What if someone said that if you learned a new thinking methodology, you could look like the smartest person in the room?

What if someone also said to you that if you learned a new analysis and problem-solving methodology, every decision you applied this methodology to would be magnitudes wiser and more effective than the decision-making process you are currently using?

But what if someone said to you that if you learned this new analysis and problem-solving methodology, you would be able to see any situation from 28 unique perspectives, views, angles, or ways that would allow you not to miss critical details and then see that situation at a level that almost no one else can see?

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

 

About DMAP

DMAP stands for dialectical metasystemic advanced analysis and problem-solving. The DMAP methodology breakthrough is also known by its originator, Otto Laske, as the dialectical thought form system (DTF).

There are 28 dialectical thought forms and perspectives used 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 condition, a problem, or even a possibility involving single or multiple interacting and interdependent systems and subsystems from 28 unique dialectical perspectives.

Without DMAP, most people will view a situation, condition, problem, or possibility from just a few different perspectives, usually no more than 1-2. With DMAP, you are literally "forced" to see a situation, condition, problem, or possibility from 28 different dialectical perspectives. These additional perspectives illuminate a multitude more essential and critical details relevant to what you are analysing or trying to resolve.

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

An analogy regarding computer screen resolution in dots per inch (DPI) provides a clearer explanation of how powerful DMAP is compared to earlier thinking and analysis methodologies. Think of Enlightenment-era rational thinking as having a computer screen resolution for details of 420 dpi. Think of classic logic as having a detail resolution of 720 dpi. Think of systems thinking as having a detail resolution of 1440 dpi. Finally, think of DPAP as having a detail resolution of 5660 dpi.

DMAP is specifically designed for analyzing and managing individual or multiple interacting, complex adaptive systems, such as climate change, politics, war, the economy, society, and the environment. It is also indispensable for science and research.

DMAP advances, transcends, and yet incorporates the best from earlier thinking methodologies, including systems thinking, data and statistical analysis, logic, and the principles of scientific falsification. It is the essential thinking skill you will need if you want to excel at analysis and problem-solving when dealing with complex adaptive systems.

The dialectical aspect of DMAP is not the classical dictionary definition of dialectical dialogue by any means. It extends far beyond Hegel's thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. Otto Laske, its originator, has significantly advanced the dialectical work of Theodor W. Adorno, Elliot Jaques, Michael Basseches, Roy Baskar, and others, so much so that the meaning of dialectical must now embrace the 28 perspectives of dialectical thinking.

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

DMAP's paradox-embracing dialectical thinking, analysis, and problem-solving advances offer individuals with above-average intelligence and persistence the opportunity to become the smartest person in the room. It offers Mensa-level and Giga Society-level individuals a new analysis and problem-solving structure, discipline, and tools that will develop and utilize their abilities in innovative ways, which is hard to believe until experienced.

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 utilize the best of both your right and left brain capabilities and potentials, giving you more analysis and problem-solving bandwidth than you ever thought possible.

Individuals capable of mastering the DMAP methodology will be in high demand and will be able to write 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 prioritize promoting the worldwide training and adoption of this new analysis and problem-solving methodology. The reason is simple.

Dialectical metasystemic thinking is a magnitude leap forward in advanced analysis and problem-solving when firmly resting on the prior foundation of logic, systems thinking, statistics, data analysis, and the principles of scientific falsification. If more think tanks, corporate C-suite members, politicians, intelligence agency analysts, and government agency heads learn and adopt DMAP at their highest analysis and problem-solving levels, they would not only solve more of the world's biggest crises within the world's complex adaptive systems more quickly, and the solutions will be more effective leading to a bettet world for all.

DMAP evolved from Laske's 28 dialectical thought forms (DTF). Laske's DTF has two other older 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.

 

DMAP Application Predictions

DMAP is relatively new and challenging.  However, as more individuals learn and apply it to their specific fields, we predict that numerous sudden and 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.

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 AI multibillion-dollar companies of the future. The first AI programmers who are able to do this will most likely be individuals of Giga Society talent level and have 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 those Asian intelligence agencies using DMAP a significant and problem-solving analysis advantage over their counterparts not trained in the breakthrough DMAP methodology.

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.

 

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

DMAP is a unique, intense application of Laske's DTF methodology. Individuals considering learning the challenging DMAP skill may find it helpful to observe how it is applied at an advanced level at the Universe Institute think tank. The Universe Institute utilizes DMAP to analyze situations, crises, or problems and predict possible consequences, timeframes, and solutions. 

The following is a description from Lawrence Wollersheim, a senior analyst, of how he uses DMAP in his climate change analysis work at the Universe Institute and at Job One for Humanity:

1. I begin by reviewing relevant existing and new climate change science and papers across all climate systems and subsystems. My initial review of materials on climate change 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 problem-solve horizontally across all related studies and other systems and subsystems related to 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: water vapor in the atmosphere, soils and forests sequestering or releasing carbon, ocean ice coverage in the Arctic Ocean, ocean carbonization and heat levels, Antarctic glacier break-offs, the albedo effect, and tundra and permafrost melting, among others.

