Goal Tree

Purpose

State the enduring conditions that must exist for the Second Renaissance group to contribute to its provisional goal.

Entities

Goal

G-1 — Co-initiate a conscious transformation toward a wiser, weller, regenerative civilization. Provisional; high confidence as document intent.

Critical Success Factors

CSF-1 — People durably embody wiser views, values, practices, and ways of acting.
CSF-2 — The group learns and revises strategy through evidence, objections, and constraint review.
CSF-3 — Proven practices stabilize in pockets and become responsibly transmissible.

Necessary Conditions

NC-1 — Goal-relevant throughput is operationally defined without reducing transformation to activity counts.
NC-2 — A transparent path connects first contact to sustained practice and contribution.
NC-3 — Participants can repeat embodied practices at progressively deeper levels.
NC-4 — Contributors can develop into facilitators and accountable stewards.
NC-5 — Dense practice containers receive sangha support and remain outward-facing.
NC-6 — Strategic maps are governed as living, challengeable, versioned commons.

Logical connections

L-001–L-003: each CSF is necessary for G-1.
L-004 and L-009: NC-1 and NC-6 are necessary for learning and revision.
L-005 and L-006: NC-2 and NC-3 are necessary for durable embodiment.
L-007 and L-008: NC-4 and NC-5 are necessary for transmissible pockets.

Necessity test: if embodiment exists without learning, the group may preserve error; if learning exists without stable practice, it produces analysis rather than cultural change; if pockets exist without transmission, the change remains isolated.

Evidence

EVD-1 and EVD-2 establish the authored goal and durable-adoption standard. EVD-4 and EVD-8–EVD-18 support the necessary conditions.

Assumptions

ASM-1: the documents represent an intended operating model.
ASM-5–ASM-7: embodiment, learning, and transmission are all necessary for the goal.

Confidence

High for fidelity to the documents; medium-to-low for empirical necessity until the group challenges the hierarchy.

Open reservations

Is civilizational transformation too broad to guide one group’s operating decisions?
Are all three CSFs necessary, and are important conditions such as resources, safety, legitimacy, or resilience missing?
Which beneficiary and time horizon define success?

Diagram

flowchart BT
  NC1["NC-1 Throughput defined"] --> CSF2["CSF-2 Learning and revision"]
  NC6["NC-6 Living governed maps"] --> CSF2
  NC2["NC-2 Contact-to-practice path"] --> CSF1["CSF-1 Durable embodiment"]
  NC3["NC-3 Repeated progressive practice"] --> CSF1
  NC4["NC-4 Stewardship pathway"] --> CSF3["CSF-3 Transmissible pockets"]
  NC5["NC-5 Dense supported containers"] --> CSF3
  CSF1 --> G1["G-1 Wiser, weller, regenerative civilization"]
  CSF2 --> G1
  CSF3 --> G1

Text: NC-1 and NC-6 support learning; NC-2 and NC-3 support embodiment; NC-4 and NC-5 support transmissible pockets; all three CSFs are necessary for G-1.

Cross-tree references

NC-1 is threatened by RC-2 and advanced by IO-2. NC-2 is threatened by RC-1 and advanced by IO-3. NC-3–NC-5 are advanced by IO-4–IO-7. NC-6 is advanced by IO-1 and ACT-1.