# Project State for TREC (Trust Economics) - Final State Before Closure metadata: project_id: TREC_04f7f1a8a8b64d25b3e7e9f0c1d2a3b4 current_status: Monitoring # Status before initiating closure last_modified_timestamp: 2025-10-27T18:00:00Z # Approximate timestamp schema_version_ref: support/DEFINE-ProjectStateSchema # Assumed version charter: project_id: TREC_04f7f1a8a8b64d25b3e7e9f0c1d2a3b4 project_name: Trust Economics project_code: TREC project_type: Social Critique and Thought Leadership Position Piece primary_methodology: Conceptual Development, Historical Analysis, and Argumentation vision_statement: To fundamentally shift the perception of money from an end in itself to a symbolic tool, fostering a societal shift towards trust in human potential and collective well-being as the true drivers of civilization. core_problem_motivation: The current reliance on traditional monetary economics, particularly the misplaced trust in money as an end rather than a tool, creates economic inefficiencies and barriers ("deadweight") that prevent humanity from achieving the collective well-being and "equal footing" necessary for a robust civilization (drawing on insights like those in Harari's Sapiens). This system hinders potential by prioritizing monetary gain over direct needs fulfillment and trust in fellow humans, thereby failing to build the strong foundation required for complex societal structures. background_context: (Populated based on exploration history: Critique of monetary systems, especially for digital goods; issues of money as a barrier vs. a tool; inspiration from non-monetary systems like open source; historical context of money's symbolism and fiat currency.) high_level_goals: - To articulate a critique of the current monetary system's limitations in fostering collective well-being and enabling individuals to reach their full potential. - To explore alternative economic models and principles based on trust and non-monetary incentives (like intrinsic motivation), aimed at fostering a society where people are on more equal footing, essential for civilization, distinct from traditional ideologies like socialism or communism. - To analyze historical context and existing non-monetary systems (like open source) to inform this exploration. specific_objectives: [] scope_in: - Theoretical exploration of the critique against monetary economics. - Historical and analytical examination of money's nature and symbolism (including fiat currency). - Analysis of existing non-monetary or trust-based systems and incentives. - Development of a conceptual framework outlining principles for a trust/needs-based economic thought model. scope_out: - Developing a detailed, practical step-by-step implementation plan for transitioning to an alternative system. - Deep technical modeling of alternative economic systems. - Advocating for specific political or economic policies. key_deliverables: - A written articulation of the thought experiment (e.g., essay, paper). - A conceptual framework document outlining key principles. key_assumptions: [] key_constraints: [] initial_risk_assessment: [] success_criteria: (Will be defined using DEFINE-SuccessMetrics process) charter_status: Formalized charter_version: '1.0' plan: plan_version: '1.0' plan_status: Formalized wbs: - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1 description: Foundational Research & Critique Development parent_id: null dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Core research completed, key arguments for critique outlined. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed # Aggregated status - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.1 description: Research Historical Evolution of Money & Fiat Currency parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1 dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Key historical periods and shifts (barter, commodity, representative, fiat, digital) understood; Research notes compiled. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.2 description: Analyze Symbolic Nature and Misuse of Money parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1 dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Concepts of money as tool vs. end analyzed; Instances of symbolic treatment/misuse (like prayer anecdote) explored; Connections to cultural/psychological aspects noted. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.3 description: Detail Critique of Monetary Economics (Deadweight, Barriers, Key Failures) parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1 dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Argument for "economic deadweight" formalized, particularly concerning low/zero marginal cost goods; Critique of money as a barrier to potential elaborated; Connection to goals of civilization/equal footing established. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.4 description: Synthesize Foundational Research & Outline Critique parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.1 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.2 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.3 definition_of_done: Core arguments for the critique summarized; Outline for the critique section of the final deliverable drafted (with increased detail and specificity as per feedback FB-TREC-2025-10-27_1). resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2 description: Analysis of Alternative & Trust Models parent_id: null dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Analysis of historical/existing non-monetary systems and non-monetary incentives completed. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed # Aggregated status - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.0 description: Define Criteria & Select Alternative System Examples parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2 dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Criteria established for identifying relevant non-monetary/trust systems based on project scope (e.g., scalability, focus on low-marginal-cost goods, clear non-monetary incentives, documented operation). Initial list of 3-5 systems selected based on criteria. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.1 description: Research Selected Existing Non-Monetary/Trust Systems parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.0 definition_of_done: Research on the N selected systems (from 2.0) completed; Notes detailing their mechanisms, motivations, trust dynamics, and limitations compiled. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.2 description: Analyze Non-Monetary Incentives & Human Motivation parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2 dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Relevant theories (intrinsic motivation, self-determination, flow, social capital) researched; Analysis of how these apply as alternatives or complements to monetary incentives in relevant contexts completed. