Threesology Research Journal

Threesology Research Journal Dualities, Trialities, Quadralities...3
Dichotomies, Trichotomies, Quadrichotomies
Dichonions, Trichonions, Quaternions
twos, threes, fours
2s, 3s, 4s

DTQ 1

DTQ 2

DTQ 3

Trichotomists as of July, 19th, 2025

In the following two examples (concerning Alexander Stepanov and Erik Vertzvet) where _threes" are mentioned alongside "fours", please note that... like other writers, they do not include a mention of dualities nor the presence of 3 to 1 ratios with this specific terminology, though the 3 to 1 arrangement is mentioned in terms of the common Christian Trinity example used by multiple writers. Use of the 3 to 1 pattern neither validates nor invalidates its presence in terms of some expressed qualification,

My first example of the initially outlined 2s-3s-4s heading of this page is Alexander I. Stepanov's "Number and Culture" article that I had downloaded several years ago, but can only find this version of it: Number and Culture by Alexander I. Stepanov. When I first encountered it the examples were singularly and successively aligned one after the other which makes it far easier to read than the practice of listing them in a paragraph, which now seems the approach by whomever is attending to the maintenance of the information. Hence, I use the previous method. Nonetheless, let me provide his threes and fours examples:

1.3 Triple structures

3 persons of pronouns;
- first person (the speaker, e.g., "I," "we").
- second person (the person being spoken to, e.g., "you".,
- third person (someone or something else being spoken about, e.g., "he," "she," "it," "they").
genders: masculine - feminine - neuter;
three part's division of time by Confucius, Zoroastrians;
the tense system in German: past - present - future;
degrees of comparison for adjectives and adverbs: positive - comparative - superlative;
articles: definite - indefinite - zero;
parts of the sentence: two primes and a secondary;
the Heaven - the Earth - the Hell (Paradise - Earth - Inferno);
body - soul - spirit;
geosphere - biosphere - noosphere;
mind - sense - will;
three levels of the ego by K. Jaspers;
more - less - equal;
rational quantities - algebraic irrational ones - transcendence;
real numbers - complex numbers - quaternions;
rich - middle - poor classes in modern Western societies;
the nobility - the clergy - the third estate in absolutistic France;
poetic social order in The Republic by Plato;
estate order in the Russian empire;
three forms of state service: military - civilian - court;
three branches of state power: legislative - executive - judicial;
the institute of tripartite commissions: business - trade unions - government;
the court: prosecution - defence - judge;
the forms of government: autocracy - oligarchy - democracy;
types of legal power by M. Weber;
standard classification of political movements: liberalism - conservatism - radicalism
- Variants:
  - liberalism - conservatism - Marxism;
  - liberalism - Marxism - nationalism);
  - the Right - the Left - the Centre;
  - the West - the East - the Third World;
the notion of "the Third Way";
world-system analysis: kernel - semi-periphery - periphery;
Russian ideology of the 19th century: orthodoxy - autocracy - nationality;
state ideology of Thailand: nation - religion - monarchy;
A. Ferguson: Ages of savagery - barbarism - civilization;
Thomsen: the Stone - the Bronze - the Iron Ages;
palaeolithic period - mesolithic period- New Stone Age;
Ancient history - Middle Ages - Modern times;
"Moscow is the Third Rome";
"the Third Reich";
"the Third Revelation";
classical system of literary genre: lyrics - epos - drama;
tragedy - comedy - drama;
literary process: author - reader - critic;
ingredients of aesthetic object by M.M. Bakhtin: author - hero - audience;
Frege's triangle: real object - concept - symbol
(denotation - designation - name);
F. de Saussure: langage - langue - parole
Germ.: Rede - Sprache - das Sprechen or Sprache - Sprachtum - Sprechart);
mental structure of a person by S. Freud: the subconscious - consciousness - Super ego;
faith - hope - love;
spheres of moral law by Thomas Aquinas: the natural realm of elements - the heavenly world of the firmament - intelligible world;
The threes by J. Boehme:
- The Threefold Life of Man: Written in 1620, this key work explores the physical, spiritual, and eternal aspects of human existence, along with the nature of God, creation, humanity's role, and the interaction of body, soul, and spirit. It is known for its poetic and symbolic style.
- The Three Principles of the Divine Essence: This book, written between 1618 and 1619, is considered an introduction to Boehme's work. It describes three fundamental principles of the divine essence: the dark principle (contraction/limitation), the light principle (expansion/freedom), and the principle of union (Christ). These principles are seen as proceeding from the Father, Son, and Spirit and manifesting in all things. Boehme viewed them as "living realities that shape and structure the entire cosmos".
the truth - the good - the beauty;
the highest cognitive abilities by I. Kant: reason - intellect - the ability for judgement;
Hegel:
- the universal - the particular - the single;
- being - nothing - becoming;
- quality - quantity - measure;
- essence - phenomenon - reality;
- law - ethics - morals;
- the family - the guild - the state;
- thesis - antithesis - synthesis;
the life styles by S.A. Kierkegaard: aesthetic - ethic - religious;
three main paradigms of New Age's philosophy by A.Whitehead: idealism - materialism - dualism;
3 races of mankind: the three-race theory;
ethnic kernel of American nation: the English - the Germans - the Irish;
3 main groups of European nations: Romanic - Germanic - Slavonic;
3 pivotal world religions: Christianity - Islam - Buddhism;
three main parts of Christianity: Catholicism - Orthodoxy - Protestantism;
3 key religious and philosophical components of the traditional Chinese culture: Confucianism - Daosism - Buddhism;
the threes of folklore's heroes;
Pythagorean classification of living intelligent creatures: God - man - a creature like Pythagoras;
Pascal: "The God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, but not the God of philosophers";
Roman law: tres facuint collegium (the three make a collegium);
number three by the Pre-Iranians, Chinese, primordial people;
the structure of monogamic family: man - wife - children;
three-dimensional physical space;

