*Foundation* Series Blog (V): The Legacy of Foundation, a Timeless Allegory for Humanity's Future

Echoes Across Eighty Years: Why We Still Read Foundation 

In 1942, a 22-year-old published a story in Astounding Science Fiction about the collapse of a Galactic Empire. World War II was underway, the atomic bomb had not yet been born, computers were theoretical, and humanity had not launched its first satellite.

More than eighty years later, in a world reshaped by artificial intelligence, gene editing, climate crisis, and the global internet, Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series remains captivating, thought-provoking, and deeply relevant to our present dilemmas.

This is no accident. Foundation became a timeless classic not because it predicted technical details of the future accurately—in fact, some of Asimov’s technological visions have aged out—but because it asks fundamental questions about human civilization, historical development, and individual destiny. These questions transcend eras and probe the central predicament of human existence.

In this final essay of the series, let’s revisit Foundation’s core themes, examine its legacy, and explore why it remains an essential tool for understanding ourselves and our world in the 21st century.

Timeless Themes: The Intellectual Core of Foundation 

Historical Inevitability vs. the Power of Contingency 

This tension runs through the entire saga. Hari Seldon’s psychohistory embodies an extreme form of historical determinism: history follows calculable laws, and the role of individuals is negligible at large scales.

But the Mule disrupts that assumption. A single mutant individual, through extraordinary abilities, alters the entire trajectory of galactic history. History is not pure physics; there are always variables beyond prediction.

Asimov’s genius lies in refusing to take a simplistic side. The narrative shows:

On the macro level, history does exhibit trends and regularities. After the Empire’s collapse, civilization must re-cohere—driven by basic social and economic laws. The Mule can delay this process but cannot fundamentally reverse its direction.

On the meso and micro levels, individual choices and contingent events are pivotal. Salvor Hardin’s political craft, Hober Mallow’s commercial strategy, Bayta Darell’s moral courage—these individual decisions shape history’s specific contours at critical junctures.

This dialectical view is especially vital today. We live in a time both highly determined and profoundly uncertain:

• Climate change obeys physical laws, yet society’s response depends on political decisions.
• Technology follows internal logics, yet how it is used depends on human choice.
• Economic globalization is structural, yet trade wars and protectionism show political will still matters.
• AI’s progress seems unstoppable, yet we still debate how it should be governed.

Foundation teaches us to recognize structural constraints while preserving space for individual agency; to maintain long horizons while guarding against the arrogance of determinism.

Individual Freedom vs. Collective Fate 

The Seldon Plan is designed for the welfare of human civilization, but its execution requires shaping the choices of countless individuals. The Second Foundation intervenes “for the greater good,” yet such intervention infringes on autonomy.

This is the classic moral dilemma known as “the tyranny of utilitarianism”: Is it acceptable to sacrifice the rights of a few for the greatest good of the many?

Foundation presents the complexity:

The cost of non-intervention: Left to “natural” historical development, the galaxy would endure a thirty-thousand-year Dark Age; trillions would suffer war, famine, and disease. Is this cost tolerable?

The cost of intervention: The Second Foundation manipulates minds, stripping genuine choice. Even if done to save civilization, is the means justified?

The difficulty of a middle path: The Seldon Plan aims to minimize intervention, nudging only at key nodes. But “minimize” and “key” are themselves subjective judgments.

Today, the dilemma reappears in new forms:

• Pandemic control: Where should governments draw the line restricting personal freedom for public health?
• Climate policy: How much sacrifice should the present generation bear for the welfare of future generations?
• AI governance: How should we constrain technological development for social safety?
• Data privacy: To what extent may privacy be traded for public safety and convenience?

Foundation does not give answers, but it offers a frame: any “for the collective good” decision must withstand moral scrutiny; benevolence is not a sufficient reason to violate freedom; above all, we must build transparency and accountability.

The Power of Technology vs. the Limits of Human Nature 

The series shows technology’s central role in civilizational development:

• The First Foundation builds influence through technological superiority.
• Nuclear tech is packaged as religion to control surrounding kingdoms.
• Traders create economic dependencies through technological monopolies.
• The Second Foundation develops mental sciences to manipulate emotion.

Technology is neutral: it can build or control, liberate or enslave. What matters is who wields it, how it is used, and its entanglement with power.

