c2000: For the past 5 years, our argumentation mapping project at Stanford has focused on building large visual diagrams of major philosophical arguments. In one sense, they represent at new genre of diagraming, in that they are conceptual "maps" of a major ongoing debates. In a wider sense, they present a new way of showing how world-wide, interdisciplinary debates are taking place, hence the name argumentation mapping. The maps are used for teaching, learning, and research. In teaching they provide the big picture overviews that are often very difficult to convey in any other way, especially in diffuse, sprawling, interdisciplinary arguments.
- Robert Horn: There are differences between those argumentation mapping. schemes that focus on supporting real-time disputes and those which support carefully crafted, heavily edited representations of the intellectual history of some of humanity’s most significant and enduring debates.
- Jeff Conklin: The case study reports on ten years of continuous usage of Dialogue Mapping by a group of approximately 50 users in the Environmental Affairs division of Southern California Edison (SCE).
- afterword Douglas Engelbart: I've been reflecting upon the concepts collected and presented in my Unfinished Revolution Colloquium, held at Stanford University early in 2000... the key operational factor of this most-effective improvement infrastructure will be to effectively facilitate the concurrent evolution of a large number of ever more capable “social organisms,” and to make visible for each of them the best possible view of the evolutionary pathways from which to choose their next “route” adjustments.