TALE: The Challenge of Thematic Conversation

Published in

TALE500

13 min readJan 19, 2023

Themes, Concepts, Notions, and Meanings

TALE stands for Thematic Analysis Learning Engagement. TALE was launched as a new knowledge center for the Thematic Engagement project.

Thematic Engagement refers to the “Person — Theme” relationship and interaction.

There are various concrete activities and projects under the abstract notion of Thematic Engagement. We will introduce some examples one by one.

This post is part of a series called “Thematic Conversation”. I will discuss the notion of “Thematic Conversation” while running a real “Thematic Conversation Project” with my friend Daiana Zavate.

A Thematic Conversation Project about Strategic Exploration

The project was born from our private chat about annual themes on Linkedin. Later, we moved to Medium and wrote posts. She will share her journey of exploring the theme of “Strategic Exploration”. I will watch her journey and review her diagrams and ideas.

You can visit the links below to follow our conversation:

Jan 17 — Oliver — How to Set Annual Themes for 2023?
Jan 18 — Daiana — Personal Project on Strategic Exploration: Thinking differently requires doing things differently
Jan 18 — Oliver — TALE: Start A Thematic Conversation
Jan 19 — Daiana — Strategic Exploration: Peeling onions without shedding tears
Jan 20 — Oliver — TALE: The Challenge of Thematic Conversation

This project is not planned. My original plan about TALE is to discuss some topics about Thematic Engagement in general. I didn’t intend to move to the concrete level to discuss a particular project.

Since Daiana started this journey, I’d like to follow her moves while maintaining my own track. I use the “WXMY” diagram to visualize our conversation. See the diagram below.

Daiana Zavate is a strategic designer and creative thinker. The theme of “Strategic Exploration” is part of her creative life about Strategic Design.

Strategic Exploration: this is her primary theme for 2023.
TCP(SE): It refers to a thematic conversation project about Strategic Exploration.

I am working on the Thematic Engagement project and TALE (Thematic Analysis Learning Engagement) which is a new Knowledge Center.

Thematic Conversation Activity: There are many types of practices of Thematic Engagement. Thematic Conversation Activity is a theme-centered conversation.
TCP: It refers to Thematic Conversation Project. In other words, real cases of Thematic Conversation Activity.

There is a three-level hierarchy for the Thematic Engagement project:

Theme: Thematic Engagement
Activity: Thematic Curation, Thematic Conversation, Thematic Diagramming, etc …
Project: A thematic conversation project about Strategic Exploration, A thematic curation project about Learning & Development Trends, Matt Cuts’ Try Something New for 30 Days, etc…

In this way, I will discover some insights from TCP(SE) and incorporate them into articles about TCP. Sometimes, I would not respond to Daiana’s posts directly.

The Challenge of Thematic Conversation

Thematic Conversation is really hard!

Why?

Because we are running a dialogue around super abstract things such as Themes, Concepts, Notions, and Meanings. The challenge is not only about language, but also cognition.

In Against Conceptual Heterogeneity: A Case Study of Academic Knowledge Curation, I mentioned a challenge for connecting THEORY and PRACTICE: Conceptual Heterogeneity.

What’s Conceptual Heterogeneity? It refers to different people using the same word to express different conceptual meanings. It leads to Knowledge Fragmentation inside one discipline. Also, it raises the cost of cross-boundary collaborative projects.

As mentioned in AAI: Cross-boundary Knowledge Curation, one task of cross-boundary collaborative projects is building shared conceptual reality and language.

We will face the same challenge in the Thematic Conversation Activity.

In general, I use a tool called Concept Dynamics for building Conceptual Empathy. The diagram below is an example.

The Concept Dynamics framework suggests four views on a concept:

Ecological Reality: real experience with a concept
Conceptual Reality: idea about a concept
Linguistic Reality: name of a concept or ordinary language
Context: what’s the background of the situation?

You can find more details about the example of “Ecosystem” in Against Conceptual Heterogeneity: A Case Study of Academic Knowledge Curation.