With respect to patterns-of-four ideas, here are Stepanov's examples:

1.4 Quaternion structures

1.4.1 Preliminary list of examples

four-dimensional physical space;
the aggregate states of the matter:
solid - liquid - gas - plasma;
the fundamental physical interactions: strong - electro-magnetic - weak - gravity;
the Golden - the Silver - the Bronze - the Iron Ages;
the four elements: earth - water - air - fire;
the four of the Gospels (by Matthias, Mark, Lucas, John);
the fours by A. Schopenhauer, H. L. Bergson;
the four-dimensional time by M. Heidegger;
the Ancient history - the Middle Ages - the New Age - the Newest;
the social and economic structures by Marxism:
slave-owning system - feudalism - capitalism - communism;
the fourth type of political movements: bolsheviks;
"Les trois mousquetaires" by A. Dumas: Athos - Porthos - Aramis - d'Artagnan;
"The Karamazov Brothers" by Dostoyevsky: three legitimate sons and an illegitimate one;
"The Golden Calf" by Il'f and Petrov: Kozlevitch - Balaganov - Panikovsky - Bender;
the seasons: spring - summer - autumn - winter; the cardinal points: east - west - south - north;
the times of the day: morning - afternoon - evening - night;
division of the day in German;
the fourth literary genre;
quaternions by K. Jung;
Paradise - Purgatory - Inferno - Earth;
studies about Sophia in Russian religious philosophy;
quaternions in the mass culture;
"Three men in a boat (to say nothing of the dog)" by J. K. Jerome;
the Beatles: John- Paul- Ringo- George;

This next example is the work taken up by Erik Vertzvet at: Trinities in Everything Since his page remains in the public sector for review, I will truncate the information to provide the examples of Three and four. Also note that Erik leans towards the "3 in 1" or 3 and 1 formula, which is counter-balanced with the view of four colors (Blue, Green, Red, White):

