C. The idea of Flow is made manifest in DebateGraph. 

C1 If there are snags in the map navigation you haven’t gotten to the basic building block you need to have. Building blocks are, by definition, non-dividable. 

C2 If something doesn’t fit anywhere the map structure is wrong. In this sense DebateGraph can help us break the (standard) narrative.

For example, a loose block containing information on Nitrogen Pollution finally signaled to me that Pollution is a big enough topic to be considered globally on its own, and is the end product of the Manufacture-Use-Trash economy that we live in, that does not take into account natural capital, that Trash and Pollution are closely linked. In other words, the standard narrative that Trash exists and is a natural part of our world ain’t necessarily so. Pollution doesn’t fit into that narrative and when it exists outside of a map being build along those narrative lines will stick out like a sore thumb. This then lead onto discussion of the Circular Economy and so on.

In practice what happened was that I built out a section of the map and then choreographed the map (edited the map structure) to make the Flow better. 

C3 In the future we will measure the Flow of the map by the speed with which it is navigated. Fast speeds will correlate with good Flow.

It is interesting to think of this in relation to our own thinking. I am beginning to suspect building maps in our heads is a primary mind function and this is why both a) the Stream is overwhelming (we don’t have time to sort it) and b) DebateGraph appeals intuitively; once we take the maps out of our heads we can switch from local thinkers to global thinkers, a point I have explored before.