1
From: "Human Potential & Development."
Split Justification: Development fundamentally involves both our inner landscape (**Internal World**) and our interaction with everything outside us (**External World**). (Ref: Subject-Object Distinction)..
2
From: "External World (Interaction)"
Split Justification: All external interactions fundamentally involve either other human beings (social, cultural, relational, political) or the non-human aspects of existence (physical environment, objects, technology, natural world). This dichotomy is mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive.
3
From: "Interaction with Humans"
Split Justification: All human interaction can be fundamentally categorized by its primary focus: either on the direct connection and relationship between specific individuals (from intimate bonds to fleeting encounters), or on the individual's engagement within and navigation of larger organized human collectives, their rules, roles, and systems. This dichotomy provides a comprehensive and distinct division between person-to-person dynamics and person-to-society dynamics.
4
From: "Social Systems and Structures"
Split Justification: All social systems and structures can be fundamentally categorized by whether their rules, roles, and organization are explicitly codified, institutionalized, and formally enforced (formal systems), or are unwritten, emergent, culturally embedded, and maintained through custom, tradition, and implicit social pressure (informal systems). This dichotomy is mutually exclusive, as a system's primary mode of operation is either formal or informal, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all aspects of collective human organization.
5
From: "Formal Social Systems"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between the overarching framework of authority, law, and governance that establishes and enforces the primary rules and structures for an entire society (encompassing governmental bodies, legal systems, and core regulatory agencies), and the diverse range of specific, mission-oriented institutions that operate within, and are shaped by, this overarching framework to achieve particular goals, produce goods, or provide services (such as corporations, educational institutions, healthcare systems, or formal non-profits). These categories are mutually exclusive, as an entity is either part of the foundational governance and legal apparatus or a specific purpose-driven organization operating under its purview, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of formal social systems.
6
From: "Purpose-Driven Formal Organizations"
Split Justification: All purpose-driven formal organizations are fundamentally distinguished by their primary financial objective: whether they operate to generate profit for their owners or shareholders, or to dedicate all financial surpluses to the advancement of their stated mission without distributing profits. This dichotomy is mutually exclusive, as an organization's core financial structure is either profit-seeking or non-profit, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of purpose-driven formal organizations.
7
From: "Profit-Seeking Organizations"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes profit-seeking organizations based on their ownership and capital structure: whether their shares are publicly traded on a stock exchange, making them accessible to the general public and subject to specific regulatory oversight, or held privately by individuals or a limited group of entities, not traded on public markets. This split is mutually exclusive, as an organization's ownership is either publicly traded or privately held, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of profit-seeking organizations.
8
From: "Privately Owned Enterprises"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes privately owned enterprises based on the legal extent of the owner's financial responsibility for the business's debts and obligations. An enterprise's ownership structure either directly exposes the owners' personal assets to business liabilities (personal liability), or creates a distinct legal entity that shields owners' personal assets, limiting their liability to their investment in the business (limited liability). This division is mutually exclusive and comprehensively covers all forms of privately owned enterprises.
9
From: "Personal Liability Enterprises"
Split Justification: All personal liability enterprises are fundamentally distinguished by whether they are owned and operated by a single individual, who bears all personal liability, or by a group of individuals who collectively share in the personal liability. This dichotomy is mutually exclusive, as an enterprise can only have one owner or multiple owners, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of personal liability enterprises.
10
From: "Multiple Owner Personal Liability Enterprises"
Split Justification: All multiple owner personal liability enterprises are fundamentally distinguished by the management roles of their owners. Either all owners actively participate in and share the responsibilities of managing the enterprise, or the ownership group includes both owners who actively manage the business and owners who, despite retaining personal liability, do not participate in daily management or strategic decision-making. This dichotomy is mutually exclusive, as an enterprise cannot simultaneously have all owners as managers and also have non-managerial owners, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all possible distributions of management responsibilities among owners in such enterprises.
11
From: "Enterprises with Managerial and Non-Managerial Owners"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between enterprises where the non-managerial owners, despite not being involved in daily operations, retain significant rights over strategic decisions (such as major investments, fundamental changes, or admission of new partners), and those where the non-managerial owners have fully delegated all strategic decision-making authority to the managing owners, primarily retaining financial rights and oversight. This distinction is mutually exclusive, as the level of retained strategic authority either includes significant decision-making power or delegates it entirely, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all possible distributions of strategic authority among non-managerial, personally liable owners.
12
From: "Non-Managerial Owners Delegate All Strategic Authority"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between enterprises where the non-managerial owners, despite having delegated all strategic authority, retain the contractual or legal right to unilaterally revoke that delegation, and those where the delegation is established as irrevocable for a defined period or until specific conditions are met, thereby granting the managing owners uninterrupted strategic control during that time. This distinction is mutually exclusive, as the delegation's revocability status is binary, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of such delegations.
✓
Topic: "Delegation Revocable by Non-Managerial Owners" (W5972)