When Goal-Setting Substitutes for Confronting Real Growth Barriers

Axiomatology does not, by any means, consider goal-setting unnecessary or irrelevant. On the contrary, it is a fundamental component of leadership and an essential operational tool. However, to achieve more substantial leaps in corporate growth, organizations must often confront the deeper obstacles that limit the realization of individual potential. This level of engagement cannot be reached if key employees remain locked in an intensive — and often short-term — goal-achievement mode.

When individuals encounter internal or external conflicts between value hierarchies, there is a strong tendency to avoid such confrontations. One common manifestation of this avoidance is excessive or compulsive goal-setting behavior. At its core, this behavior often functions as a mechanism for bypassing deeper, unresolved value conflicts, which frequently present phenomenologically as diffuse fear or anxiety.

In this article, we analyze the typology of internal value conflicts that individuals are inclined to avoid, and examine the critical role of achieving alignment between moral intuition, Structured Internal Value Hierarchies (SIVHs), and observable behavior.

Avoidance Through Alternative Goal-Setting Ideology

Carl Jung famously stated that “neurosis is always a substitute for legitimate suffering” (The Symbolic Life). In simple terms, this means that many individuals refuse to slow down and confront the profoundly unpleasant emotions linked to unresolved internal conflicts—conflicts often arising either from incoherence between one's Structured Internal Value Hierarchy (SIVH) and moral intuition, or from discrepancies between one's behavior and an SIVH aligned with moral sense. Instead of addressing these conflicts, individuals frequently engage in the active pursuit of short- and long-term goals, using relentless activity as a mechanism of avoidance.

A significant portion of Western self-help ideology—and many popular psychological interventions—exemplifies this dynamic. These frameworks emphasize goal-setting and achievement as a primary life strategy, effectively offering an ideal substitute for the arduous work of confronting deeper value conflicts. Typically, such programs first induce a sense of dissatisfaction or “hunger” with the current state of being, promoting it as essential for initiating self-improvement. Individuals are then encouraged to become intensely focused—sometimes to the point of obsession—on their goals, with the promise of eventual fulfillment. The dissatisfaction with the present is thus weaponized to drive relentless forward motion, continuously resetting new objectives before any true resolution is achieved.

However, from a psychological perspective, this mechanism often functions as a closed loop that perpetuates growing neurosis in Jungian terms, or fosters chronic anxiety and existential angst that individuals find difficult to concretely identify or articulate.

In most cases, the ethos of perpetual goal-setting and achieving, framed as a way of life, proves not only ineffective for attaining meaningful life satisfaction (and often even fails in achieving the stated goals, particularly when they are absurdly unrealistic), but also actively suppresses the confrontation with underlying value hierarchy conflicts. This suppression typically manifests as a disalignment between the SIVH and behavioral patterns, leading to deeper psychological fragmentation. In this sense, the habitual pursuit of external goals can be conceptualized as a form of emotional and axiological suppression—a refusal to engage with the necessary realignment between inner values, moral sense, and outward behavior.

Goal-Setting as Suppression of Fear of Confrontation

Although it may initially seem counterintuitive, a significant proportion of goals tied to human achievement drive are not set to resolve inner conflicts, but rather to perpetuate or intensify psychological suppression. Specifically, individuals often set goals to avoid confronting profound fears related to self-worth and violations of fundamental internal values. Career aspirations, material ambitions, physical transformation, and academic achievements frequently serve as mechanisms of "safety"—occupying the individual's active cognitive resources, including working memory (neurologically speaking), while simultaneously creating the illusion of striving toward something "bigger" and "meaningful." In this state, an individual may unconsciously believe that reaching an external goal will resolve underlying experiences of meaninglessness, fear, or existential isolation.

The mechanics of suppression as they manifest through goal-setting behavior can be categorized into several distinct patterns. Each of these represents a form of superficial drive—a surface-level neurosis that masks an underlying, unresolved value conflict:

1. Seeking External Validation
   Suppression often activates a need to fuel motivational circuits associated with external validation. In these cases, dopamine and serotonin pathways become linked to the image of success as reflected in the admiration of others. This mechanism renders self-worth highly dependent on external feedback, embedding one’s sense of value in contingent social approval rather than in authentic internal coherence.

2. Viewing Goal Achievement as a Cure for Internal Wounds
   Individuals may unconsciously believe that attaining external goals will heal deep-seated wounds—feelings of unworthiness, fear, or loneliness. However, external success rarely addresses the root causes of these psychological injuries, leading instead to disillusionment once the goal is attained.

