Discussion Forum > GED & Halving Method & Deep Foundations
The method of halving bears some resemblance to a method which developed from a professor of philosophy who lived during the 1500s named Petrus Ramas. He advocated the analysis of a subject into its parts. His followers often created charts or diagrams which resembled a binary tree. The subject would be divided into two parts and each part would then be subdivided into two parts, etc. The subject would be analyzed by dichotomies and it was thought that this would make the subject easier to understand and explain and remember. School textbooks and theological treatises were based on this method. However there was a criticism at that time that it was too simplistic, and that not all subjects could be broken down into only two parts. The movement was known as Ramism.
This method has the advantage of being simple. I have sorted papers using the method advocated in this book and it works well especially if there is a pile of papers.
I have not tried it in the other ways though. For me it is better to analyze a project in the order in which the tasks need to be done, chronologically. Although it sounds easy to divide a subject into two parts if you try it it is very hard to do and then subdivide into two parts and so on. I suspect that the followers of Ramus had standard categories that they used. However, I might be wrong about this because the charts that I have seen from antiquated books look so fascinating that I sure would like to make one myself.
This method has the advantage of being simple. I have sorted papers using the method advocated in this book and it works well especially if there is a pile of papers.
I have not tried it in the other ways though. For me it is better to analyze a project in the order in which the tasks need to be done, chronologically. Although it sounds easy to divide a subject into two parts if you try it it is very hard to do and then subdivide into two parts and so on. I suspect that the followers of Ramus had standard categories that they used. However, I might be wrong about this because the charts that I have seen from antiquated books look so fascinating that I sure would like to make one myself.
September 2, 2024 at 0:59 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
This method of halving might work better on a series of tasks rather than a complex project over a period of days or weeks or more.
I often use a no list FVP for a series of tasks that need to be ordered. So for example cooking a meal, getting ready for a trip, getting ready for work, leaving work.
I often use a no list FVP for a series of tasks that need to be ordered. So for example cooking a meal, getting ready for a trip, getting ready for work, leaving work.
September 2, 2024 at 1:10 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
The name is Petrus Ramus, or Peter Ramus. I misspelled the last name.
If you Google search for his name and then search for images you will see some of these charts.
If you Google search for his name and then search for images you will see some of these charts.
September 2, 2024 at 1:17 |
Mark
Mark
This method of halving might work faster if the two parts are divided into X and Not-X. So for example if you want to use it for sorting papers. The first time through the papers you divided into Trash and Not-Trash. Then the Not-trash get subdivided into Work and Not-Work. Then the work papers get divided into Urgent and Not-Urgent. And so on.
For halving the projects: one could decide what would be the midpoint on the project in which the project is half done. This could either be done by date or when about 50% of the project is finished. Or divide the project into the early stage and the later stage. And then subdivide these further.
For halving the projects: one could decide what would be the midpoint on the project in which the project is half done. This could either be done by date or when about 50% of the project is finished. Or divide the project into the early stage and the later stage. And then subdivide these further.
September 2, 2024 at 1:45 |
Mark
Mark
Regarding resistance: I haven't been drawn to using this method. If one uses autofocus or a long list eventually you will see what remains on the list and is not crossed off and that could indicate what one is resisting. If one uses dismissal then one could ask why one is not doing it and do some soul searching. However when I did dismissal I usually did not spend enough time doing this.
It seems that resistance as a principle of ordering would work better on a few bigger projects or longer-term tasks. There are urgent tasks that must be done today that there is no resistance for, however those might need to be done before the high resistance items. Also I am not sure that resistance alone is an indication that the things should be done. We all have bad habits that we try to break and that we resist but that doesn't mean we should do it. The fact that we resist it might be an indication that is not something we want to do or are good at but others are pressuring us against our will. The resistance might be a sign that we are not to do it. Yet if the item gets on the list how does it get on if we are resisting? It seems that it is a red light that there is some inner conflict that we need to pay attention to. Perhaps it is something that we need to resolve using a spiritual practice such as prayer or meditation or contemplation.