How about Strategic Exploration?

If we apply the Concept Dynamics framework to Strategic Exploration Activity, what’s the insight?

The insight is that we can understand the complexity of human language and creative cognition.

Do we need to debate on language? Don’t does it too early.

For Strategic Exploration Activity, I believe it is better to follow the following sequence:

Ecological Reality > Conceptual Reality > Linguistic Reality

Why?

Because the hardest part of Strategic Exploration is discovering Significant Insights about Ecological Reality in the real-life world.

(p.s. I don’t apply this notion to Strategic Imagination Activity.)

However, how can we discuss themes and concepts without having conceptual meanings of the same words?

We can respond to this challenge with the following two solutions:

See meanings of words/concepts from real examples (and may find suitable words/concepts to replace original words/concepts).
Move from a single word/concept/theme to a network of words/concepts/themes.

The second solution is really useful for Strategic Exploration Activity because one function of strategy is about curating pieces of information into a new meaningful whole.

In the early stage of Strategic Exploration Activity, we can focus on the network of concepts and pay attention to discovering possible configurations of a concept network.

Partonomy and Taxonomy

How to optimize the configurations of a concept network? We can learn something about spatial cognition.

When we think about thinking, we usually think we are thinking in words. However, linguistic thought is not the only way of the human mind. Cognitive scientist and psychologist Barbara Tversky argued that spatial thought is the foundation of our abstract thinking in her 2019 book Mind in Motion: How action shapes thought.

I want to highlight three ideas I learned from Barbara Tversky. The first is about taxonomy and partonomy, the second is about individual differences in mental rotation, and the third is a story about the Feynman diagram. First, Tversky said, “Spatial hierarchies are partonomies, not taxonomies like the categories of objects, events, and scenes…Partonomies are hierarchies of parts; taxonomies are hierarchies of kinds…categories allow reducing the amount of information in the world…” (p.77)

While Conceptual Thinking follows the logic of taxonomy, Spatial Thinking follows the logic of Partonomy. The designer of the above business card doesn’t just list the items below but organizes them in a structure of Partonomy.

{email}
<name>
[Instagram]
(Website)

The outcome is awesome! We see both a meaningful whole and its several parts.

According to Barbara Tversky, “Like taxonomies, partonomies allow inferences, but inferences of containment, not of properties. If a knee is part of a leg and a leg is part of a body, then a knee is part of a body. ”(p.78)

Designers tend to see the world from the perspective of spatial thinking.

Strategic Exploration Activity requires strategic designers to switch between Conceptual Thinking and Spatial Thinking.

If you want to know more about Partonomy, Taxonomy, and Space Affordances, see this post.

Now we are going to respond to Daiana Zavate’s new diagram about Strategic Exploration.

A Parallel Activity

Daiana Zavate’s post Strategic Exploration: Peeling onions without shedding tears introduces two ideas for the thematic conversation:

The notion of “Storytelling”
The process of “Building Meaning”

It’s clear that she discovers a new activity within the field of Meta-learning.

An old activity: the process of “creation”
A new activity: the process of “building meaning”

Let’s see this change in diagrams. The diagram below is made by Daiana Zavate. It’s an outcome of a Diagram Blending. She combines two diagrams together.

I don’t modify the above diagram but return to my original diagram. See the new version below.

What’s the difference between Daiana Zavate’s version and my version?

While she directly adopts the following diagram about “Building Meaning” to expand the original diagram, I intently remove the details of the diagram.

A useful diagram Daiana discovered here (No English subtitles)

Why do I remove the details of “building meaning”?

As mentioned above, the early stage of strategic exploration is about discovering possible configurations of a concept network and developing an optimal configuration that could be turned into a situation framework.

In the previous conversation, we define a thematic space called “the Field of Meta-learning”. Now we move to discover more details about the space.

Daiana Zavate adds the process of “Building Meaning” to the field. This is a pretty awesome action. It points out that there are two kinds of activities within the field of meta-learning.