While completing this step and all the other steps below, I maintain my near-daily exercises, which help me observe my thoughts and view them as externalized objects that can be evaluated, manipulated, discarded, and so on.

2. I take extensive notes in this first review of all relevant climate change science. I look for logical errors or omissions of information that should be present but are not. I also look for climate change-related patterns between the studies and within the studies that may not have been previously recognized.

I immerse myself entirely in all the information from a systems thinking and general analytical, logical left-brained perspective regarding what is happening. I make myself fully present to the data with no distractions. I continue to take more notes, extensively reviewing the data at the systems thinking and general analytical and logical levels. (If you are not a proficient systems-level thinker, succeeding at this and the next DMAP level will be challenging.)

3. Once that level of logic and systems-level analysis is over, I re-examine the situation, crisis, or problem from Laske's 28 dialectical perspectives. These 28 perspectives show you numerous new ways to look at ongoing processes, relationships, contexts, and transformations within the body of data you are evaluating.

I also utilize the dialectical question lists and other tools that Laske has developed to help his trainees cover all 28 dialectical perspectives and possibilities in an organized and disciplined manner. 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 perspectives questions in a disciplined and orderly way will surprise you over and over, revealing new perspectives, ideas, and possibilities that will naturally emerge during this questioning process.

4. Next, I flow chart out and think as deeply 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 and detailed thought and work.

I still utilize my analytical and systems thinking skills in this second, deeper thinking process. In addition to those thinking methodologies, I also see the situation being analyzed or the problem that needs to be solved from the 28 dialectical perspectives, which again provide much more usable detail and information about the possibilities.

In this step, I utilize Laske's 28 perspectives list of dialectical questioning tools (found at the back of Laske's Volume Three) to enforce an orderly step-by-step, detailed analysis and discipline on myself, allowing me to fully explore the depth and breadth of the subtleties of each of the powerful 28 dialectical perspectives. Especially for people new to DMAP, using the pre-established Laske lists of dialectical questions for the 28 perspectives makes it far easier. (Additionally, if you have read Laske's two other volumes in this three-volume DTF training set, you will understand far more about the many powerful subtleties and nuances contained within each dialectical perspective. For me, some of the most original thinking and biggest breakthroughs in analysis and solutions come from the numerous nuances and subtleties within the depth of a single dialectical perspective.)

In this step of deep dialectical analysis, I again look for errors or omissions of information that should be present but are not. I also look for climate change-related patterns between the studies and within the 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 vastly magnified level of detail and perspective reveals all types of information not available at the traditional logical or systems theory level of thinking.

Laske's advances beyond previous dialectical thinking, going back to Hegel and through Laske's contemporaries, are breathtaking.

5. After this extensive, often 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.

6. 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 lower-level dialectical linear left-brain flowcharting.

One of the most remarkable aspects of the DMAP process's final stages is that it dramatically accelerates the epiphany and whole-system cognition rate and process, surpassing anything I have ever experienced. It also appears to increase the development and utilization of both right and left brain 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. Once I have produced a new analysis or solution using DMAP and completed all the prior steps, I then review all my notes and the critical facts that led to my latest dialectical metasystemic analysis or solution. I reverify those at least in two separate additional processes to make sure that I have not missed something or that some other bias or incorrect estimation has not entered into my conclusions. This repetitive, multiple-fact and thesis verification process also tends to produce additional new, nuanced cognitions and epiphanies not previously seen. It can also strengthen earlier insights or discoveries. It is essential since I am also quite dyslexic.

Another subtle but important reason for carefully verifying your DMAP work before releasing it is that it often produces original analysis and solutions. True originality is rare today, and it is also more likely to be attacked by peers and competitors because it is usually disruptive, and they have not seen anything like it before.

Although there are minor differences, when talking with other individuals who have also become adept at DMAP, I noticed their process experiences were similar.

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 step-by-step process of DMAP is used for advanced climate change research analysis. 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 explains the challenging and sometimes paradoxical DMAP learning process in great detail through his personal experiences as a proficient DMAP user and evolution theorist. If you're serious about mastering this skill, this is a must-read book in addition to Laske's three new books describing the methodology.

3. To give you an illustrated and even deeper idea of the kind 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 aspects and less time on the analysis and problem-solving application when applied to complex adaptive systems. By keeping your problem in mind and starting to solve it while reading each of the 28 perspectives, you will quickly see the power this methodology offers you and the 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.)

Individuals who become proficient in DMAP will have a significant advantage over those not skilled in the dialectical metasystemic analysis and problem-solving methodology. Today, the world is driven by complex adaptive systems, and DMAP is best suited for these applications. Individuals who master the challenging DMAP methodology can write their career future as this credential becomes more 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 terms of Stoic philosophy, as forwarded by individuals like Marcus Aurelius, the Roman emperor, carefully considering what is happening in front of you and how to deal with it properly 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 capable of mastering this new thinking methodology can now see what is happening in front of them in a disciplined and organized way from 28 different dialectical perspectives. The more perspectives one can see that will affect one's evaluation of what's happening, the better one can decide what to do about that situation.

