Have others of you noticed that when "mental models" are discussed these
days, most often it is pejoratively? Not to pick on him (I usually enjoy
his insights), but for example when Bill Braun describes mental models he
includes the apparently quite negative characteristic that they mislead
him ...:
>to believe that I have the one "correct" understanding of reality.
Yes, mental models can get in the way of understanding, and certainly can
throw up impediments to changing one's understanding. But isn't it also
true that without mental models we would find it impossible to think at
all? I don't even mean that they are a necessary evil -- I think they are
a necessary good. The human brain has as-yet-unmatched powers of
abstraction, ability to compare and contrast and use analogies and
metaphors and to visualize constructs that cannot be actually seen with
the eyes, etc., -- all these are part of our ability to use mental models.
I, for one, would hate to be without them -- even though I must take care
(as with any powerful tools) not to use them carelessly or thoughtlessly.
--"John Gunkler" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>