Goal Journey Extraction

Input: $ARGUMENTS

Interpretations

Before executing, identify which interpretation matches the user’s input:

Interpretation 1 — Extract a goal journey from a source: The user has a book, story, experience, or case study and wants to extract the underlying purpose chain (action to goal to goal to intrinsic goal) and generalize it into a reusable journey pattern. Interpretation 2 — Map someone’s personal goal chain: The user wants to trace their own (or someone else’s) current actions back through instrumental goals to discover what intrinsic goals are actually driving behavior. Interpretation 3 — Analyze competing goal chains for conflict: The user suspects that multiple goals are in tension and wants to surface the full chains to find where they diverge or conflict.

If ambiguous, ask: “I can help with extracting a journey from a source, mapping a personal goal chain, or analyzing conflicts between competing goals — which fits?” If clear from context, proceed with the matching interpretation.

Overview

Extract the underlying GOAL JOURNEY from any source: books, videos, PDFs, conversations, experiences.

A goal journey is a CHAIN OF GOALS: Action → Goal → Goal → … → Intrinsic Goal

This is NOT a narrative arc. It’s a PURPOSE CHAIN.

Steps

Step 1: Identify the action

What action is being taken (or was taken)?

Be specific about what was DONE, not what happened.

NOT: “John succeeded” BUT: “Person invested years developing expertise in domain”

The action is the bottom of the goal chain.

Output: action_statement

Step 2: Ask: What goal did this action serve?

Every action serves a goal. What was this action trying to achieve?

NOT: “What happened next?” BUT: “What was this action FOR?”

Example: Action: “Invested years developing expertise” Goal: “Become highly capable in the domain”

Output: immediate_goal

Step 3: Ask: What goal did THAT goal serve?

The goal you identified is also instrumental. What does achieving that goal enable?

Example: Goal: “Become highly capable in the domain” Serves: “Be able to create significant work”

Keep going: Goal: “Create significant work” Serves: “Have meaningful impact”

Output: goal_chain (growing)

Step 4: Continue until intrinsic goal (use value elicitation)

Keep asking “What’s important to you about that?” until circularity.

Circularity indicators:

• “Because that’s what I value”
• “That’s just what matters”
• “I just do”

IMPORTANT:

• Don’t assume “flourishing” or any default terminus
• Different people have different intrinsic goals
• Some have anti-flourishing goals (asceticism, simplicity)
• Apply intrinsic_goal_termination_gate if unsure

Example chain: Action: Invested years developing expertise → Goal: Become highly capable → Goal: Create significant work → Goal: Have meaningful impact → INTRINSIC: [Varies - Meaning for some, Recognition for others, Mastery for others - discover via elicitation]

Output: complete_goal_chain

Step 5: Check for additional intrinsic goals

Ask: “Is there anything else important about [original action/goal]?”

People often have MULTIPLE intrinsic goals. Don’t stop at the first one found.

If yes: Trace the new chain (repeat steps 2-4) If no: Proceed to step 5

Example: First chain: Expertise → Impact → Meaning Second chain: Expertise → Recognition → Status

This person has TWO intrinsic goals: Meaning AND Status

Output: all_intrinsic_goals

Step 6: Check for conflicts between intrinsic goals

If multiple intrinsic goals found: Ask: “Do these ever conflict?”

Common conflicts:

• Freedom vs Security
• Meaning vs Recognition
• Achievement vs Peace
• Connection vs Independence

Note the conflict - the person will need to balance.

Output: conflicts (if any)

Step 7: Verify the chain

Read the chain from bottom (action) to top (intrinsic):

• Does each step SERVE the next? (not just “lead to”)
• Are there missing links?
• Is the intrinsic goal legitimate?

If there’s a jump: “Become highly capable” → ??? → “Live meaningful life”

Find the missing link: “Become highly capable” → “Create significant work” → “Have impact” → “Live meaningful life”

Output: verified_chain

Step 8: Generalize each step

For each step in the raw path, find the semi-generalizable form.