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.3 description: Compare Alternative Models to Monetary System Failures parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.3 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.1 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.2 definition_of_done: Comparative analysis completed, focusing on explicitly defined failures from WBS-1.3; Analysis details how the selected alternative models/incentives (from 2.1, 2.2) offer different approaches to address economic deadweight, access barriers, potential unlocking, collective well-being, and trust dynamics. Analysis notes compiled. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.4 description: Synthesize Analysis & Draft Conceptual Framework Principles parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.1 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.2 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.3 definition_of_done: Core insights from research (2.1, 2.2) and comparative analysis (2.3) synthesized; Initial principles and high-level structure for the Trust Economics conceptual framework drafted, explicitly outlining how these principles could support collective well-being and address identified failures. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3 description: Conceptual Framework Synthesis & Development parent_id: null dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Conceptual Framework Document drafted. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed # Aggregated status - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.1 description: Refine Framework Principles (Based on 2.4 draft) parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.4 definition_of_done: Core principles of Trust Economics refined and clearly articulated. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.2 description: Structure the Conceptual Framework Document parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.1 definition_of_done: Outline and structure for the framework document defined. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.3 description: Detail Framework Components & Interactions parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.1 definition_of_done: Explanation of how trust, needs fulfillment, non-monetary incentives, and other components function and interact within the proposed model drafted. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.4 description: Write Conceptual Framework Document Draft parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.2 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.3 definition_of_done: First complete draft of the Conceptual Framework Document produced. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4 description: Deliverable Creation & Refinement parent_id: null dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Written Articulation (Essay/Paper) and Conceptual Framework Document finalized. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed # Aggregated status, though quality rejected by user - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.1 description: Draft Written Articulation (Essay/Paper) parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.4 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.4 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.4 definition_of_done: First draft of the written piece (integrating critique, analysis of alternatives, and framework concepts) produced. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.2 description: Refine Conceptual Framework Document Draft parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.4 definition_of_done: Draft Framework Document (from 3.4) revised based on integration into overall thinking (e.g., for clarity in the written piece). resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.3 description: Review and Edit Deliverables parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.1 - TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.2 definition_of_done: Both the written articulation and framework document reviewed for clarity, consistency, arguments, and adherence to quality standards. Edits incorporated. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.4 description: Finalize Deliverables parent_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4 dependencies: - TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.3 definition_of_done: Deliverables prepared for final output/sharing format. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed - id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-5 description: Project Management & Coordination parent_id: null dependencies: [] definition_of_done: Ongoing: Project activities tracked, communication maintained, documentation updated, process steps followed. resources_needed: [] quality_standards: [] status: Completed # Marked complete at project closure task_sequencing_notes: null resource_plan_notes: null quality_plan_notes: null risk_register: [] change_management_process: null methodology_specific_planning: {} internal_review_summary: null # Last review was performance review flagged_critical_issues: [] execution: tasks: # Includes all task execution instances, showing status and outputs - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.1_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.1 status: Completed quality_check_status: User Approved # Implicitly via DoD confirmation output_data: summary_for_user_review: |- Research into the historical evolution of money covered: * Barter: Direct exchange, limitations (double coincidence). * Commodity Money: Intrinsically valuable items (metals, salt), tangible value. * Representative Money: Tokens representing commodity claims (e.g., gold standard). * Fiat Money: Government decree, trust-based, abstract value. * Digital/Electronic Money: Digital representation of fiat. * Cryptocurrencies/Tokens: Decentralized/alternative digital value, varying trust models. internal_critique_summary: Research covered key stages as required by DoD. provenance_data: sources: [Project Charter, general knowledge] method: Conceptual research - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.2_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.2 status: Completed quality_check_status: User Approved # Via DoD confirmation output_data: summary_for_user_review: |- Analysis Summary: * Tool vs. End: Contrasted money's intended function vs. its elevation to an end goal. * Symbolic Treatment: Explored examples like