Introduction

What if someone said to you that if you learned this new and challenging DMAP methodology and applied it in a disciplined and orderly way, you could see any situation or problem from 28 unique dialectical perspectives, views, and angles, both frozen as a single instant in time and in a continuous change and transition process.

Would you be interested in the advantage it would give to your life and career?

This new DMAP discipline of applying each of the 28 unique dialectical perspectives in advanced analysis and problem-solving will help ensure you do not miss critical details, nuances, subtle patterns, errors, or difficult-to-discover absences. It would enable you to see the situation at a level of sophistication and clarity that no one else (except another skilled DMAP specialist) could.

If all of the above were true, would you investigate DMAP further?

 

What is DMAP

DMAP is an acronym that stands for Dalectical Metasystemic Analysis and Problem-solving. The DMAP methodology and breakthrough is also known by its originator, Otto Laske, formerly of the Frankfurt School and Harvard, as the dialectical thought forms system (DTF).

There are 28 unique dialectical thought forms and perspectives employed in DMAP analysis and problem-solving. In a disciplined manner, the powerful DMAP process enables the user to view a single moment in time, a series of moments, a situation, a continually changing condition, a problem, or even a single or multiple interacting and interdependent, complex adaptive systems from 28 unique dialectical perspectives.

Without DMAP, most people will view a situation, condition, problem, or possibility from only a few perspectives, typically 2-5. With the DMAP analysis and problem-solving process, you are "forced" to view a situation, condition, problem, or possibility from 28 distinct and important dialectical perspectives. These additional perspectives illuminate usually overlooked or missed essential details relevant to what you are analyzing or trying to resolve.

DMAP simply provides magnitudes more detail and perspective on any situation. The more detail and different relevant perspectives you have on a situation, the higher the probability you will develop a significantly better analysis, solution, or decision.

An analogy using computer screen resolution, measured in dots per inch (DPI), provides a clearer explanation of how powerful DMAP is compared to earlier analytical methodologies. For comparison, think of classic logic as having a computer detail resolution of 420 dpi. Think of Enlightenment-era scientific methodology as having a computer screen resolution of 720 dpi in terms of detail. Think of systems thinking as having a computer detail resolution of 1440 dpi. Finally, think of DPAP as having a computer detail resolution of 5660 dpi. DMAP provides vastly superior detail and clarity.

DMAP is designed and best used to analyze and manage individual or multiple interacting ccomplex adaptive systems, including climate change, politics, war, the economy, society, and the environment. It is also indispensable for general science and research.

DMAP advances, transcends, and yet incorporates the best from earlier thinking methodologies, including systems thinking, data and statistical analysis, logic, bias checking, and the principles of scientific methodology and falsification. It is the essential thinking skill you will need to excel at the highest levels of analysis and problem-solving in complex adaptive systems.

The dialectical aspect of DMAP is not the classical dictionary definition of dialectical dialogue. It extends far beyond Hegel's thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. Otto Laske, its originator, has significantly advanced the dialectical work of leading scholars, including Theodor W. Adorno, Elliot Jaques, Michael Basseches, and Roy Baskar, among others. As a result, the meaning of "dialectical" must now expand to encompass the 28 perspectives of dialectical thinking.

Unfortunately, DMAP is a learning and skill-set challenge. However, if you are or will be working with interacting, complex adaptive systems, it is the new gold standard of advanced analysis and problem-solving. 

DMAP will lavishly reward your time and effort in learning it. Unlike earlier thinking methodologies that were predominantly left-brain, DMAP is different. To master it, it will recruit, develop, and leverage the best of both your right- and left-brain capabilities and potentials, with greater analysis and problem-solving bandwidth than you ever thought possible.

Individuals who master the DMAP methodology will be in high demand and will be able to shape their own career futures. DMAP is relatively new, and currently, individual referrals and word of mouth primarily drive its spread. Training is now taking place in many countries, including the United States, Germany, France, Japan, and Russia.

You might be wondering why a think tank would also prioritize promoting the worldwide training and adoption of this new analysis and problem-solving methodology.

The reasons DMAP is expanding rapidly are simple:

1. Dialectical metasystemic thinking represents a significant leap forward in advanced analysis and problem-solving, while still being firmly grounded in the foundational principles of logic, systems thinking, bias checking, statistics, big data analysis, and scientific methodology and falsification.