It seems that resistance as a principle of ordering would work better on a few bigger projects or longer-term tasks. There are urgent tasks that must be done today that there is no resistance for, however those might need to be done before the high resistance items. Also I am not sure that resistance alone is an indication that the things should be done. We all have bad habits that we try to break and that we resist but that doesn't mean we should do it. The fact that we resist it might be an indication that is not something we want to do or are good at but others are pressuring us against our will. The resistance might be a sign that we are not to do it. Yet if the item gets on the list how does it get on if we are resisting? It seems that it is a red light that there is some inner conflict that we need to pay attention to. Perhaps it is something that we need to resolve using a spiritual practice such as prayer or meditation or contemplation.
September 2, 2024 at 2:10 |
Mark
Mark
Thank you very much Mark H. I don't know why I didn't get an email telling me there was a reply.
I'll look into Ramus seems like a fun guy. I think you're right and this method is better used for non complex and repetitive projects. But the example in the book would suggest the contrary as it talks about setting up a blog or something similar which is not really that simple.
I'll reply on Resistence too next week.
In the end I think I can only be "Lorenzo" otherwise I can't log in. Oh well..
I'll look into Ramus seems like a fun guy. I think you're right and this method is better used for non complex and repetitive projects. But the example in the book would suggest the contrary as it talks about setting up a blog or something similar which is not really that simple.
I'll reply on Resistence too next week.
In the end I think I can only be "Lorenzo" otherwise I can't log in. Oh well..
September 6, 2024 at 16:48 |
Lorenzo
Lorenzo
I have tried to plan several projects using the halving method.
I tend to get stymied somewhere trying to divide the project into halfs.
However as it is written in the book, the example does not completely divide up the project but only until there is something ready to do.
I find it quicker if the project is not needed to be completely planned yet just to ask what is the first thing that has to be done and then ask is there anything before that that needs to be done. And keep on asking that question. That gets quicker results.
I tend to get stymied somewhere trying to divide the project into halfs.
However as it is written in the book, the example does not completely divide up the project but only until there is something ready to do.
I find it quicker if the project is not needed to be completely planned yet just to ask what is the first thing that has to be done and then ask is there anything before that that needs to be done. And keep on asking that question. That gets quicker results.
September 9, 2024 at 21:37 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
From the sum of your and my experience I figure halving not as method to plan projects but "only" to get to an actionable item.
This week I'll try to use halving for the "leaves" after having rebuilt the main project structure with multiple (sequential) branches instead of 2.
But I still don't see why one couldn't divide any item in the tree by 3 or 6. I guess it's for the sake of simplicity therefore less resistance. But if you struggle with the halving part then it doesn't really work.
This week I'll try to use halving for the "leaves" after having rebuilt the main project structure with multiple (sequential) branches instead of 2.
But I still don't see why one couldn't divide any item in the tree by 3 or 6. I guess it's for the sake of simplicity therefore less resistance. But if you struggle with the halving part then it doesn't really work.
September 10, 2024 at 9:41 |
Lorenzo
Lorenzo
<Also I am not sure that resistance alone is an indication that the things should be done. We all have bad habits that we try to break and that we resist but that doesn't mean we should do it. The fact that we resist it might be an indication that is not something we want to do or are good at but others are pressuring us against our will. The resistance might be a sign that we are not to do it.>
In my opinion that's covered in these 2 lines (p152):
* do what we are resisting, OR
* make a conscious decision not to do it
and the 2 following paragraphs where Mark says there's no real difference between the two points.
I find this page one of the deepest points made in the entire book.
But, we have to make the effort to look into ourselves, and be very very wary about our own false rationalizations. Things that keep ourselves enormously attached to things we simply don't have the time to do anyway, and if we include them in our schedule will cripple every other activity in whatever list we have. So the emphasis on saying no in Mark' books is nothing less then crucial. That in my experience is the one thing that kept me crawling instead of running (or at least walking!) for years.