the "shopkeeper prayer," prosperity gospel, veneration of wealth, demonstrating symbolic power beyond function. * Cultural/Psychological Links: Connected symbolic treatment to cultural narratives (success, status) and psychological factors (security, identity, cognitive biases). internal_critique_summary: Refined to better incorporate user anecdote and clarify functional vs. symbolic aspects. Strengthened link to "deadweight" concept. provenance_data: sources: [Project Charter, user input, WBS-1.1 output, sociology/psychology literature] method: Conceptual analysis, synthesis - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.3_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.3 status: Completed quality_check_status: User Approved # Via DoD confirmation after re-presentation output_data: summary_for_user_review: |- Detailed Output Summary: 1. Formalizing "Economic Deadweight": Argument based on lost potential value from precluded transactions for zero/low marginal cost goods due to price barriers. 2. Critique of Money as Barrier: Elaboration on restricted access to tools/knowledge, perpetuation of inequality, stifling innovation based on financial status vs. potential. 3. Connection to Civilization/Equal Footing: Linking monetary barriers to diminished collective potential and contradicting the need for equal footing for societal advancement. 4. Key Failures Identified: Suppression of innovation, exacerbation of inequality, resource misallocation, artificial scarcity, reduced collective intelligence, potential trust erosion. internal_critique_summary: Strengthened linkage between economic arguments and socio-philosophical goals. Distinguished barrier/deadweight arguments. Added concrete "Key Failures" list. provenance_data: sources: [Project Charter, user input, WBS-1.1/1.2 outputs, economic principles, information economy critiques, Harari context] method: Conceptual analysis, argument construction - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.4_exec_1 # Initial attempt task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.4 status: Needs Revision # Superseded by exec_2 # ... output data for skeletal outline ... - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.4_exec_2 # Revision task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.4 status: Completed quality_check_status: User Approved # Via DoD confirmation output_data: summary_for_user_review: |- Revised Detailed Outline for Critique Section: 1. Introduction (Problem, Thesis, Roadmap) 2. Nature of Money (History: Utility->Symbol; Tool vs. End: Perceptual Shift, Symbolic Inflation, Consequences) 3. Core Flaws (Deadweight: Definition, Zero-Cost Dilemma, Value Preclusion; Barrier: Access Restriction, Inequality, Innovation Stifling, Sapiens Link; Misalignment: Metrics, Commons, Collective Intelligence) 4. Key Failures Manifested (List with brief explanation) 5. Conclusion & Transition internal_critique_summary: Focused on adding 1-2 levels of sub-points under each major heading per user feedback. Ensured logical flow and coverage of prior phases. Made language more assertive for critique tone. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-1.1/1.2/1.3 outputs, Feedback FB-TREC-2025-10-27_1, Project Charter] method: Revision/expansion of outline, synthesis - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.0_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.0 status: Completed quality_check_status: User Approved # Via DoD confirmation output_data: summary_for_user_review: |- A. Defined Criteria: Relevance to critique, non-monetary incentives, trust mechanisms, info availability, scalability/generalizability, diversity. B. Selected Systems: 1. OSS Dev Ecosystems, 2. Wikipedia/Knowledge Commons, 3. LETS/Time Banks, 4. Gift Economies (Examples), 5. Scientific Research Communities (Foundational). internal_critique_summary: Refined criteria for project relevance. Ensured example diversity and provided rationale for each selection. provenance_data: sources: [Project Charter, WBS-1 outputs, general knowledge] method: Criteria development, selection against criteria - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.1_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.1 status: Completed quality_check_status: User Approved # Via DoD confirmation output_data: summary_for_user_review: |- Research Notes Highlights: 1. OSS: Mechanisms (Git, trackers), Motivations (intrinsic/extrinsic), Trust (code, norms, reputation), Limits (burnout, funding). 2. Wikipedia: Mechanisms (Wiki, policies, roles), Motivations (knowledge sharing, community), Trust (process, reputation), Limits (vandalism, bias). 3. LETS/Time Banks: Mechanisms (local units, directory), Motivations (access, community), Trust (interpersonal, transparency), Limits (scale, range). 4. Gift Economies: Mechanisms (giving w/o explicit return, norms), Motivations (altruism, bonds), Trust (social ties, reciprocity), Limits (scale, norm violation). 5. Science: Mechanisms (peer review, publication), Motivations (knowledge, reputation), Trust (method, integrity, replication), Limits (competition, bias, commercial influence). internal_critique_summary: Ensured balanced coverage of mechanisms, motivations, trust, and limitations for each system. Focused scope for Gift Economies. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-2.0 output, academic/public knowledge databases] method: Targeted research, synthesis - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.2_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.2 status: Completed quality_check_status: User Approved # Via DoD confirmation output_data: summary_for_user_review: |- Analysis Highlights: 1. SDT: Autonomy, Competence, Relatedness as drivers (e.g., OSS, Wikipedia). Monetary rewards can undermine if controlling. 2. Flow Theory: Immersion via challenge/skill balance (e.g., OSS coding, research). Monetary rewards external but can enable conditions. 3. Social Capital: Value from networks, norms, trust (e.g., LETS, Gift Economies, OSS reputation). Can be eroded by over-commodification. 4. Other Motivators: Purpose, Mastery, Altruism, Recognition, Reciprocity identified and linked to examples. internal_critique_summary: Added cross-references between theories. Clarified alternative/complement role vs. monetary incentives. Strengthened links to WBS-2.1 examples. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-2.1 output, motivation theory literature] method: Literature review, conceptual analysis, application - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.3_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.3 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Completed autonomously output_data: summary_for_user_review: Comparative analysis notes detailing how alternative models/incentives address specific monetary system failures (deadweight, barriers, potential, well-being, trust) identified in WBS-1.3. internal_critique_summary: Ensured each Key Failure from WBS-1.3 was explicitly addressed and the comparison clearly articulated *how* alternatives offered different approaches. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-1.3, WBS-2.1, WBS-2.2 outputs] method: Comparative analysis - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.4_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-2.4 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Completed autonomously output_data: summary_for_user_review: |- Drafted Principles for Trust Economics Framework: 1. Access over Ownership (for Abundant Goods) 2. Valuing Potential & Contribution 3. Fostering Intrinsic & Prosocial Motivation 4. Distributed Trust Mechanisms 5. Needs-Oriented Resource Allocation (Principles link explicitly to supporting well-being and addressing identified failures). internal_critique_summary: Ensured principles stemmed from prior analyses and addressed project goals/critiques. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-2.1, WBS-2.2, WBS-2.3 outputs] method: Synthesis, principle formulation - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.1_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.1 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Completed autonomously output_data: summary_for_user_review: Refined framework principles (from 2.4) focusing on clarity, consistency, comprehensiveness, and appropriate language. internal_critique_summary: Checked for actionability/clarity of each principle and cohesive fit of the set. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-2.4 output] method: Refinement, editing - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.2_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.2 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Completed autonomously output_data: summary_for_user_review: Proposed outline and structure for the Conceptual Framework Document based on refined principles. internal_critique_summary: Ensured structure was logical, comprehensive, and facilitated clear explanation. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-3.1 output] method: Structuring, outlining - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.3_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.3 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Completed autonomously output_data: summary_for_user_review: Drafted explanations of framework components (trust, needs fulfillment, non-monetary incentives) and their interactions within the defined structure. internal_critique_summary: Checked explanations for clarity, consistency with principles, and logical flow. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-3.1, WBS-3.2 outputs] method: Drafting, explanation - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.4_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-3.4 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Completed autonomously output_data: summary_for_user_review: First complete draft of the Conceptual Framework Document, compiling outputs from 3.1, 3.2, 3.3. internal_critique_summary: Checked for completeness, logical flow, consistent language. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-3.1, WBS-3.2, WBS-3.3 outputs] method: Compilation, drafting - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.1_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.1 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Quality subsequently rejected by user output_data: summary_for_user_review: First draft of the written articulation (essay/paper), integrating critique, alternatives analysis, and framework concepts. internal_critique_summary: Focused on seamless integration, clear argumentation, consistent tone. *Critique failed to identify lack of substantive depth.* provenance_data: sources: [WBS-1.4, WBS-2.4, WBS-3.4 outputs] method: Integration, drafting - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.2_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.2 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Quality subsequently rejected by user output_data: summary_for_user_review: Refined draft of the Conceptual Framework Document for consistency with essay draft (4.1). internal_critique_summary: Focused on alignment with essay draft and clarity. *Critique failed to identify lack of substantive depth.* provenance_data: sources: [WBS-3.4, WBS-4.1 outputs] method: Refinement, editing - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.3_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.3 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Quality subsequently rejected by user output_data: summary_for_user_review: Edited versions of both written articulation and framework document, checked for clarity, consistency, flow, grammar, style. internal_critique_summary: Cross-checked arguments, performed language/grammar checks. *Critique failed to identify lack of substantive depth.* provenance_data: sources: [WBS-4.1, WBS-4.2 outputs] method: Editing, review - task_execution_id: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.4_exec_1 task_id_from_plan: TREC-PLAN-WBS-4.4 status: Completed quality_check_status: AI Self-Checked # Quality subsequently rejected by user output_data: summary_for_user_review: Final prepared versions of the written articulation and framework document. internal_critique_summary: Final formatting check. provenance_data: sources: [WBS-4.3 outputs] method: Finalization, formatting logs: decisions: - decision_id: DEC-TREC-20251027_1 timestamp: 2025-10-27T18:00:00Z # Approximate description: Decision made during performance review TREC-PerfRev-2025-10-27_4 regarding unsatisfactory final deliverables. decision: Close Project As-Is (Option B) due to quality failure. rationale: User assessment that deliverables lacked sufficient depth and value-add. alternatives_considered: Option A - Revise Deliverables. impact: Project moves to closure phase instead of revision. feedback_items: - feedback_id: FB-TREC-2025-10-27_1 reviewed_item_ref: Output of Task Execution ID TREC-PLAN-WBS-1.4_exec_1 ("Drafted Outline for Critique Section") overall_assessment: Not specific enough. specific_points: - point_id: FB-TREC-2025-10-27_1-P1 description: The drafted outline is too skeletal, lacks sufficient detail, and is at too high a level for the intended thought leadership piece. suggested_action: The outline needs to be expanded with more sub-points and greater specificity under each major heading to provide a more detailed roadmap for the critique. priority: High