Use the generalization rules:

• Names → Roles (John → Person, Leader, Seeker)
• Specific things → Categories (Gibson guitar → Tool, Resource)
• Specific places → Contexts (Sam’s shop → Marketplace)
• Specific actions → Action types (bought → Acquired, Obtained)
• Specific outcomes → Outcome types (got promoted → Advanced)

Test each step:

• Too specific? Abstract further
• Too abstract? Add back some specificity
• Semi-generalizable: Can apply to 10-1000 other situations

Example: Specific: “Got promoted to VP after the merger” Too abstract: “Status changed” Semi-generalizable: “Person advanced through organizational transition”

Output: generalized_path (list of semi-generalizable steps)

Step 9: Identify key transitions

Find the moments where the journey CHANGED significantly.

Types of transitions:

• Choice points: “Could have gone either way, chose this”
• Thresholds: “Entered new territory, can’t go back”
• Transformations: “Became different than before”
• Revelations: “Understood differently than before”
• Reversals: “Direction changed completely”
• Crises: “Everything at stake”

For each transition:

• Which step is it?
• What type of transition?
• What makes it significant?

These are often the most transferable parts - the SHAPE of change.

Output: key_transitions (list of {step, type, significance})

Step 10: Classify the journey archetype

Match the journey to archetypes:

Complexity: simple | complicated | complex | chaotic Difficulty: easy | challenging | hard | seemingly_impossible Predictability: predictable | twist | reversal | emergent Frequency: universal | common | uncommon | rare

Also check classic structures:

• Hero’s journey
• Tragedy
• Comedy
• Rags to riches
• Voyage and return

A journey may match multiple archetypes partially.

Output: archetype_classification

Step 11: Test generalizability

Test: Can this journey apply to other situations?

Try instantiating in:

1. A different domain (if business → personal; if art → science)
2. A different scale (if individual → group; if small → large)
3. A different context (if modern → historical; if Western → other)

For each test:

• Does the structure still make sense?
• Do the transitions still apply?
• Would someone in that situation recognize this journey?

If it fails to transfer:

• The journey is too specific - generalize more
• Or it’s a genuinely unique journey - note this

Output: generalizability_assessment

Step 12: Test satisfaction

Test: Does this journey feel complete and meaningful?

Check:

• Beginning → Middle → End present?
• Movement/change throughout (not static)?
• Stakes clear (something matters)?
• Resolution provides closure (even if tragic)?
• Emotional shape recognizable?

If unsatisfying:

• Missing steps? Add them
• Wrong ending? Find true endpoint
• No stakes? Find what was at risk
• Random feeling? Find underlying pattern

Output: satisfaction_assessment

Step 13: Construct final journey representation

Create the complete journey object:

journey:
  title: "[Evocative name for this journey type]"
  source: "[Original source reference]"

  archetype:
    complexity: [simple|complicated|complex|chaotic]
    difficulty: [easy|challenging|hard|seemingly_impossible]
    predictability: [predictable|twist|reversal|emergent]
    frequency: [universal|common|uncommon|rare]
    classic_structure: [heros_journey|tragedy|comedy|rags_to_riches|voyage_and_return|none]

  steps:
    - "[Semi-generalizable step 1]"
    - "[Semi-generalizable step 2]"
    - ...

  key_transitions:
    - step: [number]
      type: [choice|threshold|transformation|revelation|reversal|crisis]
      description: "[What makes this significant]"

  intrinsic_goals:
    primary: "[Main intrinsic goal - discovered via value elicitation]"
    additional:
      - "[Additional intrinsic goal if any]"
    conflicts:
      - between: ["[Goal 1]", "[Goal 2]"]
        nature: "[Description of conflict]"
    note: "Different people may have different intrinsic goals for same journey"

  validation:
    generalizability: [passes|partial|fails]
    generalizability_notes: "[How it transferred in tests]"
    satisfaction: [satisfying|partial|unsatisfying]
    satisfaction_notes: "[What makes it satisfying or not]"
    chain_coherence:
      each_step_serves_next: [true|false]
      proper_verb_forms: [true|false]
      no_skipped_steps: [true|false]

  applicability:
    - "[Situation type 1 this applies to]"
    - "[Situation type 2 this applies to]"
    - ...

  variants:
    - "[Alternative version of this journey]"
    - "[What changes if X is different]"
    - "[Different intrinsic goal variant]"

Output: complete_journey