EXP 004 / A LIVING MAP OF AN IDEA

Every thought
has roots.

Plant a belief. Uncover its assumptions. Let counterexamples flower where certainty once stood. This garden grows questions, not truth.

Enter the greenhouse ↓Download Field Guide (PDF) ↗

LOCAL FIRST · NO SIGN-IN · NO AI PRETENCE · YOUR DATA STAYS IN YOUR BROWSER

01 / CULTIVATION ENGINE

Plant a thought.

Start with an example or enter your own proposition. Local rules generate prompts—not validated answers.

● READY0 nodes

THE CANOPY / DRAG TO REARRANGESelect a node to edit

Select a node to inspect its thinking.

↑ Import JSON

Loaded with a learning seed. No data leaves this page.

Thought Garden without JavaScript

Begin with: “Learning improves when mistakes are safe to discuss.” What must be true for that claim to hold? Consider psychological safety, facilitator behaviour, and the difference between discussing mistakes and tolerating avoidable harm. Counterexample: a group may discuss errors openly yet repeat them if no action follows. Question: whose mistakes feel safe to disclose?

Download the field guide PDF for three complete paper-based experiments. The interactive graph requires JavaScript.

03 / THE EXPERIMENTAL BED

From thought to action.

Move the sliders. Watch an illustrative action-readiness index change. This is a teaching model, not a psychological instrument or empirical prediction.

Intention strength 70Environmental support 55Practical friction 60

ILLUSTRATIVE ACTION READINESS

54/ 100
INDEX

Support may ease execution; friction can obstruct even a strong intention.

Formula: 0.45 × intention + 0.35 × support + 0.20 × (100 − friction), rounded. Arbitrary weights for comparison, not calibrated from participants.

04 / NOTES FROM THE SOIL

The map is
not the mind.

Thought Garden is an artistic metaphor for disciplined inquiry. Its nodes represent different jobs a sentence can do: premises support a claim; implications trace consequences; counterexamples pressure-test generalisations; disciplines suggest additional lenses; questions identify missing observations; uncertainties preserve intellectual humility.

A line between two nodes means “inspect this relationship”, not “one proposition causally proves another.” The starter branches are deterministic templates; they are not AI-generated insights, academic citations, diagnoses or established evidence.

01 / THE DISAGREEMENT TEST

Grow a dissenting branch

Plant a strong opinion. Generate a counterexample. Rewrite it as the strongest credible objection. What evidence could decide between the two?

02 / TRANSLATION TEST

Cross a disciplinary border

Turn a workplace belief into an organisational-design question, then a psychology question. Notice what each vocabulary highlights—and conceals.

03 / FRICTION SWAP

Keep intent constant

Set intention to 70. Compare friction 20 and 80 without changing support. The difference follows our chosen formula—not a measured human response.

Limitations matter: a graph's neatness can make weak propositions look persuasive. A numeric slider can imply measurement where none exists. Check sources, causal assumptions, context and exceptions outside this page. The most useful result may be a better question.