The “Creation” activity
The “Building Meaning” activity

My new diagram highlights this significant insight. However, I don’t want to claim the concrete mechanism of the “Building Meaning” activity at this stage. We can explore this deep issue later.

Jump from “Subjectivity” to “Intersubjectivity”

Daiana Zavate also introduces the notion of “Storytelling” to discuss Strategic Exploration.

To take the next step, I will introduce a new dimension to Strategic Exploration. My previous diagram, reviewed by Oliver, revealed to me one important medium for emergence: Storytelling. The way I designed previously, somehow hid this element, but it became more intuitive in the new version:

With it, I can move into the heart of the knowledge theme exploration, since identifying relevant knowledge theme marks only the beginning of the exploration. Embarking on this route requires multiple moments of departure: the knowledge themes require constant updating and validation — they must survive the test of time and not hinder new discoveries beyond their scope. A useful tool for testing the value of learning is Storytelling
Storytelling becomes an informal and implicit ally that gives Meaning to each element in the diagram (that is why I won’t reveal the visual representation of Storytelling itself, at least not yet).

I use “Conversation” for my new diagram. What is the difference between “Conversation” and “Storytelling”? I don’t want to change Daiana’s original Conceptual meaning. I just use a noun to replace a gerund. This is not a big change.

However, there is a significant Jump behind Daiana’s action. She jumps from the “Subjectivity” thematic space to the “Intersubjectivity” thematic space.

What does it mean? I use the following working definitions for our discussion:

Subjectivity: only considers a subject without considering complex social interactions
Intersubjectivity: considers two or more subjects and complex social interactions.

See the diagram below. Before, the five movements of meta-learning are all about “Subjectivity”. It can refer to a person, two people, or a team. However, we don’t care about the internal social dynamics between two people and within a team. In other words, they are just one Actor from the perspective of sociology.

However, the notion of “Storytelling” is different because it is a concept of “Intersubjectivity”. There is an “A -> B” schema behind the notion of “Storytelling”.

After adding “Storytelling” to the framework, Daiana has to apply the schema of “Intersubjectivity” to other concepts such as Consolidation, Exploration, Reflection, Anticipation, and Orientation.

For example, the concept of “Anticipation”. How does it work if we consider “intersubjectivity”? If members of a team have different “anticipation”, how does Strategic Exploration work?

We should notice that “Subjectivity” is the foundation of “Intersubjectivity”. If you develop a framework that considers “Intersubjectivity”, you have to deal with “Subjectivity”.

However, if you work on a framework only about “Subjectivity”, you don’t have to do anything about “Intersubjectivity”.

The jump from “Subjectivity” to “Intersubjectivity” is significant because it increases the complexity of the project in the early stage.

Themes, Concepts, and Framework

Why do I hide the details of the “Building Meaning” activity in the new diagram?

In the above discussion, I have mentioned that the decision is about Configuration and Mechanism. We can confirm both issues at one time, or we can solve them one by one.

Let’s look at the diagram about “meaning” again.

This is a typical model of Sign. According to Wikipedia, “A sign is an object, quality, event, or entity whose presence or occurrence indicates the probable presence or occurrence of something else…The philosophical study of signs and symbols is called semiotics; this includes the study of semiosis, which is the way in which signs (in the semiotic sense) operate…Semiotics, epistemology, logic, and philosophy of language are concerned about the nature of signs, what they are and how they signify.”

We should notice that Daiana wants to use the model to discuss “Storytelling” which refers to the process of “Building Meaning” within the field of Meta-learning.

Why does Daiana need the process of “Building Meaning”? She points out the logic behind this notion:

…the knowledge themes require constant updating and validation — they must survive the test of time and not hinder new discoveries beyond their scope.
A useful tool for testing the value of learning is Storytelling.
Storytelling becomes an informal and implicit ally that gives Meaning to each element in the diagram.

In fact, Daiana doesn’t realize that she is moving from the “knowledge theme” space to the “knowledge framework” space.

