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: "Limited Liability Enterprises"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes limited liability enterprises based on the number of distinct entities or individuals holding ownership stakes. An enterprise either has a sole owner who controls the entire equity and decision-making (single-owner) or it is owned by two or more distinct entities or individuals who share the equity and governance (multi-owner). This division is mutually exclusive, as an enterprise cannot simultaneously have exactly one owner and more than one, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all possible ownership structures for limited liability enterprises regardless of their specific legal form (e.g., single-member LLC vs. multi-member LLC, sole shareholder corporation vs. multiple shareholder corporation).
10
From: "Multi-Owner Limited Liability Enterprises"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes multi-owner limited liability enterprises based on the uniformity of their owners' rights, responsibilities, and claims. An enterprise either grants all owners substantially similar classes of rights, responsibilities, and claims on the business's profits and control (undifferentiated ownership), or it formally establishes distinct classes of ownership with varying degrees of control, profit distribution, and/or liability within the limited liability framework (differentiated ownership). This division is mutually exclusive, as an ownership structure cannot simultaneously be uniform and formally differentiated, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all possible internal equity and governance arrangements for multi-owner limited liability enterprises.
11
From: "Differentiated Ownership Enterprises"
Split Justification: All differentiated ownership structures fundamentally involve a variance in either control rights, economic claims, or both. This dichotomy precisely separates enterprises whose ownership differentiation is exclusively based on varying control rights (where per-unit economic claims are uniform across all differentiated classes) from those whose differentiation includes varying economic claims (which may or may not also include varying control rights). This ensures mutual exclusivity, as an enterprise cannot simultaneously have only control-based differentiation and also possess varying economic claims, and it is comprehensively exhaustive, covering all possible forms of differentiated ownership.
12
From: "Enterprises with Control-Only Differentiated Ownership"
Split Justification: ** All enterprises with control-only differentiated ownership achieve this differentiation either exclusively through varying the voting power assigned to different classes of ownership units (where no other specific non-voting control mechanisms are present), or through the establishment of distinct non-voting special powers (such as veto rights, board appointment rights, or specific decision-making authorities) granted to certain owners or classes. This dichotomy is mutually exclusive, as an enterprise's control differentiation is either based *only* on voting rights or it involves *at least one* non-voting special power, and it is comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of control-only differentiated ownership.
✓
Topic: "Enterprises with Control Differentiated by Non-Voting Special Powers" (W7124)