3 needs of a human: Wisdom- Power- Wealth 3 parts to the mind by Plato: Rational- Spirited- Appetitive 3 ideal state social classes by Plato: Kings-Philosophers, Soldiers, Workers 3 main social branches of ancient societies: Clergy- Monarchy- Merchants 3 main sectors of modern society: Academia- Government- Business 3 U.S. federal government branches: Executive- Legislative- Judicial 3 in 1 god manifestations: Father- Son- Holy spirit/ghost 3 deities of Hindu Trimurti: Brahma the creator, Vishnu the preserver, Shiva the destroyer. 3 Germ Layers: Ectoderm- Mesoderm- Endoderm. 3 types of cone cells to the eyes: S (short wave-lengths)- M (medium wave-lengths)- L (long wave-lengths). 3 proposed criteria for a trinity of the Universe: Matter- Energy- Information. 3 divisions of time: past- present- future. 3 body problem has no (current) solution, 2-body problem does. 3 to 1 dimensions of space: 3 spatial, 1 temporal. Trefoil knot is the simplest example of a nontrivial knot, and it is tricolorable. (Compare with Borromean rings.) 3 ages/stages of human life: Youth- Adulthood- Old Age. 3 Nietzschean metamorphoses that an individual must go through to pursue the freedom to create his own purpose, resulting in the stage of ubermensch (overman/superman): Camel- Lion- Child.

H.O.B. note: we can view the 3 of Nietzsche as symbolic behavioral currents of activity many people experience:

Camel: beast of burden, servitude, employee
Lion: predator, entrepreneur, boss, employer
Child: reflective old age, innocence/naïveté/ignorance, humility

Four "Omni" attributes of the Monotheistic god practiced by Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and the corresponding color attributions:
- Omnipresence (W): God is everywhere
- Omniscience (B): God is all-knowing
- Omnipotence (R): God is all-powerful
- Omnibenevolence (G): God is all-loving
Four cardinal virtues, identical to four Socratic virtues:
- Prudence (W): Practical common sense, thinking about what you are doing and what might happen as a result.
- Justice (B): Fairness in court and in the distribution of goods.
- Fortitude (R): The courage to face danger and to remain committed even when suffering.
- Temperance (G): The right amount of pleasure, not abstaining from all pleasures.
Four doctrines called Tetrapharmakos (Four Cures) of Epicurus:
- Don't fear god.
- Don't worry about death.
- What is good is easy to get.
- What is terrible is easy to endure.
Four temperaments of Hippocrates:
- Choleric (R): Aggressive, energetic, and passionate.
- Sanguine (G): Sociable, enthusiastic, and pleasure-seeking.
- Melancholic (B): Analytical, deep thinking, and prone to sadness.
- Phlegmatic (W): Calm, peaceful, and easygoing.
The K4 graph, also known as the complete graph on four vertices, serves as the perfect symbol for the tripartite framework.
The Tetraktys is a triangular figure in Pythagorean philosophy, consisting of ten points arranged in four rows: one, two, three, and four points in each row respectively. This figure relates to the tripartite framework.
Quaternions are a number system with four units: 1, i, j, and k. When we combine all three at once, we get -1. Quaternions are used in 3D rotations.

A few other examples are provided, but let me instead provide some of Erik's concluding remarks:

The important question is why exactly this trinity appears so often in so many disciplines. Some would claim that it is because Christianity is the one true religion and that the Holy Trinity is real — the Trinitarian god creatively imprints its own tripartite nature onto everything, hence why it is so omnipresent. I find the claim bold because this framework is not exclusive to Christianity and is present in philosophical and religious systems that have no connection to Christianity or are older than that religion. I call it the religious explanation. It is more likely that two other possible explanations are true, which can be labeled as psychological and physical explanation. The former has a trivial reason behind it, while the latter implies that this framework has a much deeper meaning, possibly being an explanation of all of existence.