2. If more think tanks, corporate C-suite members, politicians, intelligence agency analysts, and government agency heads learn and adopt DMAP, they would not only more easily understand and resolve more of the world's biggest crises within the world's complex adaptive systems, and the solutions would be more effective, leading to a better world for all.

3. DMAP may be the advanced thinking methodology that could bring about a second enlightenment. Similar to how the basics of scientific methodology and logic brought about the first enlightenment.

DMAP is derived from Professor Otto Laske's 28 dialectical thought forms (DTF). Laske's DTF has two other application areas in addition to DMAP: 

1. 1. Adult education (as a way to extend the highest possibilities of adult cognitive and social-emotional development).
   2. Executive and Management consulting and coaching.

 

Here is an example of how Otto Laske's DTF methodology is used in DMAP analysis and problem-solving at a think tank

DMAP is a unique, intensive analysis and problem-solving application of Laske's DTF methodology, particularly useful when analyzing problem areas involving complex adaptive systems such as the environment, the economy, politics, and climate change. The following is an application description from Lawrence Wollersheim, a lead and senior DMAP analyst, of how he uses DMAP in his climate change analysis work at the Universe Institute and at Job One for Humanity.

Please note that individuals differ in intellectual capacity and prior educational experience, so there will always be variations in how they learn and apply DMAP. Although there are minor differences in application, when talking with other individuals who have also become adept at DMAP, we noticed their learning process experiences were generally similar to what you will read below.

Here is the DMAP process that Wollersheim uses. It roughly proseeds like this: sense → research and stabilize → classify lightly → translate dialectically → reality-test.

1. I clear my mind of distractions, and I think about any intuitions or gut feelings I have about the subject matter that I am going to study and analyze. I note them down.

I note down any feelings I have about the area of study I'm about to engage in, and I search for any potential pre-existing biases on the subject area. After completing that process, I list my current ideas on the subject, uninfluenced yet by what I am about to study. I also pay attention to potentially relevant fleeting images and thoughts in this highly unstructured first DMAP action.

I engage in what can be called a creative free thinking phase based only on any previous knowledge I might have acquired related to the new subject matter I'm about to analyze. In this creative free-thinking period, I might develop a conditional theory or hypothesis related to the new materials I'm about to analyze. I save all these original notes for what's called a "Red Team" validity checklist that I will go through at the end of the seven-step process below.

 

2. Next, I review relevant existing and new climate change science and published peer-reviewed research papers across all climate systems and subsystems. My initial review of climate change materials exceeded 20,000 pages.

I analyze horizontally across the many systems and subsystems that comprise the climate change master or meta-system. Most researchers work vertically within their specialty and seldom have the opportunity to analyze and solve problems horizontally across related studies from the systems and subsystems in their area.

Climate is a complex adaptive system, and to understand it sufficiently, one must closely inspect all climate change systems and subsystems that are interconnected or interdependent in linear or potentially nonlinear cause-and-effect relationships. (There are numerous climate change subsystems collectively creating climate change. The major climate change systems and subsystems include: atmospheric water vapor; soils and forests that sequester or release carbon; Arctic Ocean ice cover; ocean carbonization and heat levels; Antarctic glacier break-offs; the albedo effect; and tundra and permafrost thaw, among others.

While completing this step and the steps below, I maintain my near-daily exercise routine, which helps me observe my thoughts and view them as external objects that can be evaluated, manipulated, discarded, and so on.

 

3. I take extensive notes in this first review of all relevant climate change science. I look for logical errors, biases, false premises, or omissions of information that should be present but are not. I also look for climate change-related patterns between and within studies that may not have been previously recognized. I even scan for areas where results might have been biased and skewed by outside funding sources or other inherent conflicts of interest.

While also screening for my own and external biases, I immerse myself in all the information from a logical, systems-thinking, and general big-data analytical, left-brained perspective on what is happening. I make myself fully present to the data, without distractions. I continue to take more notes, extensively reviewing the data at the logical and systems thinking levels. (If you are not a proficient systems-level thinker, succeeding at this and the next DMAP level will be challenging.)

 

4. Once that level of bias, logic, and systems-level analysis is over, I re-examine the situation, crisis, or problem from Laske's 28 dialectical perspectives. These 28 perspectives offer new dialectical ways to view ongoing processes, relationships, contexts, and transformations within the data set you are evaluating. 