Yet Asimov also reveals limits:

Technology cannot solve every problem: The Mule’s powers are technical, but his solitude and pain are human. No technology can deliver happiness or meaning.

The fragility of dependence: When Korell relies on Foundation tech, it loses autonomy. Advancement without self-directed innovation creates new dependencies.

The gap between capability and ethics: Possessing emotional manipulation does not confer wisdom about its use. When technical capacity outstrips moral judgment, danger follows.

Amid rapid advances in AI, gene editing, and brain–computer interfaces, these insights resonate. Our tools grow stronger, but wisdom about their use lags. Foundation reminds us: progress must be paired with ethical reflection; innovation must be constrained by moral guardrails.

Knowledge as Power vs. the Responsibility of Power 

At the core of the Second Foundation is the question of the power and duty of knowledge elites: What obligations do those with special knowledge bear? How should they wield influence?

This question has unprecedented urgency today:

Technical elites: Silicon Valley engineers and product managers shape the information environments and behaviors of billions.

Scientific experts: From climate scientists to epidemiologists, expert judgments increasingly drive policy.

AI researchers: A handful of labs may steer the future of human civilization.

Financial technocrats: Monetary policy and regulation by technical officials affect billions of livelihoods.

The Second Foundation’s dilemma mirrors theirs: endowed with capabilities others lack, how do we prevent abuse? How do we balance efficiency and democracy? How do we uphold professionalism alongside public responsibility?

The series teaches:

Elites need checks: Even the most benevolent can err or corrupt. Transparency and accountability are essential.

Expertise ≠ moral superiority: Knowing “how” is not knowing “what ought.” Technical and value judgments differ.

Participation over pure efficiency: Decisions affecting people should include them, even at the cost of speed. This honors human dignity.

Humility is true wisdom: Acknowledging limits and welcoming dissent defines genuine professionalism.

Asimov’s Foresight: 1940s Thought Experiments, Today’s Reality 

Conceived during WWII, Foundation shows remarkable foresight. While some technical details are dated (no internet, smartphones, or gene tech), his grasp of social trends and human predicaments is strikingly accurate.

Foreseeing Technological Dependence and Digital Colonialism 

The First Foundation’s control via technological monopoly prefigures today’s digital economy:

• Platform monopolies: Google, Facebook, Amazon run digital infrastructure, much like nuclear tech monopolies.
• Technical standards: Those who set standards control value distribution across supply chains.
• Data colonialism: Tech firms of rich nations harvest global data, creating new dependencies.
• Algorithmic power: Recommendation systems decide what we see—an influence over thought.

Mallow’s strategy—inducing “voluntary” dependence—mirrors modern tech business models. We “choose” social media, but algorithms shape cognition; we “choose” the cloud, but data sovereignty shifts; we “choose” recommendations, but choice space is optimized and narrowed.

Foreseeing Expert Rule and Technocracy 

The Second Foundation’s elitism anticipates society’s reliance on technocrats:

• Central bank independence: Economists steer monetary policy beyond electoral politics.
• Public health authority: During pandemics, medical advice often overrides democratic procedure.
• Climate policy: Scientific consensus pushes policy while citizens feel excluded.
• AI governance: A few experts define AI’s direction and boundaries.

The justification echoes the Second Foundation: complexity requires expertise; democracy can be irrational; experts see the long view. The critique is similar: Who oversees them? Are judgments value-neutral? Should efficiency outrank participation?

Foreseeing Information Warfare and Cognitive Manipulation 

The Second Foundation’s mental influence foreshadows modern information war and cognitive shaping:

• Social media manipulation: Bots and algorithms sway public opinion.
• Precision targeting ads: Psychological profiling enables personalized persuasion.
• Deepfakes: AI content blurs truth boundaries.
• Attention economy: Addictive design manipulates behavior.

We don’t yet “directly” tweak emotions, but the fusion of data, algorithms, and neuroscience already yields astonishing behavioral influence. The Second Foundation’s “fine-tuning” of emotion is, in part, realized by technical means.

Foreseeing the Difficulty of Long-Term Planning 

The millennium-spanning Seldon Plan constantly meets surprises and needs adjustment—anticipating modern long-horizon challenges:

• Climate change: Requires intergenerational coordination, yet short-term incentives dominate.
• AI risk: Demands preventive action now, though future threats are hard to quantify.
• Biodiversity: Extinctions are irreversible; protection costs borne today.
• Fiscal sustainability: Debt and pensions need decades-long views, while politicians focus on the next election.