In psychological explanation, it could be that our logical parts of the brain are so attracted to these simplistic systems that we tend to invent the ones that are based on some sort of trinity. The perfect mathematical simplicity gives rise to these K4-based systems, our brains are hardwired to like triangles and find them in everything, so we try to find them in everything we see. It perfectly explains why so many religions have trinities in them and why philosophers like to implement trinities in their frameworks, as well; it also explains why this article was written.

However, it's not just that there are systems consisting of four entities, where the fourth is or seems like the combination of the other three, but that all four have their own distinct “character” which I have connected to the three colors the human vision is composed of.

The physical explanation could be that this is indeed the answer to life, the universe, and everything. Maybe this trinity is somewhere at the foundation of all things, and our inclination to create Trinitarian conceptual systems could be the result of all that exists being ran by this framework. This claim is much bolder and has no evidence for it, because we do not have a physical Theory of Everything yet. We don't have a definition for some fundamental law of nature, the one that would unite the four fundamental forces into one system.

Maybe the universe is so "Trinitarian" because it’s just the most elegant way it can be due to mathematics, and then we humans invent all those trinities because it's the most elegant way for us to see things. It makes a difference because the former is that way due to objective, natural reasons, while the latter is due to our subjective bias. On the other hand, our perception and bias were shaped by that triune universe, so it can also be seen as the extension of natural law. It's like a Fractal of many triangles, the simplest it can possibly be and not any simpler.

If this trinity is the Theory of Everything, the plan could be to start with looking at relevant math and trying to find connections between that and physics.

This 3rd selection comes from Jessie Duffield's Stop Selling Me Trichotomies!. I love this article because Jessie makes an effort to describe what is meant by a fundamental (or authentic) Trichotomy and those that are arbitrary, (or unconvincingly stable). Indeed, if we look over lists of assumed Trichotomies, the philosophical notion of an Inconsistent triad may come to mind, though the analogy itself appears to be an inconsistent comparison. Nonetheless, the idea that one or another triadic example may not be "up to snuff", may cause some to look at their own lists of "threes" and place them in to a dichotomy of real and fanciful, or whichever terms are preferenced.

However, the different flavours, colours, sounds, dress code, language, subject, etc., of "threes" can not dispute the attempted usage of a "three", be it false, true, or measurement in between. Nonetheless, if we declare a triad as the 3 states of matter (solids, liquids, gases) found readily on Earth are an example of an arbitrarily assigned triad distinction because we note the existence of plasma... (if not other proposed states of matter); then perhaps we need to reexamine our applied definitions which in the case of Jessie, appears to be a leaning towards dismissing a labeled triad in favour of a perceived plurality. The 3 states of matter are distinct, just as is plasma. In this respect, we are confronted by a 3 to 1 ratio category. And naming an encounter with ‘Bose–Einstein condensates’ and ‘Fermionic condensates, as examples which appear to throw a wrench into the basic states of matter triad, doesn't take into account the idea of continuance seen in simple value notation of placing a comma after every third set of three: ones-tens-hundreds (comma) thousands- ten thousands- one hundred thousands (comma)... etc... In other words, triple distinctions can be made thuogh they may in some circumstances be accompanied by one or more other examples.

For example, we call the 3 bears a triplet, even though Goldilocks is part of the ensemble. Likewise the three pigs and the fox/wolf, three fiddlers and old king cole, 3 coins in vending machines and some requiring a paper dollar or plastic card. Hence, while Jessie's idea is useful, it too is an arbitrary assignment of tridic structure categorization. Nonetheless, it exemplifies the spirit of applying the "Devil's Advocate" approach in seeking qualification for establishing measures of truth in threes research. No less, the idea is warranted when we notice the presence of Embellished Dyads posing as triads, as in the case of the I-Ching dyads masquerading as triads:

While Jessie goes through examples of triadic ideas to point out salient features in order to render a verdict of being arbitrary or authentic, we appear to be confronted by the underlying dichotomy of Nature versus Nurture. We should not apply the standard of some Universal presence such as the DNA triplet code in order to make the determination of whether a given threes example is authentic or arbitrary, since all of life is sometimes considered by some to be the result of chance and not decree. Even if we agree that some examples of threes are culture- or time period specific, doesn't mean they aren't authentic. To the respective users, the item may be very real to them, just like the Christian Trinity and Hindu Trimurti is to millions. They may both be the result of superstition and imagination, but they seem very real to some people... just like Me, Myself, and I. If we are to use the term "arbitray", let us say "arbitrarily true", since in many cases a given "threes" idea is a product of imagination and we can't at present prove it.