To do this, I sometimes refer back to Laske's helpful list of 28 dialectical questions and other tools he developed to help his students systematically cover all 28 dialectical perspectives and possibilities. Sometimes, some of the many Laske 28 perspective questions are not entirely applicable to the data, analysis, or situation you are reviewing, but using Laske's 28 perspective questions at this early stage in a disciplined and orderly way will surprise you over and over, revealing new perspectives, ideas, possibilities, and solutions that will naturally emerge during this questioning process. 

Please note that using the 28 dialectical perspectives in a linear checklist fashion is not the ultimate goal. But it does help discipline beginners and intermediate-level users who have not yet mastered the 28 perspectives, calling them up as a very comprehensive wholeism and dialectical gestalt of some moment in time or a situation in transition.  Once one moves beyond using the 28 perspectives as a checklist to linearly examine the situation or problem and begins to see it non-linearly and holistically, one moves to a whole other level of seeing and understanding reality, analysis, and problem-solving.

 

5. Next, I flowchart out and think as deeply and fluidly as possible about how each of the 28 dialectical perspectives of DMAP could affect or involve the situation, crisis, or problem, or how they might influence future consequences, timeframes, or solutions. I take plenty of notes that I can refer back to later. This is another layer of tedious, detailed thought and work.

I still use my logical, analytical, and systems-thinking skills in this second, deeper thinking process. But in addition to those thinking methodologies, I now also begin to deeply and fluidly ponder the situation or the problem to be solved from all of the 28 dialectical perspectives, which again provide much more usable linear detail and non-linear information about the possibilities.

In this step of deep dialectical analysis, I once again look for errors or omissions of information that should be present but are not. I also look for climate change-related patterns between and within studies that may not have been previously recognized. But this time, I am doing it with and at the level of the 28 dialectical perspectives. This highly detailed, broad perspective reveals information that is simply not available at the traditional logical or systems-theory level of thinking.

At this stage, the right brain, and even its subconscious bandwidth, is more fully engaged in looking at the situation in ways that the left brain's linear analytical capabilities cannot. This is the level at which, if the individual practitioner is not able to engage right-brain capabilities alongside their left-brain capabilities, they will get stuck or perform poorly. (There are drills and exercises that can help you develop a greater left and right brain activation balance.)

 

6. After this extensive, tedious, dialectically driven immersion in all the data and flowcharting related to the analysis or situation, I step back and do something completely unrelated to this work. I stop thinking about the evaluation or being involved in it in any way whatsoever. What happens next is quite remarkable.

Spontaneously and without effort, the target situation and its many dynamics will return to me in unique, near-complete epiphanies and whole-system, right-brain-engaged cognitions, whether awake or asleep. These sudden right-brain epiphanies synthesize massive amounts of climate-change information in entirely new or more holistic ways that I did not see earlier in the process of left-brained, deep, linear, logical, and system-theory-level analysis, or in lower-level dialectical, linear left-brain flowcharting.

One of the most remarkable aspects of the final stages of the DMAP process is that it dramatically accelerates epiphany and whole-system cognition, surpassing anything I have ever experienced. It's regular practice also appears to enhance the development and use of both the brain's right and left hemispheres.

Over time, and through my repetitive use of DMAP procedures, which become somewhat unconscious at some point, I have had numerous epiphanies in other areas of my life, particularly on subjects outside of my think tank assignments, where I am also very familiar with the components, conditions, and elements of that area.

 

7. The final "Red Team" fact-checking validation step. Once I have produced a new analysis or solution using DMAP and completed all prior steps, I review my original materials, notes, and the critical facts described in numbers one through six above that led to my final dialectical metasystemic analysis or solution. I review and re-verify those areas in at least two separate processes or layers to ensure I have not missed anything and that no bias, incorrect premise, weak or exaggerated evidence, or estimation has influenced my conclusions. This repetitive, multifactorial Red Team analysis and solution-verification process also tends to produce unseen errors and additional nuanced insights and epiphanies. It can also strengthen your reliance on earlier insights or discoveries. This red team process is also essential since I am quite dyslexic.

