In strategy it’s more effective to think of the end before the beginning, because in this manner you become organized methodologically with the collection of obstacles, which determine our course, more so than the target.
The aim doesn’t belong to the strategy, but it functions as a metastrategic entity, in a catalytic manner.
Therefore, the reactions will be activated from its context, in order for it to convert into a field.
Therefore, If you do not get prepared from the end, you can not know how you should get started in order to achieve the final result, and you will improvise with all the problems which will come to surface without providing any help, but only cause you concern on a daily basis.
Also, when the targets are of high standards, then the preparation is even more necessary, as training and rehearsals are needed in order to provide the representation which only makes sense, if it follows the mental scheme of the task, otherwise it will be merely a degeneration.
The substance is based on the production of the task, and not merely the end. When the end is already an aim, then the aim is not worthwhile. Because in the end, we need a phase change, and not just the end of a process which has no continuity.
The end in this fashion becomes the beginning. Whereas otherwise, it is the beginning which ends, without changing the reality, because it came to a finish as an entity, without becoming life.
But Humanity and Time need lives in order to live on, and not merely creatures without teleology.