Jessie's list of selective arbitrary formulas:

3 states of matter... arbitrary
3 Branches of government... arbitrary
Mind, Body, Spirit... arbitrary

Jessie's Fundamental trichotomies:

Time: Past, present, and future
The outcome of a game: Win, lose, draw
The three horns of a triceratops

The stated fundamental examples are clearly arbitrary to me, if one chooses to selectively address them in a larger context:

Time: Past, present, and future... based on personal preferences and evaluation.
The outcome of a game: Win, lose, draw... again, based on personal definitions.
The three horns of a triceratops ... selective appearance in one type of animal. An arbitrary selection by Evolution?

Clearly, as Jessie suggested, some trichotomies can be arbitrary concoctions made up of a dichotomy, yet he does not give much credit for the existence of multiple triads as stand-alone creations without the support of a dichotomy... because he has an invested in dualities. His trailing commentary touches on this very issue:

Conclusion

To recap: my claim is that trichotomies which are not composed of one or two dichotomies are almost certainly arbitrary, and I think with the above examples that’s been demonstrated.

To be clear, there’s nothing wrong with an arbitrary trichotomy! Many trichotomies are useful despite being arbitrary: for example, the Hungry, Humble, Smart trifecta is a great heuristic when hiring talent. The mistake to avoid is presupposing that an arbitrary trichotomy is in fact fundamental, and then wasting time arguing about which slice an edge-case belongs to.

In closing, there are three kinds of people in this world: those who have never heard the word ‘trichotomy’ before (which includes myself before writing this post), those who have heard the word and who assume trichotomies are all fundamental, and those who assume trichotomies are arbitrary until proven fundamental. If you train yourself to be the third kind of person, I guarantee that you will become happy, healthy, and whole.

If you can think of a fundamental trichotomy which is not composed of dichotomies, let me know!

H.O.B. note: How does one tell someone determined to saw off a branch, they are sitting on it, when their perspective of the world is from that while on a seesaw, swing, or merry-go-round?

For those of us interested in the "threes" repetition phenomena, however you may reference it in your work, and I am presently using the term "Trichotomization", in similar respects to the title attributed to Georges Dumezil labeled "trifunctional", many of us may not follow his work as a scholar might, but we are interested in his usage of three social categories. For many of us, his use of a "three" idea is just another example we add to our lists culled from different subjects. Our lists suggests that it may not be the independent three-patterned ideas which are cultivated by different researchers in their respective research orientation, but that the recurrence of yet another three-patterned idea is saying something about human cognitive activity over time and place. In some cases we say a pattern is cultural, in other cases there is the suggestion of physiology, biology, physics, chemistry, education, and basic environmental influences. And yes, some of us engage in a reductionist approach in an attempt to decipher some originating influence for one, another or all occasions of cognitive patterning, be they with a structure of three or otherwise.

In short, threes researchers are working with a very large trifunctional tool system of investigation and application, with the flexibility for permitting ourselves to freely engage in a research and development approach of trying out different ideas to see what fits best with the currency of information at our disposal. One can not work in the field of threes research without gaining some modicum appreciation of other patterns in relation to threes, and it to them. We need to become cognizant of our usage in relationship with those patterns we may pay lip service to, and those which play a larger part such duality, fours, geometric figures, ... etc...