That baggage we must bring with us every time is typically a bunch of stuff linked with our own percieved "true identity". Things we're attached to cause we have done well in the past (but we're not good anymore). Like that freaking drum set that sits dusty in our garage for 15 years.
Things we want to fix from the past can also be big. The main theme here is clearly that they are things from the past.
We need to hear our true inner voice shouting in the background just leave it alone and let it go!
If not, there's no system on Earth that can help us make our way forward.
In my opinion that's covered in these 2 lines (p152):
* do what we are resisting, OR
* make a conscious decision not to do it
and the 2 following paragraphs where Mark says there's no real difference between the two points.
I find this page one of the deepest points made in the entire book.
But, we have to make the effort to look into ourselves, and be very very wary about our own false rationalizations. Things that keep ourselves enormously attached to things we simply don't have the time to do anyway, and if we include them in our schedule will cripple every other activity in whatever list we have. So the emphasis on saying no in Mark' books is nothing less then crucial. That in my experience is the one thing that kept me crawling instead of running (or at least walking!) for years.
That baggage we must bring with us every time is typically a bunch of stuff linked with our own percieved "true identity". Things we're attached to cause we have done well in the past (but we're not good anymore). Like that freaking drum set that sits dusty in our garage for 15 years.
Things we want to fix from the past can also be big. The main theme here is clearly that they are things from the past.
We need to hear our true inner voice shouting in the background just leave it alone and let it go!
If not, there's no system on Earth that can help us make our way forward.
September 10, 2024 at 11:12 |
Lorenzo
Lorenzo
I have been searching the internet for the followers of Peter Ramus to see if I could find out how they divided a subject into two parts, and continue to subdivide and subdivide into two parts. However, it seems that only scholars who specialize in this can understand what they were doing.
This method was used long ago to structure educational textbooks, and if one is familiar with a subject, and has taught it, it would be easier to put the parts of the subject into two parts, like a binary tree.
It is harder if one is not familiar with a subject.
I would like to think there is value in this method, however, it doesn't seem as practical as other ways.
This method was used long ago to structure educational textbooks, and if one is familiar with a subject, and has taught it, it would be easier to put the parts of the subject into two parts, like a binary tree.
It is harder if one is not familiar with a subject.
I would like to think there is value in this method, however, it doesn't seem as practical as other ways.
September 10, 2024 at 18:47 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
I think that there is a degree of misunderstanding in this discussion about the purpose of "halving". It is not intended to produce a structural diagram of more or less equal parts. It is intended to be a method of ensuring that all the tasks that need to be actioned are in fact actioned systematically.
Basically the binary tree consists of a continual repetition of Now/Not Yet. So to take the first example on p. 121, it could be expanded as follows:
"Let's leave everything else for the moment to concentrate on Network Marketing. The first thing we need to do with that is familiarise ourselves with the nature of the business. And of course the most important thing about it is the nature of the product(s) we are going to be selling. So let's read the product leaflets so that we are well-informed about them before going any further. OK, we've done that - now what else do we need to do get to know the products?"
You will note that the total number of actions under Product Familiarisation may well end up much higher than just reading the product leaflets. As Mark H says the division into (approximate) halves is really into X and not-X.
Basically the binary tree consists of a continual repetition of Now/Not Yet. So to take the first example on p. 121, it could be expanded as follows:
"Let's leave everything else for the moment to concentrate on Network Marketing. The first thing we need to do with that is familiarise ourselves with the nature of the business. And of course the most important thing about it is the nature of the product(s) we are going to be selling. So let's read the product leaflets so that we are well-informed about them before going any further. OK, we've done that - now what else do we need to do get to know the products?"
You will note that the total number of actions under Product Familiarisation may well end up much higher than just reading the product leaflets. As Mark H says the division into (approximate) halves is really into X and not-X.
September 10, 2024 at 22:34 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark Forster,
Thanks for the clarification.
Thanks for the clarification.