In this "Red Team" final fact-checking, I will go back to the listing of Laske's 28 DTF perspectives and his 28 DTF questions to make triple sure that in this massive analysis process, I have not underweighted, overweighted, or omitted any one of the 28 perspectives in my analysis of the problem or the solution. The 28 perspectives offer a complex, subtle, and nuanced way of looking at any situation, whether frozen in time or evolving, and omitting the relevance of any one of these perspectives can lessen the final quality of a solution or analysis.

Because I am now relatively proficient and fluid with these 28 perspectives, the process I just mentioned is more spontaneous and fluid than a perspective-by-perspective, linear, and mechanical one. If you are a beginner or not proficient with these 28 perspectives, you will once again use Laske's mind-opening 28 perspective questions or other references in his books until you are able to do this without referring back to the checklist. 

Another subtle but important reason to carefully verify your "Red Team" DMAP work before releasing it is that, aside from the public embarrassment of incorrect or inapplicable work that could potentially make things worse, its validity tests often yield additional original analysis and solutions that could not be seen had you not seen the problem or situation within an integrated holistic viewing through all 28 perspectives. Additionally, your analysis or solution is likely to contain original ideas if you have followed the DMAP process diligently. True originality is rare today and is more likely to be challenged by peers and competitors because it is often highly disruptive or unlike anything they have seen before. If you do your red team process correctly, you will be ready for these peer challenges.

For Red Team validity-checking reference, the following three links and the processes described within them are part of my, the Universe Institute, and Job One For Humanity's extensive Red Team fact-checking process. 

Click here for our Basic Rationality and Thinking Skills Summary and White Paper, which explains how we apply the advanced layers and various reality testing methodologies of rational thinking to our work. We created this white paper in collaboration with the Job One for Humanity Climate Change Think Tank.

Click here to see additional factors we use to evaluate the credibility of evidence from other sources in our research. This document includes procedures we use when data is missing or intentionally omitted, and when that data is critical to the evaluation. 

Click here for our Advanced Rationality and Thinking Skills Summary and White Paper. This paper includes not only DMAP training but also training on the powers of recursive learning and metacognition as well as the basics of Superintelligence.

Individuals who become proficient in DMAP will have a significant advantage over those who are not skilled in dialectical metasystemic analysis and problem-solving methodology. Today, the world is driven by complex adaptive systems, and DMAP is well-suited to these applications. Individuals who master the challenging DMAP methodology can shape their career trajectories as this credential becomes increasingly recognized and in demand at the highest levels of today's organizations, corporations, and governments.

Otto Laske's DMAP methodology has made a significant contribution to the history of human thought. In Stoic philosophy, as advanced by figures such as Marcus Aurelius, the Roman emperor, carefully considering what is happening in front of you and how to respond appropriately before acting was a central principle. Otto Laske has expanded this simple Stoic central principle to a far more comprehensive phenomenal level by allowing you to see an evolving moment in time or a series of moments from 28 different perspectives. Keep going.

Those who can master this new DMAP thinking methodology can now see what is happening in front of them in a disciplined, organized way across 28 dialectical perspectives. The more perspectives one can see and understand about a situation, the better one can evaluate it and decide what to do. I believe that if you learned the new DMAP analysis and problem-solving methodology, any problem solution you applied this methodology to would be magnitudes more complete, wiser, and effective than any of the older decision-making processes or methodologies you are currently using, such as traditional logic, bias checking, big data analysis, and systems theory principles.

Laske's advanced DMAP methodology has enabled me to integrate numerous observations about my life and my work in climate change science and evolutionary theory in less time than I ever imagined. It has also helped me evaluate complex personal situations in my life in a whole new way, either saving me significant trouble and cost or more quickly motivating me to take prudent risks and seize new opportunities that offer real, dialectically evaluated benefits.

Finally, certain qualities will help ensure your success in learning DMAP. One of these qualities is quite surprising. Before you begin the DMAP learning process, I strongly recommend reviewing the qualities or prerequisites for success with DMAP on this page.

 

 

Lawrence Wollersheim, DMAP Specialist at the Universe Institute

 

Could the new DMAP thinking methodology bring about a great second enlightenment era for humanity?

During the original Enlightenment, in the 1600s, a breakthrough in thinking occurred; the basics of prior rational, logical thought were integrated with the new principles of scientific methodology and falsification. This new thinking methodology allowed for a new way of conceptualizing and managing the world. Even now, 400 years later, we still reap the bountiful benefits of the first Enlightenment breakthrough new way of thinking.