“Strategic Exploration” is a knowledge theme
The diagram offers a knowledge framework for explaining “Strategic Exploration”

In the early stage, the diagram only represents a draft of the possible knowledge framework. This is the reason that Daiana mentions “constant updating and validation”.

Now we have to use “Knowledge Concepts” and “Concept Network” to replace “Knowledge Themes” and “Theme Network” for further discussion.

Knowledge Themes: Strategic Exploration
Theme Network: Strategic Exploration + Meta-learning + Creation
Knowledge Concepts: The Field of Meta-learning, Learning, Working, Synthesis, Connection, Expression, etc
Concept Network: a network of connected concepts

A Knowledge Framework is a Concept Network. However, not every Concept Network is a Knowledge Framework. For example, a Tag Cloud on a bookmarking website is a Concept Network, not a Knowledge Framework.

While the knowledge theme refers to a creative space which is a container, it doesn’t offer content to the container. The knowledge framework is the content of the theme.

If we adopt the General Curation Framework from Curativity Theory, then we can get a model for Developing Knowledge Framework. See the diagram below.

Theme: knowledge theme
Container: the process of developing a knowledge framework
Whole: the final knowledge framework as a new meaningful whole
Pieces outside Container: concepts, notions, and experiences
Pieces inside Container: knowledge concepts

The above General Curation Framework also considers a loop between Actor and Audience. This loop echoes Storytelling/Conversation.

Experience, Meaning, and Insights

What does the process of “Building Meaning” actually look like?

Daiana also shares a real example:

Acknowledge Reality

(given context as presented to you)

19 January 2023. Sunny weather. Workday.

Select the Object

(what sparks your attention or what is available to you at that moment)

Writing about Strategic Exploration before following through with my work-related tasks for the day

Attribute a Sign

(an abstract element that can be correlated with your Object and is context-relevant)

It’s a personal exploration filled with uncertainty about the outcome, but something like Hero’s Journey pops into my head.

Distill a Pre-concept

(a working definition — a metaphor or analogy, for instance — that serves as a shortcut into accessing the previous three steps as one)

Discovery of a personal fable (I’m supposed to learn a skill that I cannot fully map yet)

Settle into Meaning

(hard wire the Pre-concept into your experience as something worth sharing — this is not really an accurate representation of reality since that is hardly possible; so that’s why there’s a distortion in the meaning)

Self-fulfilling prophecy (Reality confers the perfect timing for pursuing this exploration. While the future is uncertain, the present has just become more fulfilling. That distortion from the previous diagram becomes Creation which can now be the writing of this post, and creation of the self shaped by the process).

To be honest, I don’t fully understand this model of “Building Meaning”.

I’d like to re-tell this story with my terms:

Time: 19 January 2023. Sunny weather. Workday, before following through with my work-related tasks for the day.
Event: Writing about Strategic Exploration
Theme: personal exploration (It’s a personal exploration filled with uncertainty about the outcome…)
Reference 1: Hero’s Journey (…but something like Hero’s Journey pops into my head)
Insight: That distortion from the previous diagram becomes Creation which can now be the writing of this post, and creation of the self shaped by the process.
Reference 2: Self-fulfilling prophecy

I don’t under the definition of “Pre-concept” and Daiana’s example of “Pre-concept”. So, the new version of the story doesn’t mention it.

This story has two sections of “building meaning”:

Section 1: Event > Theme > Reference 1

“Writing about Strategic Exploration” is an Event. Daiana uses the Theme of “Personal Exploration” to frame this event. Moreover, she also uses a Reference called “Hero’s Journey” to associate with the event and the theme.

Section 2: Insight > Reference 2

While “Event” is a simple description of life experience, “Insight” is used to describe a notion based on an observed deviation or a unique event of life experience.

After using a long sentence to describe an Insight, Daiana uses a Reference called “Self-fulfilling prophecy” to frame this insight.

This is a great story of Strategic Exploration Activity because it is all about Generating Significant Insights for Further Activity.