September 12, 2024 at 14:13 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Thanks alot both Mark Forster and Mark H.!
So I'll continue to experiment using halving "as is" on small projects. For bigger projects where I need to communicate to other people the ovarall structure of it I'll start using halving on the "middle branches". Maybe I'll have one or two levels of subdivisions with multiple objects, then I'll use it on what comes next, specifically to fight resistence 🌊
PS Fun fact (you probably know). Ramus means "branch" in Latin :)
So I'll continue to experiment using halving "as is" on small projects. For bigger projects where I need to communicate to other people the ovarall structure of it I'll start using halving on the "middle branches". Maybe I'll have one or two levels of subdivisions with multiple objects, then I'll use it on what comes next, specifically to fight resistence 🌊
PS Fun fact (you probably know). Ramus means "branch" in Latin :)
September 17, 2024 at 11:58 |
Lorenzo
Lorenzo
Mark & Mark do you know other methods that should achieve the same goal? Meaning further subdividing a task to defy the resistance coming from too much complexity that looms over?
September 17, 2024 at 12:09 |
Lorenzo
Lorenzo
There's a book entitled "big things happen" by Don Gabor and on page 126 he has a strategy for dividing a project into two equal parts. So he divides writing a book over a year into two 6 months segments and has a plan for what he needs to accomplish in each half. He also suggests dividing a month project into two weeks each and try to attain the midterm project goal. He has some other interesting ways to divide up a long-term project that I find creative and I wish I had the perseverance to put them into effect.
September 17, 2024 at 14:18 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Lorenzo,
Yes I was aware that the name Ramas means branch. I wonder if that's how he got the idea of having branching diagrams.
Ramus, besides being of interest to specialists, seems to be of interest in modern times to those who are interested in studying Puritan theology and sermons. Apparently some of the big name Puritan writers were especially fond of dividing their subjects into two parts and subdividing into two parts, etc. The method was in vogue for some time especially in writing textbooks to teach older children perhaps teenagers.
Although I don't understand Ramas and the Puritans, there might be value in the method. I am thinking that since it was used for education to keep the subject simple and easy to comprehend it might be a good way to study a subject. Divide the subject into half and so on.
Since analysis is necessary in life the easiest analysis would be to divide it into only two. Perhaps this method is more of a food for creativity and brainstorming.
Yes I was aware that the name Ramas means branch. I wonder if that's how he got the idea of having branching diagrams.
Ramus, besides being of interest to specialists, seems to be of interest in modern times to those who are interested in studying Puritan theology and sermons. Apparently some of the big name Puritan writers were especially fond of dividing their subjects into two parts and subdividing into two parts, etc. The method was in vogue for some time especially in writing textbooks to teach older children perhaps teenagers.
Although I don't understand Ramas and the Puritans, there might be value in the method. I am thinking that since it was used for education to keep the subject simple and easy to comprehend it might be a good way to study a subject. Divide the subject into half and so on.
Since analysis is necessary in life the easiest analysis would be to divide it into only two. Perhaps this method is more of a food for creativity and brainstorming.
September 17, 2024 at 14:30 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
<Since analysis is necessary in life the easiest analysis would be to divide it into only two>
Actually I find myself more naturally dividing items in "n" rather then "2" most of the times.
Also I think that you previously stated that too, just using other words (you said you find halving "very hard" in practice).
So if dividing into "n" is quicker I don't get the logic of constraining myself to halving. This is my simple critique to the issue. But of course in case I find it easier or quicker dividing into 2s, that's when I'll do it.
Actually I find myself more naturally dividing items in "n" rather then "2" most of the times.
Also I think that you previously stated that too, just using other words (you said you find halving "very hard" in practice).
So if dividing into "n" is quicker I don't get the logic of constraining myself to halving. This is my simple critique to the issue. But of course in case I find it easier or quicker dividing into 2s, that's when I'll do it.
September 20, 2024 at 14:57 |
Lorenzo
Lorenzo
Lorenzo,
"Easiest" isn't the right word, maybe "simplest" "least complex" is better - it is simpler to divide into 2, than 3, or 6, or 10.