The Plan’s revisions reflect the fate of all long-term agendas: uncertainty is unavoidable, planning is still necessary; adaptiveness is crucial; continuity across generations must be institutionalized.

Foreseeing the Power of “Black Swans” 

The Mule foreshadows Nassim Taleb’s theory: history turns on unpredictable, extreme events rather than smooth, forecastable change.

21st-century “Mules” include:

• 9/11: Reshaped global security and geopolitics.
• 2008 financial crisis: Shattered confidence and restructured the global economy.
• COVID-19: In months, transformed work, social life, and politics worldwide.
• AI leaps: LLM breakthroughs exceeded expectations, triggering social reconfiguration.

The Mule teaches: no model is immune to unknowns; resilience beats perfection; systems must retain capacity for the unforeseen.

Cultural Legacy: How Foundation Shaped Sci‑Fi Imagination 

Foundation is not only literature; it is one of sci‑fi’s bedrocks, profoundly influencing later works.

Pioneering the “Future History” Tradition 

Before Foundation, sci‑fi often focused on single events or short adventures. Asimov created “future history”: spanning millennia, charting the rise and fall of civilizations, merging historical philosophy with speculative vision.

This tradition influenced:

• Frank Herbert’s Dune: Millennia of human evolution and politics, clearly inspired by Foundation.
• Larry Niven’s Known Space: Systematic future-historical construction.
• Orson Scott Card’s Ender series: Long-term consequences of civilizational conflict.
• Liu Cixin’s Three-Body: Cosmic-scale strategy and historical cycles.

Redefining the Space Opera Paradigm 

Foundation reframed space opera: from heroics to civilizational evolution; from moral binaries to political and economic complexity.

Star Wars, while a hero’s tale, borrows Foundation’s backdrop—Empire collapse, rebel bases. George Lucas acknowledged Foundation as a key inspiration.

Babylon 5 directly pays homage: alliances collapsing, prophecy and intervention—echoes of Foundation abound.

Modern space operas like The Expanse inherit its political realism and power-structure focus.

Inspiring the Fusion of Social Science and Sci‑Fi 

Foundation models how to convert social science into compelling fiction. Psychohistory, though fictional, synthesizes:

• The methodology of statistical mechanics
• The philosophy of historical determinism
• Sociology’s large-scale data analysis
• Economics’ rational actor assumptions

This academic-to-fiction alchemy influenced:

• Neal Stephenson: Cryptography and economics woven into narrative.
• Kim Stanley Robinson: Scientific method probing politics and ecology.
• Charles Stross: Economics and computation rendered speculative.
• Liu Cixin: Game theory and cosmic sociology embedded in Three-Body.

Shaping Thinking About AI and Superintelligence 

Though not about AI per se, the Second Foundation’s collective mind and the Seldon Plan’s predictive power prefigure debates on superintelligence:

• How would an intelligence surpassing humanity behave?
• Would it secretly guide society “for our own good”?
• Is such guidance protection or control?
• How do humans coexist with a superior intelligence?

These questions define today’s AI ethics; Foundation provides a narrative frame to think them through.

The Limits of an Era: Foundation’s Blind Spots 

For all its foresight, Foundation is a product of its time, marked by 1940–50s constraints. Acknowledging them doesn’t diminish the work, but deepens understanding.

Missing Gender Perspective 

Women are few and mostly secondary. Decision-makers, scientists, politicians are almost all men. This reflects social attitudes of the time and narrows the narrative.

Bayta Darell and Arcadia are notable, yet often framed within male-centric arcs. Later expansions added more women, but by the 1980s society had already shifted.

Limits of Technological Imagination 

As a chemist, Asimov foresaw some tech (nuclear, robotics) but missed others:

Completely missing the computer revolution: In Foundation, math remains manual. No computers, networks, or digitization. Psychohistory requires genius mathematicians, not supercomputer simulations.

No vision of biotech: Gene engineering, bio-computation, neuroscience are absent. The Mule’s mutation is natural, not engineered.

A static physics: Fundamental physics seems “done.” No new discoveries about the cosmos’s nature.

These are era-bound limits—and reminders that even visionary thinkers are bounded by contemporary knowledge and imagination.

