The “Now what?” question led me into more research, reflective thinking, outlining, eventually writing “Fundamentals of Social Sustainability,” (unpublished) and this daily Post.  In 2006 I became aware of “sustainability” but had not yet fully discerned its material and social distinctions.  In 2008 it dawned on me that values undergird all human motivation, and this brought along a cascade of thinking, conjecture and finally the “ah-ha” of the three core values of social sustainability – quality of life, growth and equality as the values that have sustained our species for 40-500,000 years. 
 
The process that led to those values was deductive rather than inductive.  It started with “disappointment” which I had recognized as evidence of unfulfilled “expectations,” that grow out of from “beliefs” that originate from values.  I began using this line of logic in my holistic life coaching practice to great advantage for couples and partners in relationship distress and for almost anyone in some sort of transition in their life.  It can be used to look backwards at life to the causes of disappointment, or forward for more accurate planning for the future, with greater satisfaction in life and living. 
 
Further reflection led me to believe that these values must be operational at the DNA level because these values urge us as individuals to incessantly pursue a better quality of life, to grow and to fulfill that equally as any other person.  Collectively, huge populations can convince themselves to pursue a particular course of action to give everyone in their nation a united means to achieve a “way of life” for their improved existence.  While every person of our species has these identical values at the core of their being, how they interpret the expression of those values gives rise to cultural and ethnic differences as we see in their way of life and living. 
 
That being the case, it seemed remarkably easy to develop a procedure of analysis and discernment (the Schematic for Validating Social Sustainability) that would guide the thinking of anyone in two ways.  One method of using it is to create a sustainable design for some social action project, program, social policy, legislation, organizational structure and process or any other social topic.  The second method, using the same Schematic, would be to validate existing programs, etc., as being partially, fully or non-compliant to those three values.  

That whole process that I’ve described wouldn’t be worth a hoot if it were not a useful, practical and utilitarian tool for ordinary, inquisitive citizens.  Again, “Now what?”