As an aside notation, we can also find the presence of a "four" idea causing some disruptive concern in the context of Georges Dumezil's Tripartite Ideology when he encountered the more-than-3 caste system in India, which did not sit well with his tripartite social structure idea of Indo-European cultures as expressed in his mythological orientations. Nonetheless, he managed to wedge them into his tripartite system. And as a blaring footnote, let me momentarily digress to include information from Mr. (or Ms.) internet AI using the search criteria "dumezil's headache with the caste system of India":

Georges Dumézil and the Indian Caste System;

Georges Dumézil, a French mythographer, is known for his trifunctional hypothesis which proposes that ancient Indo-European societies were structured around a three-tiered ideology. This ideology reflected three social classes or castes:

Priests (representing the sacred function).

Warriors (representing the martial function).

Commoners (farmers, tradesmen, representing the economic function).

Relevance to the Indian caste system:

Dumézil applied his trifunctional hypothesis to the Indian caste system, noting a correspondence with the four traditional varnas:

Brahmins: Aligning with the priestly class and sacred function.

Kshatriyas: Corresponding to the warrior class and martial function.

Vaishyas: Representing the commoner class (farmers, merchants, etc.) and economic function.

Shudras: A fourth category, comprised of laborers or servants, according to Wikipedia.

Criticisms and concerns

While Dumézil's work sparked significant debate and contributed to scholarship on Indo-European societies, it has also faced criticism, particularly concerning its application to India:

Oversimplification: Critics argue that Dumézil's focus on ancient texts and the trifunctional model may oversimplify the complex realities of India's caste system, neglecting the nuances of local variations, historical changes, and lived experiences.

Ignoring lower castes: Some argue that Dumézil's analysis may not adequately address the position and experiences of the Shudras and Dalits (formerly referred to as "Untouchables"), who have historically faced severe discrimination.

Colonial influence: The British colonial era significantly impacted the codification and rigidification of the caste system, and some argue that a sole focus on a textual or purely functionalist interpretation may not sufficiently account for these colonial influences.

In essence, while Dumézil's theories offer a framework for understanding the potential Indo-European roots of social stratification in India, it is important to consider the complexity of the caste system, its evolution over time, and the experiences of all social groups within its structure, including those at the lower levels of the hierarchy.

Internet Query: "the problematic caste system of India and Trifunctional analysis"

...Relationship with the Trifunctional hypothesis:

Potential origins: Some scholars suggest a possible connection between the early Vedic social divisions (related to the varna system) and the Trifunctional hypothesis, which proposes an ancient Indo-European social structure with priests, warriors, and a third class encompassing producers and laborers.

Debate and criticism: However, this connection is debated, with some arguing that the Indian caste system, particularly the development of rigid jatis and the concept of "untouchability", emerged much later and is a unique development within India, not simply a direct manifestation of a broader Indo-European Trifunctional structure.

Focus on Dalits: A critique of the simple application of the Trifunctional hypothesis to India is that it often overlooks the unique position and systematic oppression of the Dalits who fall outside the traditional four-fold varna system, according to Frontiers.

In essence, while some scholars have drawn parallels between the early Indian varna system and the Trifunctional hypothesis to explore the origins of social stratification, the problematic nature of the Indian caste system, especially its discriminatory practices and persistence despite legal reforms, is a much more complex and deeply entrenched issue that requires a nuanced understanding of its history, evolution, and social consequences.

Internet Query: "burat mongols and dumezil's theory". (This additional entry portrays the insufficiency of Dumezil's Trifunctional scheme being used as a specialized... selective tool of dissecting human cognitive patterning over large swaths of human history, and not simply Indo-Europeans. In other words, claiming A Trifunctional tool has a privileged status for Indo-European cultures only, appears similar to the elitist attitudes found throughout history. Trifunctional thinking and activity can take non-Indo-European specific representations. The Dumezilian model is but one exercise of "Trichotomization" (Trifunctionality) of human cognitive activity involving other patterns and processing developmental scenarios such as the 1-2-3... schema and other models of activity now prevalent in the perspectives of different subjects. Indeed, mapping the basic formulaic cognitive patterns used by humanity involves consideration of plurality as well as the specificites of plurality that later became singularly identified with a given quantitative number and independently arranged sequentiality.