Cultural Uniformity 

Galactic civilization is largely monocultural: a unified language, similar values, homogeneous thinking. This simplifies plot but loses the richness of diversity.

History shows real civilizations interact through clashes and fusion of differences. Foundation lacks truly heterogeneous civilizations, fundamental cultural conflicts, or incommensurable value systems.

By contrast, Three-Body’s “dark forest” and Arrival’s linguistic exploration show deeper engagement with cultural difference.

Simplified Economic Models 

Economy in Foundation is depicted via trade, tech monopolies, resource control—without deep inquiry into production relations, class structures, or institutional design.

In Mallow’s era, market capitalism seems the sole mode. Alternatives remain unexplored; distributional justice is underexamined.

This reflects Cold War ideologies and Asimov’s emphasis on politics and technology over economic structure.

Why We Still Need Foundation: A Framework, Not Answers 

Despite its limits, Foundation is more crucial than ever—not for answers (Asimov avoids simplistic resolutions) but for a way to think about complexity.

Thinking on Long Timescales 

Foundation trains millennial perspective in an age ruled by quarterly earnings, 24‑hour news cycles, and short videos.

Climate change demands decisions for a world a century hence. Foundation teaches intergenerational responsibility.

AI may transform civilization within decades. Foundation shows strategic planning amid uncertainty.

Biodiversity loss reveals costs that surface over centuries. Foundation reminds us that invisible short-term costs can become long-term catastrophes.

Though fictional, the Seldon Plan symbolizes a mindset: to transcend the near-term and take responsibility for the distant future. This is essential for “super wicked problems.”

Training System Thinking 

Foundation models systems thinking: understanding interconnections, spotting leverage points, anticipating unintended consequences.

Psychohistory’s methodology—finding regularities, modeling trends, predicting trajectories, identifying variables—resembles real systems analysis.

In an increasingly complex world, isolated thinking fails. Climate, economy, tech, politics, culture interweave. Foundation trains us to think in systems, not events.

Recognizing Moral Complexity 

Foundation’s richest legacy is rejecting easy moral judgments. No pure heroes or villains, no perfect choices—every decision carries costs.

• Hardin’s religious strategy deceives, yet saves the Foundation.
• Mallow’s economic imperialism breeds dependence, yet generates prosperity.
• The Mule’s tyranny is oppressive, yet his suffering evokes sympathy.
• The Second Foundation protects, yet manipulates.

This realism is vital now. We face constant trade-offs:

• Public health vs. personal freedom
• Economic development vs. environmental protection
• Innovation vs. job security
• National security vs. privacy
• Free speech vs. anti-hate protections

Foundation teaches us to resist simplification, acknowledge complexity, and choose responsibly without perfect answers.

A Critical Lens on Power 

Foundation provides tools to scrutinize power—imperial bureaucracy, Foundation politics, Second Foundation elites—each examined for limits and dangers.

As we confront platform power, state surveillance, and algorithmic authority, Foundation’s critique helps us ask:

• Who holds power? With what legitimacy?
• How is power exercised—transparent or secret?
• Who oversees it? Are checks and balances real?
• To what end—public interest or private gain?
• What are the costs? Who bears them?

The Second Foundation especially warns: the most dangerous power often wears the mask of benevolence, claims expertise, and invokes the future.

Contemporary Lessons: Our Age’s Seldon Crises 

If we see our era as a “Seldon Crisis”—a moment demanding decisive choices—what does Foundation offer?

AI Governance: Are We Creating Our Mule? 

AI development may be one of humanity’s gravest Seldon Crises. We are building entities that might surpass human intelligence, while knowing little about their behavior and impact.

Lessons from Foundation:

• Beware overconfidence: The Plan failed to foresee the Mule. Our AI forecasts may be wrong. Stay humble; plan for surprises.
• Focus on distributions, not averages: Psychohistory models statistics; the Mule lies in the tail. In AI, look for long-tail risks—low probability, high impact scenarios.
• Decentralize power: The Second Foundation as a counterbalance matters. In AI, avoid lab or corporate monopolies; build plural research and oversight ecosystems.
• Transparency and participation: Secrecy was the Second Foundation’s moral failure. AI governance must be open, with those affected—everyone—engaged.
• Value alignment: The Mule’s goals stemmed from personal trauma. Ensuring AI objectives align with human values matters more than raw capability.