 

Lawrence Wollersheim, DMAP Specialist at the Universe Institute

 

(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 before continuing with the rest of this article.)

 

The good and the not-so-good regarding 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 far beyond our nations' competitive and advantage-seeking negotiating skills to solve without some new global entity evolving with the power to make and enforce laws on a transnational basis. Only the evolution of this new global governance entity will ultimately be able to address many of our accelerating transnational global 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.

 

More about the DMAP breakthrough analysis and problem-solving advancement

During the Enlightenment, in the 1600s, a breakthrough in thinking occurred; rational, logical thought and its accompanying scientific falsification methodology emerged. This allowed for a new way of conceptualizing and managing the world. Even now, 400 years later, we still reap the bountiful benefits of that previous breakthrough in a new way of thinking.

Today, we are also on the brink of what might be considered an even greater Second Enlightenment. This occurs because the DMAP process is far more capable than logic and systems theory for managing today's complex, interacting, and evolving personal, economic, and political systems.

Understanding the new dialectical meta-systemic tools developed by Otto Laske, as outlined in his three new training books, will help us get there far sooner.

While the rational, logical thinking of the first Enlightenment was two-dimensional and linear, we became three-dimensional thinkers with the advent of systems theory. The new dialectical meta-systems thinking elucidated in Laske's books brings us into four-dimensional thinking. It enables one to cope with unpredictable spontaneities, nonlinear and unknown feedback loops, and other issues that arise from multiple and single dialectically interacting complex systems.

It shows a person how to step outside their thoughts, problems, or issues to consider them objectively by using twenty-eight different dialectical thought forms to redirect attention, creating four-dimensional dialectical thinking. The ability to think in a dialectical metasystemic way is a considerable advantage in all areas of life. It is far more effective in dealing with today's complex adaptive systems and multisystem problems. DMAP analysis and problem-solving are crucial in comprehending the intricacies of the universe's evolutionary processes.
 
It's no exaggeration to say that Laske's new three-book set is 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, Jaques, and Basseches, he is a rare genius who has not only explained the developmental breakthrough in thought and the seamless integration of multiple perspectives and frameworks, including psychology and science. Life and world-rearranging epiphanies by the bucketful await the conscious reader of this four-dimensional revolution in dialectical metasystemic analysis and problem-solving.

Laske's dialectical metasystemic process provides a well-thought-out "thinking" agency for any optimized decision-making process that results in wise action, thus creating the better future we seek. There is little doubt that someday, learning the dialectical meta-systemic thinking skills using Laske's 28 attention-redirecting thought forms will be an educational requirement for all in advanced decisional or predictive positions!
 
Laske's advanced DMAP methodology has enabled me to integrate numerous observations about my life and my work in climate change science and evolution theory in less time than I ever imagined possible. It even helped me evaluate complex personal situations in my life in a whole new way, either saving me untold trouble and cost or more quickly motivating me to take wise risks and seize new opportunities that hold real, dialectically evaluated benefits.

 
Until now, a well-defined and comprehensive dialectical meta-systemic thinking system has been the central element lacking in effectively resolving the challenges posed by the multiple complex systems interacting in our world today. Laske's new book provides exactly that missing element. There is little doubt that this work will eventually spread within other progressive social and activist movements.  
 
Laske's books on this subject are nothing less than a true gift to humanity! Eventually, he will be recognized as the individual who did much to help bring about and forward a second great Enlightenment. However, as amazing as it is, this new analysis and problem-solving methodology also poses a few significant challenges to its readers.
 
Although Laske says that anyone can be taught complex systems of dialectical thinking, his books are difficult for many individuals. His writing style is concept-dense and demands that you pay careful attention to each initial definition or perspective he uses. He may take you through a dozen interrelated or sequential new thinking conceptual spaces in one paragraph alone.

He also uses statements from multiple languages to express aspects of that dialectical perspective. We strongly recommend that you look up those foreign language statements because Laske hides important nuance and subtleties in them, and every word he carefully selects.

In addition to the implied high cognitive capacity requirements, significant social and emotional development requirements also play an essential part in one's ability to understand and "get" Laske's new dialectical metasystemic training manuals and tools.
  
Whether you're a leader in the corporate, government, or non-profit sector, I strongly recommend acquiring Laske's books quickly. 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 deals with analyzing multiple complex adaptive systems and their interactions.

Our organization highly recommends learning Laske's DMAP methodology and books. This DMAP breakthrough is so decisive that if you have someone proficient in it at the highest decision-making levels of your organization, your organization will be significantly advantaged over your competitors or enemies.

Don't be surprised if, after you have mastered DMAP, your peers enviously wonder how you come up with the new analyses or solutions you do. They see that you are not just gifted but living at a new level of superintelligence. It will be your secret until you tell them it is your new DMAP-enhanced thinking skills. 

Finally, for those gifted individuals who can cruise through and grasp almost anything easily, do not be surprised if learning DMAP is more challenging than nearly anything you have ever done.

(Lawrence Wollersheim wrote the above review. He is a senior analyst at several organizations, using DMAP analysis and problem-solving skills at the Universe Institute and Job One for Humanity.) 

 

(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.)