Today, we are also on the brink of what might be considered an even greater Second Enlightenment, advancing a new methodology of thought. This is happening because the DMAP process is far more capable than logic, scientific methodology, big data analysis, bias checking, and systems theory for managing today's interacting and continually evolving economic, ecological, and political complex adaptive systems. These prior thinking methodologies on their own are just not enough to analyze, manage, and solve the problems of today's complex adaptive systems.

Understanding the new DMAP dialectical meta-systemic tools developed by Otto Laske will help us enter a second great enlightenment period much sooner.

The rational, logical thinking and scientific methodology of the first Enlightenment were two-dimensional, mechanical, and linear. With systems thinking, we became three-dimensional thinkers. The new dialectical meta-systems thinking, as elucidated in Laske's books and in the new DMAP application, introduces what could be called four-dimensional thinking. It enables one to better cope with unpredictability, nonlinear and unknown feedback loops, tipping points, and other issues that arise from multiple-layered or even single dialectically interacting complex adaptive systems.

It shows a person how to step outside their subjective thoughts, problems, or issues to consider them objectively, using twenty-eight dialectical thought forms to redirect attention and create the new "four-dimensional "dialectical thinking. The ability to think in a dialectical metasystemic way is a considerable advantage in all areas of life. DMAP analysis and problem-solving are particularly crucial for understanding the intricate and complex processes of the universe's evolution. And as the ancient Stoics said, the more we understand the nature of the universe, the more we understand ourselves and our own lives.
 
It's no exaggeration to say that Laske's new three-book set may be the best yet written about the evolution of cognition and human thinking. While Laske stands on the shoulders of the giants of dialectical thinking like Hegel, Adorno, Jacques, and Basseches, he is a rare genius who has not only explained the developmental breakthrough in thought but also the seamless integration of multiple perspectives and frameworks. Life and world-rearranging epiphanies by the bucketful await the conscious reader of this four-dimensional revolution in dialectical metasystemic analysis and problem-solving.

Until now, a well-defined, comprehensive dialectical meta-systemic thinking system has been the central element missing for effectively resolving the challenges posed by the multiple complex adaptive systems interacting in our world today. Laske's new books on this subject are nothing less than a true gift to humanity!
  
Whether you're a leader in the corporate, government, or non-profit sector, I strongly recommend that you acquire Laske's new books as soon as possible. Laske's books on how to learn this thinking breakthrough are a must-read for anyone who believes that optimized thinking, analysis, and problem-solving processes are the best way to create success in almost any area. Laske's books, plus Dialectical Thinking and Adult Development by Michael Basseches, will hopefully find their way into the planet's most important critical thinking applications, where one analyzes multiple complex adaptive systems and their interactions.

 

DMAP Application Global Use Predictions

DMAP is relatively new and challenging.  However, as more individuals learn and apply it in their respective fields, we predict numerous sudden, significant improvements and changes will occur globally.

For example, we predict:

1. Proven DMAP proficiency will eventually be a resume requirement for all C-Suite executives worldwide in addition to a system's thinking credential.

2. Skilled AI programmers who master DMAP and apply DMAP and DTF principles and processes (the 28 dialectical prospectives possible for any situation, condition, or problem) to advanced AI analysis and problem solving programming will create a new AI with much more accurate analysis and problem-solving skills than the current center of the bell curve AI analysis process and problem solving we have now.

These DMAP-qualified AI programmers will create the next leading multibillion-dollar AI companies. The first AI programmers who can do this will most likely be individuals at the Mensa or Giga Society talent level and possess the other DMAP qualities described here.

3. Researchers, particularly in the fields of science (biotech, disease research, pharmaceuticals, space technology, etc), who become proficient in DMAP will have more breakthrough discoveries and will occur faster than their non-DMAP peers. This will happen because these researchers will be better able to mine their research and experiments for omissions, errors, and patterns that would be missed using older research and data analysis methodologies.

4. Because Asian countries, particularly China, have a long cultural history of basic dialectical thinking and reasoning, it would not be surprising that the highly competitive intelligence agencies of China and other Asian nations implement this technology sooner and more vigorously than the intelligence agencies of non-Asian countries. This would give Asian intelligence agencies using DMAP a significant advantage in problem-solving and analysis over their counterparts not trained in the breakthrough DMAP methodology.