(The idea of plurality can be labeled as a singular plurality, double plurality, triple plurality, etc... In this sense, the words singularity, duality, triplicity, etc., can be used to reference specific types of plurality, but some individuals preference single digits without a corresponding plural connectivity. If human cognitive developed an unnamed sense of plurality first followed by a cognizance of geometry followed by enumeration (cardinality or ordinality); then let us also be cognizant of any inclination towards the usage of the dichotomy "specificity/generality".

In the Burat Mongol example of an attempted application of Dumezil's model of Trifunctionality, we see arguments based on the propositions involving an exclusionary specificity and inclusivity promoted by generality. Some reviewers of the theory like the idea of trying to punch holes in Dumezil's trifunctional ideology (thereby claiming themselves as a giant slayer); by an attempted application of the model to non-Indo-European cultures, while others hold firmly to their specificity of usage... but neither of these perspectives allows for an enlarged consideration of Trifunctional cognitive activity which can be differentiated by time, place, culture and associated demographics, just as zoologists do when making notes of comparison between species like the Pentadactyl limb exclusivity dependent on a flexibility of observation.

To RECAP:

Georges Dumézil's trifunctional hypothesis proposes that prehistoric Proto-Indo-European society was structured around three key functions reflected in social classes or castes, namely:

Sovereignty/Priesthood: Corresponding to the sacred and religious domain.

Warfare: Representing the martial and military aspects of society.

Productivity/Commoners: Encompassing farmers, tradesmen, and the economic well-being of the society.

Note: we see a similar arrangement in the overall fictional characterizations of the three most often motion picture-portrayed human-like creatures:

Vampires: (Typically portrayed in an elitist social position).

Werewolves: (Often portrayed as murderous predators under specific conditions, like soldiers on a designated battlefield.)

Zombies: (Most commonly portrayed as a mindless group acting like indentured actors serving a routinely unseen controller/boss.)

Mythology: Georges Dumézil and the Trifunctional Hypothesis... He looked at the ancient Norse culture of Odin/Thor, Greek Mythology, and even Indian-Aryan Hindu beliefs and came up with a “trifunctional” or Three Part structure or theory that all of European, Russian, Greek, Roman, Iranian, and Indian cultures shared. He found all of Western Asia used the same trinity of Gods and Myths that formed a unified 3-part construct for how religious casts, the kingship-military cast, and the common people were connected via the religions and mythologies of our cultures.

You can see remnants of this in the RigVeda which is an ancient Sanskrit text that forms the original mythology that got shared then transformed among all these cultures. All these cultures connect us as one people as they came from a core culture that rose up in southern Russia and the Ukraine about 3000 bc. Even the Celts in England/Ireland came from them as did the language roots, religions, and people of India. ...he basically shows the proto-indo-europeans formulated ancients Gods based on a rigid cast that is still superimposed on our societies today.

Application (of Dumezilian trifunctional theory) to Burat (Buryat) Mongols:

While Dumézil's trifunctional hypothesis primarily focuses on Indo-European cultures, its relevance to Burat Mongols, who are not Indo-European, is a subject of scholarly discussion and debate.

Some scholars, while acknowledging Dumézil's insights into Indo-European societies, question the direct applicability of the trifunctional hypothesis to non-Indo-European groups like the Mongols, including the Burats. They argue that the social structures of different cultures may not neatly align with a universal three-fold division.

However, others propose that, despite not being Indo-European, the Mongols may have had social structures that resonate with some aspects of Dumézil's theory, such as a division of labor and specialized roles. This is not a direct application of the hypothesis but rather an observation of potential parallels.

Burat Mongol Social Structure:

Historically, the Burat Mongols were organized into a hierarchical system with noble and common strata, and in earlier periods, they also had slaves. Their social organization was built upon patrilineal clans and kin villages, grouped into larger clan confederations led by princely dynasties. While a form of social stratification existed among the Burat Mongols, directly applying Dumézil's specific three functions (priesthood, warfare, and productivity) in the exact Indo-European sense might require careful consideration and analysis of their unique cultural context.