It seems to me that in order to divide a subject into twos entirely, continually subdividing into twos, one would have to have grasped the whole subject in its entirety first before doing it.
So I could see an educator who is an expert in the subject presenting it to beginners using this method as an introduction, and perhaps it was easier to remember only two subdivisions.
Also, from what I have read, Ramus and his followers based this method on philosophical views.
And maybe they had stock subdivisions.
I have seen:
1. Inward 2. Outward
1. Positively 2. Negatively
1. Causes 2. Effects
1. God 2. Man
and so on.
I agree that this method seemed to be arbitrary, and that was a criticism at the time, and maybe why it faded.
Yet, for certain purposes dividing into two is useful. I think for long term project planning with timeline it could be useful.
"Easiest" isn't the right word, maybe "simplest" "least complex" is better - it is simpler to divide into 2, than 3, or 6, or 10.
It seems to me that in order to divide a subject into twos entirely, continually subdividing into twos, one would have to have grasped the whole subject in its entirety first before doing it.
So I could see an educator who is an expert in the subject presenting it to beginners using this method as an introduction, and perhaps it was easier to remember only two subdivisions.
Also, from what I have read, Ramus and his followers based this method on philosophical views.
And maybe they had stock subdivisions.
I have seen:
1. Inward 2. Outward
1. Positively 2. Negatively
1. Causes 2. Effects
1. God 2. Man
and so on.
I agree that this method seemed to be arbitrary, and that was a criticism at the time, and maybe why it faded.
Yet, for certain purposes dividing into two is useful. I think for long term project planning with timeline it could be useful.
September 20, 2024 at 19:45 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Lorenzo,
Most of us want to use a quick method of planning. Analyzing into twos sounds neat and logical, like something Mr. Spock would have done on StarTrek.
I find it easier to brainstorm things I have to do for a project, and write them down as they come, and ask what has be to done before this step, or after this step. And then to organize the steps, either logically, or chronologically. So this is actually synthesis, in other starting with the steps, the items, and then organizing them into broader categories.
One doesn't have to plan all of the steps, only as many as needed at the moment.
Most of us want to use a quick method of planning. Analyzing into twos sounds neat and logical, like something Mr. Spock would have done on StarTrek.
I find it easier to brainstorm things I have to do for a project, and write them down as they come, and ask what has be to done before this step, or after this step. And then to organize the steps, either logically, or chronologically. So this is actually synthesis, in other starting with the steps, the items, and then organizing them into broader categories.
One doesn't have to plan all of the steps, only as many as needed at the moment.
September 20, 2024 at 19:54 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
So my questions are:
* do you think the system breaks if I don't _halve_ but rather "divide" into an arbitrary number of sub-objects every time?
* I've looked for other systems of breaking down items in order to have the max readiness level for engaging them (and least resistance obviously) but I didn't find any. How do you all approach it? Are there specific questions that you pose to yourself in order to find the right size? Or do you use other systems entirely?
About Get Everything Done.
I have to say that this has been my Mark's most deep reading and the best one overall. There's almost everything I came to think about time on a very different perspective which has to do more with psychology and my practice of meditation for the last 10 years. There are the familiar counter-intuitive perspectives I already discovered in later books yes. But especially the last part of the book about the connection between Resistance and our feelings and the habits we hide behind. That was surprising how it coincide perfectly with what I discovered through practice, meditation _and_ what I recently found described in an ancient Indian book named Yoga Sutra. Now I believe any time-management system should first of all deal with fundamental psychologic mechanisms even before starting to find a practical system. And I'm very happy to confirm that Mark's theory already had this level of foundation in it. It's clear he looked deeply into himself and observed on every step how things plays out. We should also do the same thing to find our own method.
What do you think?
PS I think there's another "Lorenzo" in the forum. I'm not him I wrote much less then him in the past under Lorenzo F. or il_fabbro Idk