3. Escaping the Current Life Situation
   Goal-setting can also serve as a strategy for psychological escape rather than authentic self-development. Individuals often pursue new goals not to build a better or more meaningful life, but simply to flee dissatisfaction with their current reality. Predictably, the promised “riches” found at the end of this journey prove illusory.

4. The Belief in a Final Destination
   Goals are frequently treated as definitive endpoints, granting a false sense of narrative closure. Upon reaching such goals, individuals often experience profound emptiness, as the narrative arc of striving collapses without the scaffolding of a larger, open-ended purpose. This can trigger a cycle of aimlessness and the compulsive setting of new goals to avoid existential drift.

5. Identity Fusion with Goal Pursuit
   For some, fighting, striving, and "being on a mission" become central elements of self-identity. The individual fuses personal worth and existential purpose with the act of goal-pursuit itself. Consequently, when a goal is achieved—or abandoned—their sense of self may disintegrate, leading to confusion, fear, and a profound loss of existential orientation.

In all these cases, goal pursuit fails to deliver the anticipated sense of satisfaction or resolution. In fact, achieving the goal often intensifies feelings of confusion, meaninglessness, fear, and loneliness. What was initially perceived as a pathway toward meaning instead reveals itself as a carefully orchestrated avoidance of deeper internal reconciliation.

Suppression Expression Through the Lens of Axiomatology

From the perspective of Axiomatology, suppression fundamentally concerns the valuation mechanics underlying a given situation. The core issue lies in the relationship between behavior, conscious value hierarchies, and moral sense. Even when individuals lack a conscious awareness of their Structured Internal Value Hierarchy (SIVH), the hierarchy itself still operates implicitly, shaping perception, motivation, and emotional experience. Suppression, therefore, arises primarily from conflicts either between behavior and the SIVH, or between the SIVH and an individual's innate moral sense.

In this framework, suppression is not merely a psychological phenomenon but a structural failure to align action with vertically ordered, coherent valuation. The greater the dissonance between internalized values, moral intuition, and behavior, the stronger the psychic pressure toward suppression.

This dissonance often manifests both psychologically and psychosomatically. Common expressions include hair loss, chronic physical pain without clear medical causes, disordered eating patterns, persistent irritability, a pervasive sense of emptiness or lack of fulfillment, and recurring disturbing dreams. These symptoms reflect the psyche’s attempt to signal unresolved internal conflict.

Importantly, within Axiomatology, the entire mechanics of compulsive goal-setting can be understood as an elaborate attempt to distract consciousness from the inflow of unordered, fear-laden experiential material into each moment of becoming. Instead of allowing value conflicts to surface and be properly integrated, individuals redirect their psychic energy toward externally structured pursuits, creating a superficial sense of order that temporarily shields them from the anxiety of unprocessed moral and axiological discord.

Axiomatological Explanation Through Process Theory

When we approach compulsive goal-setting behavior as a suppression mechanism from the perspective of Axiomatology integrated with process theory, a deeper dynamic emerges. Each new occasion of experience involves subjective prehensions that carry forward the cumulative burden of "falseness"—a residue of unresolved internal value conflicts. In this framework, something "rotten" is added to the Self Fusion process at each iteration, embedded within the physical prehensions colored by subjective qualities.

In other words, every new occasion inherits a compounding set of prior occasions in which some dimension of existential uncertainty, misalignment, or unintegrated fear remains unresolved. Rather than allowing these conflicts to surface into conscious awareness and initiate transformative integration, individuals instinctively deploy semantic constructions—goal-setting narratives—to suppress and rationalize the emerging dissonance. As a result, the "free potential" and motivational energy available in each moment are increasingly depleted.

Within this dynamic, goal-setting and achievement function as semantic tools to counterbalance the growing existential unease. These conceptual constructs act as barriers, preventing the retrieval and reprocessing of episodic memories linked to unresolved value conflicts—memories that, if properly integrated, could immediately alter the individual's state of being. Instead, the suppression becomes recursive: with each cycle, the subjective experience of falseness deepens, and the cumulative burden of dissonance increases.

The expression of this process varies depending on individual personality trait configurations. In those with high neuroticism and low conscientiousness, the increasing weight of unresolved falseness often leads to greater withdrawal, passivity, and avoidance of tangible goal-directed behavior. In contrast, individuals with high conscientiousness—particularly high industriousness—may respond by intensifying their focus on external goal pursuit, attempting to drown out the internal dissonance through sheer action.

Thus, the pattern can be likened to a form of existential gambling, where the stakes continually rise: each cycle demands more goal-oriented effort to temporarily silence the growing falseness embedded within each new occasion of becoming. Over time, this dynamic becomes self-defeating, eroding the authentic integration necessary for a coherent and meaningful life trajectory.