Climate Change: The Need for a Millennial Plan 

Climate change is a genuine intergenerational challenge that requires Seldon-like vision and coordination.

Lessons:

• The difficulty of long-term commitments: The Plan spans millennia but needs each generation’s effort. Climate action demands sustained coordination despite near-term temptations.
• The inevitability of surprises: The Plan constantly adapts. Climate policy needs adaptive management, allowing for new tech, social shifts, and shocks.
• Bridging knowledge and action: Seldon foresaw collapse but couldn’t move rulers. Climate scientists know crisis, yet politics lags. How to translate knowledge into action?
• Global coordination: The Foundation aligns a galaxy; climate action must align nations. The series’ handling of regional power offers governance insights.
• Justice in distribution: Expansion creates center–periphery dynamics. Climate burdens fall unevenly. Fair responsibility sharing is essential.

Tech Monopolies: The Trader’s Dilemma Today 

Tech giants’ platform, standards, and data monopolies mirror Mallow’s strategies.

Lessons:

• The danger of dependence: Korell’s reliance cost autonomy. Nations and individuals dependent on platforms risk similar loss. Preserve technological sovereignty.
• The power of standards: Control over OSs, protocols, and data formats conveys immense power. Regulation must acknowledge this.
• Knowledge transfer vs. dependence: Mallow taught use, not manufacture. Tech transfer should enable capability, not deepen reliance.
• Profit vs. public interest: Traders sought profit yet advanced the Plan. Companies pursue profits but shape the public sphere. Balance is needed.
• Antitrust as resilience: Foundation shows overconcentration breeds fragility. Modern antitrust is not only about markets, but democracy and systemic robustness.

Information Manipulation: Countering a Modern “Psychohistory” 

Algorithms, data analytics, and behavioral design create modern “soft manipulation.”

Lessons:

• The power of subtle nudges: Tiny shifts in emotion or ranking can have outsized effects.
• The illusion of autonomy: Subjects think they choose freely. Users think they decide independently. Recognize and resist invisible influences.
• The danger of benevolent control: “It’s for your good” is a slippery justification. Who defines “good”? What is the optimization target?
• The necessity of transparency: Secrecy breeds moral rot. Algorithmic transparency, data rights, and explainable AI are democratic essentials.
• Collective resistance: The First Foundation eventually challenges the Second. Civil society, regulators, independent researchers must unite against manipulation.

Expert Governance: The Technocrat’s Dilemma 

From pandemics to monetary policy, we face tension between expert authority and democratic participation.

Lessons:

• The value of expertise: Second Foundation psychologists genuinely possess special knowledge. Experts matter. Reject anti-intellectualism.
• The limits of expertise: Psychohistory missed the Mule. Experts have blind spots. Over-reliance and over-rejection are both dangerous.
• The primacy of procedure: Secrecy and unaccountability were the core failure. Expert rule needs transparent process, public debate, and institutional oversight.
• Participation as a right: Those affected deserve a voice. Public participation grants legitimacy.
• Diversity of voices: Homogenous elites fall into groupthink. Expert communities need diversity—disciplines, backgrounds, perspectives.

Personal Lessons: Our Own Seldon Plans 

Foundation is about civilizations—and individuals. Each life is a mini “Seldon Plan”: we try to plan a future amid unpredictability.

Balancing Planning and Adaptation 

The Seldon Plan is precise yet constantly adjusted. So too our lives:

• Direction matters: Without goals, life drifts. Set aims and plans.
• Flexibility matters: Plans lag reality. Rigidity risks missed chances or worsened outcomes.
• Leave room for surprises: The “Mule” will appear—unexpected openings, crises, turns. Resilience beats perfect plans.

Foundation teaches: have direction without rigidity, plans with capacity to pivot, foresight while embracing uncertainty.

The Meaning of Individual Choice 

Amid grand structures, individual decisions remain decisive. The series repeats this truth:

Hardin chooses politics over force; Mallow chooses trade over conquest; Bayta chooses moral courage over compliance; Arcadia chooses exploration over safety—choices that shape history’s concrete form.

In our lives:

• Constraints exist: Choices are bounded by economy, society, technology—like psychohistorical trends.
• Choices still matter: Within constraints, how we act and treat others defines meaning.
• Ripple effects: The Mule amplifies influence via key conversions. Our choices can affect others beyond ourselves.

