The idea that “the map is not the territory” easily creates an image in the mind allowing us to assess how the map differs from the territory.

It’s not possible to walk on a map in the same way as one would walk on the territory it represents. Imagining the path one will take using the map, differs from the experience our senses reacting to the environment provide us with. And there is more.

The idea that “the map is not the territory” brings up another analogy, that is the relationship we have with authority.

I was reminded of this when discussing with a service provider. When I asked them to finalize the connection with a new landline to have a better internet connection, they came back to me saying that it would still take a few months. They also mentioned that the line had not yet been put into the ground. However, having seen the work done myself I knew that this wasn’t true and tried to explain the situation.

As the conversation unfolded, he kept trying to map the reality of the territory I was describing into the information available to him. He relied on the information in the database and kept assuming that it was right. Luckily, I was able to give him some information that made clear that what I was saying was true too. After a while we found the cause, however, he couldn’t correct the entry in the database to reflect the reality I was describing.

This episode highlighted how often we’ll trust information that seems to come from a reliable source without questioning it. But also, how simple errors and details need to be verified and compared with the ones on the territory itself to be sure of one’s assessment.

A few weeks ago, I had taken it for granted that they were right and that I needed to wait a bit more.

Maps, in this sense, can be given to us by experts, authors, leaders, and others. Our task is to figure out how to trust them as well as retain our ability to question the information we’re being given. That is true regardless of how well we know the territory.