Fundamental Concern: A Value Conflict Involving SIVHs

In such situations, a paradoxical buildup occurs. The longer an individual maintains a "goal achievement lifestyle" without intervening to address the deeper, Structured Internal Value Hierarchy (SIVH)-related conflicts, the more entrenched the avoidance mechanism becomes. By refusing to confront the actuality of suppression, the psychological burden compounds, and the confrontation with suppressed truth becomes increasingly difficult, often manifesting as escalating fear.

Each new occasion within the Self Fusion process compounds the unresolved dissonance, further layering suppressed conflicts onto the experiential fabric of becoming. As these unaddressed layers accumulate, the individual increasingly experiences a subjective sense of incapacity: they feel that they no longer possess the potential or resources to confront the root problem. Fear grows so immense that the only seemingly viable strategy becomes an even more intensified commitment to external goal pursuit—essentially an escalation of the very avoidance mechanism that fuels the deeper problem.

Within Axiomatology, this phenomenon is identified as the emergence of a fundamental concern—a state where suppression of SIVH-related conflicts, combined with ongoing repression, catalyzes a powerful anti-alētheia dynamic. This anti-alētheia mechanic refers to the willful participation in processes that systematically obscure, rather than reveal, existential truth.

As this process continues, the internal architecture of suppression grows increasingly complex. Multiple layers of repression stack upon one another, making it progressively harder to approach the core value conflict at all. Over time, the original dissonance becomes buried beneath successive rationalizations and goal-driven activities, rendering the path back to authenticity more arduous with each cycle of suppression.

Axiomatic Intervention: First Step — Absolute Halt

When considering a viable intervention for this dynamic, Axiomatology posits only one possible starting point: the Absolute Halt. This principle demands that, instead of pursuing any further activities—whether goal-related or otherwise—the individual must immediately interrupt their current trajectory and confront the situation directly, here and now.

Although this approach may sound radical, and individuals often present compelling and seemingly reasonable arguments against such a sudden cessation, their objections are, paradoxically, evidence of the very avoidance mechanisms sustaining their suppression. In most cases, the point at which a genuine Absolute Halt can occur arises spontaneously and under suboptimal circumstances. Nevertheless, the necessity of immediate intervention remains paramount.

The first stage of Axiomatic Intervention employs what is termed the Potential-Freeing Procedure, which consists of three concrete steps:

1. Cessation of Current Behavior
   All ongoing externalized activities must be suspended to break the recursive suppression cycle.

2. Self-Intervention through Radical Honesty
   The individual must ask themselves directly: "What am I lying to myself about at this moment?"—thus targeting the suppression at its semantic root.

3. Third-Person Narrative Reconstruction
   The individual should then describe their current situation from an external, third-person perspective, which forces objectification of the self-deception and exposes the absurdity of the rationalizations maintaining the suppression.

In most cases, this triadic intervention produces immediate flashes of clarity, allowing the individual to recognize the disproportionate and often absurd nature of their goal-driven entrapment. By forcibly halting the flow of suppression mechanisms, the Absolute Halt opens a temporary window for genuine realignment between moral sense, SIVH, and behavior.situation the individual had been trapped in.

A Real-Life Example: Suppression through Goal-Setting

Consider the case of a woman in her mid-thirties, living with her two children (ages 8 and 10) in a rented apartment, which she continues to share with the children’s father despite the de facto dissolution of their relationship. The emotional bond between them has long since eroded; their cohabitation persists solely due to financial hardship. They no longer share a bedroom—whichever parent arrives home first claims the bedroom, while the other sleeps on the couch—and neither holds any acknowledged right to inquire into the other's personal affairs. Their connection is limited to shared expenses and minimal coordination regarding the children's needs. The children themselves, perceptive of the relational void, have silently internalized the arrangement, with discussions about the situation becoming an unspoken taboo.

The woman, currently unemployed and dependent on welfare, attempts to maintain a sense of purpose through a variety of structured activities. She sets daily and weekly goals: achieving a specific number of steps walked per day, reading quotas, attending scheduled appointments in search of employment, and managing her children's schooling needs with precision. Her days are filled with rigid schedules designed to create the appearance of movement and progress.

However, beneath the surface, a growing anxiety festers. She increasingly senses the absurdity of her situation—the emotional emptiness of her living arrangement, the frozen relational dynamics, and her socio-economic stagnation. Yet, instead of confronting these deeper existential and value-hierarchy conflicts, she engages in compulsive goal-achievement behavior. The pursuit of daily objectives provides temporary contentment, but this contentment is highly superficial. In reality, her actions constitute a systematic avoidance of the profound dissonance and fear associated with facing her suppressed reality.