Foundation says: don’t use determinism to excuse inaction, nor individualism to deny structure. Find agency amid necessity.

The Tension Between Loneliness and Connection 

The Mule’s tragedy is loneliness—power magnifies isolation. This is power’s general curse and modern life’s reflection.

In the social media age, we are “connected” to the world yet often lonelier. Hundreds of “friends,” few deep ties. We can “influence,” but struggle to be understood.

Lessons:

• Real relationships are irreplaceable: The Mule can manufacture loyalty, but longs for genuine love. Algorithms match interests, not understanding.
• The value of vulnerability: The Mule hides fragility and grows lonelier. True connection requires risk—showing the self, risking rejection.
• Meaning comes from relationships: The Mule conquers the galaxy, yet finds no meaning. Meaning arises from deep human bonds.

In a culture fixated on efficiency, optimization, and influence, Foundation reminds us: relationships, understanding, community are central values.

Legacy and Responsibility 

Seldon plans for generations beyond his life, shouldering responsibility across time. This urges us to consider our legacy.

• More than material: We leave not just wealth, but environment, institutions, culture, and values.
• Long-range effects: Our choices—consumption, votes, professional ethics—shape future lives.
• Intergenerational imagination: Picture your grandchildren’s world. We are laying its foundations.
• The humility to accept limits: Seldon’s plan had constraints; our plans will too. The best legacy may be problem-solving capacity and adaptive resilience, not fixed answers.

Conclusion: Between Necessity and Freedom 

Eighty years ago, a young Asimov began a tale of imperial collapse and rebirth. He may not have imagined it would continue to resonate, inspire, and offer wisdom decades on.

Foundation endures not for precise predictions—it errs on many details—but because it captures civilization’s core dilemmas:

How do we preserve individual dignity and freedom against history’s vast forces?

How do we take responsibility for the distant future without sacrificing the present?

How do we use knowledge and technology to improve the world without forging new forms of oppression?

How do we plan amid uncertainty and rebuild when plans fail?

How do we remain moral in the face of power and lucid amid complexity?

There are no ultimate answers. Foundation offers a way to think. It teaches:

Embrace complexity: The world is not binary; solutions are not either–or. Learn to act within gray zones.

Maintain humility: Even the finest plans meet surprises; even the smartest experts have blind spots. Acknowledging limits is the start of wisdom.

Think long-term: Go beyond quarters, elections, careers; act for generations hence.

Cherish freedom: Efficiency cannot replace dignity; optimization cannot replace autonomy; benevolence cannot replace liberty.

Trust in choice: Even amid grand forces, individual choices matter and can shape the future.

We each live within our own “Seldon Plan”—bounded by structures yet capable of choice; small as individuals yet co-creators of history.

Ultimately, Foundation tells us: history is not dictated by iron laws, yet it isn’t pure randomness; individuals aren’t puppets, yet cannot ignore structures; the future isn’t fully predictable, yet it is not unshapeable.

Between necessity and freedom, between regularity and chance, between collective and individual, we seek balance, choose, shoulder responsibility, and create meaning.

This is Foundation’s legacy—not a set of answers, but a method of inquiry; not a fixed future, but imaginative multiplicity; not an escape from history, but courage to participate in making it.

Eighty years on, amid challenge and uncertainty, we need this way of thinking, this imagination, this courage more than ever.

Seldon’s words echo along the river of time: “We cannot be certain of the future, but we can work for it. We cannot eliminate uncertainty, but we can prepare for surprises. We cannot avoid decline, but we can shorten the duration of darkness.”

This is Foundation’s legacy—and our mission.

Series complete: Thank you for following this five-part exploration of Foundation—from psychohistory to the Traders’ era, from the Mule’s tragedy to the Second Foundation’s dilemma, and finally to its enduring legacy.

I hope this series helped you rediscover or deepen your understanding of Foundation—and, more importantly, offered fresh perspectives for thinking about our own world: our challenges, choices, and future.

In this age of uncertainty, let us proceed with Foundation’s wisdom: humility, complexity, freedom, long-term thinking, and courageous choice.

May the Foundation be with you. May you find your place in the currents of history, strike balance between necessity and freedom, and create meaning amid uncertainty.