(Update of 1.10.2026) In a convoluted process, our organization has been informed that Chinese intelligence and defense agencies are rapidly deploying their top analysts and problem-solvers, fluent in English, into DMAP training. They are also translating Otto Laske's DTF English manuals into Chinese to teach even more senior Chinese officials this indispensable new set of analysis and problem-solving skills. Apparently, key military and intelligence officials in China have recognized the significant military, intelligence, economic, and political advantages that DMAP training will provide to the country's senior members, thereby further enabling China's rapid rise on the world stage.

Early adopters of the Chinese intelligence and military agency clearly appear to have correctly recognized that training their key personnel in DMAP will give them a significant strategic advantage in complex problem analysis and solution development. Time will tell whether military and intelligence leaders in Western-developed nations will soon begin training their top personnel in the DMAP process to counter and keep pace with this new technological advance in a globally surging China.

5. Authors and screenwriters who become proficient in the complete DMAP learning process can create characters and stories with significantly greater depth and breadth. Additionally, the DMAP process will naturally foster additional creativity and originality in their work.

 

Finally, the good and the not-so-good reality regarding learning DMAP

DMAP allows you to overview the world's many interacting complex adaptive systems at a highly detailed, very big-picture level of comprehensiveness, beauty, and new possibilities that must be experienced to be believed, even possible. A side effect of this DMAP ability, whether you like it or not, is that you can frequently experience fear about a world plagued by multiple accelerating global crises, each of which can bring most of humanity to extinction.

Worse yet, you begin to see that these accelerating global crises are beyond our nations' competitive, advantage-seeking negotiating skills to resolve without a new global entity with the power to make and enforce laws on a transnational basis. Only the evolution of this new global governance entity can ultimately address many of our accelerating transnational crises, such as climate change.

The more proficient you become at DMAP and apply DMAP to analyzing and problem-solving multiple complex adaptive systems, the more your overview of the world will expand. This expanding world overview will change you in unique, beautiful, and positive ways that you must experience to understand fully.

 

For more on DMAP, please see:

1. 1. A Video discussing the Dialectical Metasystemic Thinking Processes (DMAP) and Otto Laske's breakthrough, by Leading Students

      The beginning of this video explains how the DMAP step-by-step process is used in advanced climate change research. Other individuals that Laske has trained also praise the value of this new thinking, analysis, and decision-making breakthrough, or they discuss DTF's other uses above.

2. Click here for a new, highly recommended book, Superintelligence by John Stewart. It also explains the challenging and sometimes paradoxical DMAP learning process in detail, drawing on his personal experiences as a proficient DMAP user and evolution theorist. If you're serious about mastering this skill, this is a must-read, along with Laske's three new books that describe the methodology.

To our knowledge, John Stewart, in his work and published studies on new evolutionary theory, is the first to recognize that Otto Laske's DTF work can be applied to advanced analysis and problem-solving in complex adaptive systems. Before Stewart applied Laske's methodology to that area, Laske's DTF was primarily used for adult education and expanding adult capacity.

3. To give you an illustrated and even deeper idea of the kinds and levels of complexity that DMAP is capable of analyzing and dealing with, please see this page, which describes something called the Climageddon Feedback Loop. (The Universe Institute helped create this page.)

4. Important DMAP learning tip: When reading Laske's books on this topic, be sure to keep a specific problem or issue in mind that you want to solve or analyze using DMAP. Then, when you go through each of the 28 dialectical perspectives of DTF methodology, ask yourself how that perspective and its nuances could relate to the analysis or problem you are trying to resolve. 

Laske's work has three major applications. In his books, he spends much time discussing his consulting, coaching, and adult educational development, and less time on the analysis and problem-solving applications to complex adaptive systems. By keeping your problem in mind and starting to solve it as you read each of the 28 perspectives, you will quickly see the power this methodology offers you and your future.

5. Laske's new volume one forward provides an excellent additional description of the DMAP methodology process and its products. (That Forward can also be found on this page.)

6. The rest of the links relating to DMAP or DTF on the Learn pulldown menu of this website.

7. If you haven't done so already, please review the recommended and nice-to-have qualities and skills to become proficient in DMAP by clicking here.)

 

 

(For much more about DNAP qualities, capabilities, and learning, please also see the sublinks below this website's top-of-the-page navigation Learn link.)