Conclusion:

While Dumézil's trifunctional hypothesis is a valuable tool for understanding Indo-European cultures, applying it directly to non-Indo-European societies like the Burat Mongols is a complex issue requiring nuanced consideration. While some parallels might exist, the social structure of the Burat Mongols should be examined within their specific cultural and historical context rather than simply mapping them onto a pre-defined theoretical framework.

This next excerpt was culled from here: Debating Dumezil: Recent Studies in Comparative Mythology by N. J. ALLEN . It briefly speaks of adding an additional item to Dumezil's Trifunctional analysis, in order to incorporated other features that a strict application of this mode of Trifunctionality overlooks or is dismissive of. In other words, it is claimed that a fourth (an perhaps others) need to be counted, but do not count these others as part of an enlarged appreciation of trifunctionality in terms of a cognitive model of trichotomization.

...There are many reasons why Dumezil's work is controversial. Some of them are good, or at least reasonable, and relate to real issues on which he may have been wrong. For instance, I have argued elsewhere that his notion of a 'trifunctional' Indo-European ideology was incomplete: in addition to his three main categories or clusters of ideas (pertaining respectively to the sacred, to force and to abundance), we need to recognize a fourth, pertaining to 'otherness' and covering both transcendence/totality (which is valued) and exclusion/nothingness (which is devalued). Such an addition opens the way to certain other revisions (AlIen 1991; forthcoming a)...B

In the foregoing remarks we see the recognition of that exceeding or attached to a three-pattern, thus representing yet another metaphysical-like reference... where after 3 the potential for another 3 (or at least 1) characterization beyond the three exists in some relative manner. Like believing in some mode of three, called triad, trinity, triune or otherwise, will somehow advance once chances to reach some greater prominent feature or consideration whether it is named "otherness", nirvana, heaven, oneness with a creator, god, Enlightenment, other-worldly realm, etc... Dumezil's trifunctional ideology has helped some to pay witness to the presence of this "otherness", however it may be described, in spiritual or down-to-earth terms.

Ai response to Internet search query "A fourth category for Dumezilian trifunctionality?":

Attempts to introduce a fourth category to Dumézil's trifunctional hypothesis—>/p>

Georges Dumézil's influential trifunctional hypothesis proposes a three-part social and ideological structure in ancient Indo-European societies, consisting of:

Sovereignty/Priesthood: (concerned with order, law, and the sacred)

Military/Warrior: (focused on force, war, and defense)

Productivity/Commoners: (involved with agriculture, fertility, and economic activities)

However, some scholars have argued for the need to incorporate a "fourth category" or function to fully account for the complexities of Indo-European societies and ideologies.

One notable proposal for a fourth category has been suggested by Nicholas Allen. He posits a fourth category pertaining to "otherness," encompassing both valued aspects like transcendence and totality (F4+), and devalued or excluded aspects such as ritual impurity and marginalization (F4-). This idea attempts to incorporate social elements that don't neatly fit into the primary three functions, such as the Shudra caste in India, who are outside the "twice-born" categories and are ritually excluded. This approach allows for a broader perspective on the social hierarchy, acknowledging elements both above and below the typical trifunctional structure.

This fourth category, and extensions of Dumézil's work more broadly, have sparked scholarly debate. Critics have raised concerns about the potential for creating a "selection effect" by potentially imposing the framework rather than observing inherent structures. However, proponents of expanding the hypothesis argue that it provides a more nuanced understanding of the historical and social realities of Indo-European societies.

In essence, while Dumézil's trifunctional hypothesis provides a fundamental framework for understanding the core societal divisions in Indo-European cultures, the potential for a fourth category highlights the ongoing evolution and refinement of scholarly understanding in the field of comparative mythology and Indo-European studies.

Initial Posting: Saturday, July 12th, 2025... 3:33 AM
Updated Posting: Saturday, July 19th, 2025... 7:45 AM