epistemic tool
Layer 5: Mediation of human activities

In 2021, I conducted a case study on Diagram Development and used five types of diagrams.

Meta-diagram (It belongs to Layer 1)
Diagrams for Theories (It belongs to Layer 2)
Diagrams for Abstract Models (It belongs to Layer 2)
Diagrams for Concrete Models (It belongs to Layer 2)
Diagrams for Case Studies (It belongs to Layer 3)

See the diagram below. You can find more details in Diagram Explained: The Supportance Model and Its History.

Diagram Explained: The Supportance Model (Oliver Ding, 2021)

From the transformation of the “ARCH” diagram, we also learned two models:

Basic model
Advanced model

If we combine the above five types of diagrams and two models of diagrams together, we can find ten thematic spaces of a diagram. Now we can make a visual to map my mental moves between these different thematic spaces. See the diagram below.

This is a wonderful insight!

Now we have a map for identifying thematic spaces for the transformation of a particular diagram.

This map is a basic model too because we can modify the number of layers and models.

I’d like to share my principle about the “hierarchy”. There is no standard number of a hierarchy of a particular thing.

According to Construal level theory (CLT), a social psychology theory that describes the relationship between psychological distance and the extent to which people’s thinking is abstract or concrete.

Yaacov Trope and Nira Liberman pointed out in their article Construal-Level Theory of Psychological Distance, “According to CLT, then, people traverse different psychological distances by using similar mental construal processes. Because the various distances have the same egocentric reference point, they should all be cognitively related to each other and similarly affect and be affected by level of construal. As psychological distance increases, construals would become more abstract, and as level of abstraction increases, so too would the psychological distances people envisage. Construal levels thus expand and contract one’s mental horizon.”

Knowing “the Hierarchy of Things” depends on a person’s cognitive skills in understanding different construal levels.

If you want to make a useful hierarchy for yourself, you can define each level and find real examples for each level. Based on your definition and examples, you can use the hierarchy as a knowledge framework.

Moving between different Projects

As mentioned in Creative Action: The Chance-configuration Theory and Beyond, Attachance Theory is about the ecological meaning and value of detaching acts and attaching acts. In other words, we pay attention to the process of moving between containers.

For the knowledge engagement project and the thematic engagement project in general, we pay attention to Thematic Spaces which are a specific type of container.

Container [Configuration (Mental Elements)]

Moreover, we can use the concept of “Nested Containers” to define several containers for case studies. For example, we can find the following three types of containers from my journey of working on TALE.

Projects: social containers
Thematic Spaces: cognitive containers
Digital Platforms: physical containers

We can make a new model for discussing Container [Configuration (Mental Elements)]. See the diagram below.

Each project corresponds to a thematic space.
Each project is supported by a digital platform.
A mental element can move between two thematic spaces.

I have applied the above model to conduct several case studies. You can find more details in Mental Moves #1: The Transformation of Mental Elements and Mental Moves #2: Creative Swapping of Mental Elements.

This time I want to move the focus to the relationship between Mental Elements and Projects. The diagram below is a simple exploration. I use “main character” and “side character” to define the importance of mental elements in a particular project.

Let's pay attention to the column of Side Character.

In 2020, I worked on a social action platform called Doowit. The platform allows users to create their own channels and publish action templates. In order to test the platform, I created a set of channels around different themes. It’s clear that the D as Diagramming Channel is a side character to the Doowit project.

In 2022, I worked on the Activity Analysis project and launched a category called “Diagrams” on the site. If you know the historical development of the project, you know it was born from the Activity U project which is all about curating theoretical approaches to Activity Theory. Activity Theory or the “Cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT)” is an interdisciplinary philosophical framework for studying both individual and social aspects of human behavior.

Originally, I published a blog post about a particular ARCH diagram referring to Alan P. Fiske’s Relational Models Theory and Clay Spinuzzi’s typology of Activity. It was a side character to the Activity Analysis project.

Later, I developed the ARCH Framework as a visual language of interpersonal interactions and collaborative project engagement. In this way, it became a main character of the Activity Analysis project.

Why?

Because the Project Engagement approach is one of the major sub-project of Activity Analysis Center. The ARCH Framework contributes to Collaborative Project Engagement.

Finally, we see an emerging project called “Concept System”. I didn’t start the Concept System project. But, I started working on the idea of “Spontaneous Concept System” and the idea of “Conceptual Elaboration”.

In the past several weeks, I worked on developing the “Strategic Thematic Exploration” framework. I consider Strategic Thematic Exploration and Conceptual Elaboration as two phases of EARLY DISCOVERY of the journey of knowledge Engagement. See the diagram below.

You can find more details in Themes in the Field: Self, Agency, and Activity (Part III).

The ARCH diagram is a side character to the Concept System project.

The Fleeting Moment

The diagram below is based on my diagram “the Path of Creative Life” and the concept of “the fleeting moment” which is adopted from Ping Keung Lui’s Theoretical Sociology. You can find more details in Three Paths of Creative Life and A Semiotic System.

In 2007, Lui published a book titled Gaze, Action, and the Social World in which he presented his account of theoretical sociology. The fundamental starting point of his approach is an Ontology of action, which was inspired by Saint Augustine (354–430), Martin Heidegger (1889–1976), and Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908–1961). See the statement below:

The body is in action, action is in the fleeting moment, the fleeting moment is in the body.

According to Lui, “This moment is Augustinian, it comprises at the same time the Present of the Past, the Present of the Present, and the Present of the Future. The actor Remembers in the present of the past, Pays Attention in the present of the present, Expects in the present of the future.” (p.235–236, 2010, The Scientific Project of Sociology)

Reflection: Remembers in the present of the past
Emergence: Pays Attention in the present of the present
Anticipation: Expects in the present of the future

“Creative Life Curation” is about the Present of the Past. It means we reflect on the past of a creative life from the present time.

“Strategic Thematic Exploration” is about the Present of the Future. While we are exploring something new in the present time, the thing is anticipated to be useful in the future or used to guide us to the future.

If we want to turn experiences into developmental resources, we can move mental elements from the Past to the Present or the Future.