This example illustrates how goal-oriented structures, even when appearing productive, can serve primarily as defense mechanisms—temporary shields against the unbearable confrontation with existential and axiological misalignment.*

Second Step: Resource Assessment for Intervention

Following the Absolute Halt, the second stage of Axiomatic Intervention is the realistic assessment of available resources for internal change. As discussed earlier, the available potential for intervention diminishes incrementally with each occasion of unresolved suppression. Recognizing this reduction in potential is itself a vital component of intervention readiness.

Nevertheless, Axiomatology posits that successful intervention is categorically impossible without first achieving absolute clarity regarding one's internal value hierarchy and its relation to one's fundamental narrative cosmology. Intervention cannot rely merely on emotional momentum or circumstantial opportunity—it must be grounded in conscious recognition of the values one holds and a deliberate decision based upon those values.

This leads to an important and often overlooked psychological necessity: avoiding the trap of moral superiority.

Avoiding Moral Superiority Through the Recognition of Internal Evil

Whenever an individual confronts deep-seated fears, the challenge reaches into the very core of identity, into questions of right and wrong, good and evil, divine and fallen aspects of the self. Regardless of one’s professed beliefs, every confrontation with fear is, at its root, a confrontation with the moral structure of one’s being.

Fyodor Dostoevsky articulated this fundamental truth in The Brothers Karamazov:
"The battlefield is in the heart of man."
Good and evil are not external forces acting upon us; they are internal realities, locked in perpetual conflict within every human heart.

In situations requiring profound intervention, it is critically important to resist the impulse to claim moral high ground. Assertions such as "I am good to the core" or "I have done nothing wrong" often serve only to reinforce the suppression mechanisms, further insulating the individual from the necessary work of self-confrontation.

A more effective starting point requires radical humility: the acknowledgment that both good and evil exist within every individual. Only by relinquishing claims to absolute moral superiority can one create the necessary internal conditions for real change. The acceptance of one's internal complexity—both the divine and the fallen aspects of the self—forms the ethical and psychological foundation upon which genuine reintegration can occur.

Thus, Axiomatology demands not only cognitive clarity about one's value structures but also moral humility: a willingness to confront the internal battlefield without self-deceptive narratives of innate goodness.

Third Step: Confrontation

Once an individual has assessed the alignment—or lack thereof—between their Structured Internal Value Hierarchy (SIVH), moral sense (the Will of God, or WOG), and observable behavior, actual confrontation becomes possible. This confrontation can occur both at the level of self and at the interpersonal level, depending on the nature of the value conflict.

Self-Confrontation

As a person approaches the "breaking point" phase, the core determinant of their capacity for successful confrontation lies in their willingness to face the underlying structure of their own SIVH. There is, ultimately, no confrontation outside of the confrontation of value hierarchies. Superficial disputes or behaviors are only symptoms; the true confrontation occurs at the axiological level.

When analyzing one's current SIVH in the presence of conflict-avoidant behavior, two primary scenarios emerge:

1. Behavior is aligned with an SIVH that is not aligned with the WOG (Will of God).
   In this case, the SIVH itself must be restructured to realign with a higher moral order.

2. Behavior is not aligned with an SIVH that is aligned with the WOG.
   Here, the behavior must be modified to bring it into congruence with the correct value hierarchy.

If ambiguity remains about the true structure of one's SIVH, behavioral analysis—careful observation of recurring action patterns—can offer critical insights, allowing implicit hierarchies to surface into conscious examination.

Interpersonal Confrontation

When confronting conflicts involving others, the principle remains the same: the conflict must be analyzed in terms of the underlying value hierarchies. Interpersonal confrontation becomes reasonable and sustainable only if one's own SIVH is aligned both with one's behavior and with the moral lure toward the good (the Will of God).

The structure is as follows:

• If the other party's SIVH and behavior are not in alignment with the WOG, or their behavior is disaligned with their professed SIVH, confrontation can proceed with moral certainty, even if resolution takes time.

• However, peculiar but critical situations can arise where the other person's SIVH and behavior are properly aligned with the WOG, while one's own behavior remains disaligned. In such cases, any attempt at opposition will be fruitless. The correct course of action is not to escalate the confrontation but to recognize one's own misalignment and prioritize self-realignment before any further engagement.

In short, the success of interpersonal confrontation is predicated entirely on the internal consistency and moral alignment of one’s own value structure and actions. Without this foundation, opposition degenerates into projection, not resolution.

