Methodology of investigation and transformation

∆ has no mandatory algorithm of development. Methodology here means a set of approaches to investigating questions, testing ideas and evaluating one's own actions. Specific methods can change along with the tasks and the experience of participants.

Start with a question

It is worth stating clearly what exactly is unclear, difficult or interesting. It may be a belief, a personal goal, a limitation, a way of interacting, a technical task or a social problem.

A preliminary check of the wording matters: does the question assume what is still to be proven?

Distinguish facts, inferences and evaluations

In discussion it helps to separate observations from interpretations, assumptions from confirmed positions, and personal values from generally valid claims. The source of information and the degree of confidence are best stated explicitly.

The presence of several points of view does not mean each is equally well grounded. Respect for the other person is compatible with rigorous criticism of the argument.

Investigate conditions and limitations

For a task one can draw a map: what is available, what is unknown, what depends on the participant and what is tied to surrounding conditions. Not every problem is solved by inner work on oneself. Sometimes external resources, allies or changed rules are needed.

Form alternatives

It helps to examine several options for action or explanation. Among them may be keeping the previous position. Alternatives are compared by their grounds, costs, risks, effect on others and possibility of revision.

Try and observe

A practical test can take the form of a small experiment, a joint project, a discussion, a study of sources or a change to a habitual way of acting. It matters to know in advance which signs will help evaluate the result.

Not every hypothesis may be tested by experimenting on oneself or others. Consent, safety and respect for participants' boundaries take priority over curiosity.

Re-evaluate conclusions

After acting, one can discuss: what happened, what remained unknown, which expectations were confirmed, what new problems arose. Both the actions and the original goals are open to revision.

A convenient format for a short record:

Question:
Initial assumptions:
Available information:
Possible explanations or actions:
Limitations and risks:
What was done:
What was observed:
What needs clarifying:

This template can be shortened or changed.

Collective discussion

To keep a discussion productive, it helps to agree on the topic, distinguish criticism of ideas from judgement of a person, clarify terms, acknowledge uncertainty and record the disagreements that remain.

A strong position allows the question: what evidence would change my mind? If there is no answer, it matters to understand why.

How to update ∆ documents

State the proposed change and its reason.
Name the affected definitions and cross-references.
Give participants the opportunity for criticism and alternative wording.
Record the decision taken, its arguments and the open questions.
Leave room for revisiting it later.

This order is a recommendation, not a mandatory governance procedure.