Example Analyzed: Confrontation Dynamics through SIVH Alignment

Let us return to the earlier example of the woman in her mid-thirties living with her children's father. Suppose she now wishes to confront him regarding their untenable living arrangement. The viability of this confrontation, according to Axiomatology, rests entirely on the structure and alignment of her value hierarchy.

If her top value is "Family," and if this value is genuinely her highest monotheistic orientation, then her SIVH is fundamentally aligned with the Will of God (WOG), as "Family" embodies a vast narrative truth within cosmological terms. However, the critical first step is assessing whether her behavior coherently aligns with her professed SIVH. Without this internal alignment, no meaningful confrontation is possible.

For instance, if she has historically failed in fulfilling relational duties—through manipulation, dishonesty, or emotional withdrawal—then regardless of the correctness of her top value, the disalignment between her behavior and her SIVH will undermine her confrontation efforts.

At the same time, the behavior and value structure of the other party must be analyzed. Suppose the father, despite disengagement from the relationship, has maintained behavioral alignment with a different high-order value—for example, caring for a terminally ill mother. In this case, his SIVH, although different in content, remains morally coherent with his behavior and aligned with WOG.

In such a scenario, the woman, despite having a higher top value in the abstract ("Family"), would be at a disadvantage because her behavior does not substantiate her SIVH, while the man's behavior consistently fulfills his.

Alternatively, if the father's SIVH reflects selfish or irresponsible values—such as openly prioritizing personal freedom and avoidance of commitment—and if his behavior aligns with this low-order hierarchy, the situation deteriorates for both parties. Neither party possesses the moral leverage for a successful confrontation; both suffer from a compromised internal structure.

Crucially, when an individual with a noble top value (e.g., "Family") but behavioral disalignment initiates confrontation, they risk initiating from a false position of moral high ground. Under scrutiny, this gap becomes visible, and the confrontation typically collapses. Outcomes in such cases often include:

• Failure of confrontation and regression into further suppression mechanisms (e.g., increased superficial goal-setting).

• Acute realization of identity flaws, potentially leading to emotional collapse, depressive withdrawal, or existential despair.

Thus, in the Axiomatological framework, any confrontation—self or interpersonal—must be grounded in the congruence of SIVH, behavior, and moral cosmology. Without this congruence, confrontation degenerates into an emotionally and morally destructive exercise, deepening internal fragmentation rather than resolving it.

Importance of SIVH–WOG–Behavior Alignment Before Confrontation

Regardless of whether an individual seeks to end avoidance behavior within themselves or aims to oppose another person, the mechanics remain fundamentally the same. There is no viable starting point for authentic confrontation other than rigorously assessing the alignment among behavior, the Structured Internal Value Hierarchy (SIVH), and the Will of God (WOG).

Long-standing internal conflicts and suppression dynamics almost invariably involve disalignment—at minimum—at the behavioral level. This disalignment often manifests externally as compulsive alternative goal-setting behavior. Therefore, the only realistic pathway toward meaningful resolution and the cessation of replacement behaviors is the achievement of absolute alignment among these three axes.

In Axiomatological terms, this alignment marks the first movement from confession toward adornment. Although the full transition to adornment—where action becomes fully integrated with divine orientation—may take years of lived transformation, the initial act of confession and repentance creates the necessary rupture in suppression mechanics. Through repentance, the individual reorients their subjective aim in each new occasion of the Self Fusion process, initiating real internal change.

Consequently, the imperative becomes clear: alignment of behavior, SIVH, and WOG is not merely preparatory but foundational. It constitutes a necessary condition for what Kierkegaard termed the Leap of Faith—a radical existential decision that opens the possibility for higher life quality and the end of compulsive replacement behaviors.

Conclusion

As a final conclusion, any intensive goal-setting behavior that appears to dominate one's motivational structure must be subjected to critical examination. Rather than celebrating goal obsession as a hallmark of "achievement-oriented" culture, one must interrogate to what extent such behavior serves as an avoidance mechanism from unresolved conflicts within the triad of Behavior–SIVH–WOG.

In the vast majority of cases, persistent disalignment is present.

Upon achieving initial alignment, Axiomatology offers further techniques to strengthen and consolidate change. These include maximizing available potential, cultivating authentic self-confidence through the acceptance of responsibility, and employing practices such as "two-way prayer"—for instance, prayers oriented around the archetypal invocation "You Walk Before Me."

Unlike conventional self-help methodologies rooted in Western canon, Axiomatology deliberately rejects superficial motivational techniques in favor of metaphysically grounded, empirically more durable transformation paths. Our practical experience supports the conclusion that this approach generates not only deeper change but also substantially more lasting results.