Investigators of Dualities as of July 10th, 2025
Interestingly, the more references to the presence of dualities that I encounter, the more evidence I acquire as to the factuality that those who have come to make lists of dualities and reference the insufficiency of the pattern, or even promote it as a viability of consideration; the easier it is to claim that these researchers have not as yet developed the realization of a developing consciousness along a 1-2-3 pattern, because they have not developed the necessary radar which can identity the multitude of 3-patterned blips on the screen of available acknowledgements. Attempts to make them aware is like trying to convince cartoon characters that there exists a reality outside their own day-to-day preoccupations where their colleagues interact with them in a like-minded way.
An advance in the study of threes (that I am now referencing as trichotomization) requires an appreciable cognizance of those who are using words/ideas substituting for enumeration", depending on the medium used to portray them, such as for example:
- Singularity
- Duality
- Plurality (more than 2, more than 3, 3 + 1, four or more...)
- Geometric forms,... (many of which express quantity in their labeling:)
- Möbius strip = one-sided geometric form. It's a two-dimensional surface with only one side and one edge.
- Triangle, Cylinder = 3
- Square, Rectangle, Parallelogram = 4
- Pentagon = 5
- Box, Cube, Hexagon = 6
- Heptagon = 7
- Octagon = 8
- Nonagon = 9
- Decagon = 10
- etc...
From my reading of multiple research papers involving some perception of dualities, there is either a widespread conspiracy about not referencing the threes phenomena for fear of being viewed a Numerologist, or there is a similarly profound level of ignorance about trichotomization. However, even if researchers conveying some knowledge of dualities are not aware of advances in threes research due to an obliviousness/blindness akin to horse blinders placed on them by the present routinized conventions/standards of education; and just because they are oblivious to or ignorant of your particular research efforts in the field of trichotomization, doesn't mean you have to share in a similar limited mindset about their research. Let's face it, the current spectrum of threes research is going to leave them far behind at small watering holes that are shrinking not only due to increased visitors whose commonplace intelligence is increasing into a '2' realm of acknowledgement, but are drying up due to occupational assertions of control and ownership using the bullying, lies, manipulation, collusion and other nefarious tactics inherent in conducting business, religion, government and other social institutions.
The usual approach to the development of an unrecognized and unlabeled "trichotomization" is to view prevailing dichotomies not as warring factions of opposition, nor sibling rivalries, but as complementary/complimentary amalgamations given separate individualisms similar to the ancient view that human dimorphism (instead of being labeled a mono-morphism, is the potential emergence of two sexes which) initially began as a singular hemaphroditic creature/life form from where the notion of "soul mate" is thought to have had its genesis. Typical alternative thinking about dichotomies/dualities to create some supposed superior third option is to focus on internal modifications of already existing structures instead of creating a whole new foundation, from which embellished dichotomies have arisen and the term false/inconsistent triad is a false ascription. In other words, the approach to creating an alternative (supposed) 3rd view is to create the impression of a supposedly overlooked fusibility distinction, which actually substitutes for thinking in very primitive terms involving a biological functions such as sexuality. As such, intellectualization comes to the fore and we get words like:
- amalgamation
- merging/merger
- syncretism
- compliment
- complement
- welding
- paired
- coalesence
- melding (melting pot)
- synchronization
- coupling
- compatabilty
- blending
- compile
- association
- convergence
- compartmentlize
- composite
- etc...
Oh my gosh, author after author attempts to give others the view that they have given birth to a new ideological brain child by speaking in terms of suggesting the generative growth of combining two supposed oppositions into a creature akin to a child that unites two previously warring kingdoms. From the central dichotomies of:
- Feminist theory (men/women, dependent/independent, men-public sphere/women-private sphere, masculine mind/femine body)
- Sociology theory (haves/have nots, Structure vs. Agency, Individual vs. Society, Modernity vs. Tradition...)
- Economic theory (buy/sell, input-output, crowding out/crowding in, macro/micro, fast/slow thinking, supply/demand...)
- Employment theory (closed/open shop, Classical vs. Keynesian, employed/unemployed, tips/wages, employer/employee, )
- Accounting theory (in the black/in the red, double-entry)
...and the gamut of supposed deep philosophical issues typified under the heading of scholarly pursuits; we see a reductionist approach to examinations of multiple ideological domains adopting the logic of basic biological functions by which their ideological models illuminate their emulations that symbollically represent preoccupations with one or another basic body function, and their playgrounds of ideological adventurism is based on poor potty training and a rationalized hypocrisy disguising a questionable moral philosophy that some careers perpetrate and perpetuate by an adopted financing structure of opposition.
Yet, much like the mistaken idea of a triad produced by the ancient Chinese in the I-Ching portrayal of the yin/yang in presumed 3-part compositions of lines, what we actually see are embellished dyads (aks bigrams). Instead of a new species of thought, we find that the former dual model has created a child of its-self, that, like a human child may be a similarly named ("JR") such as the major/minor premise designation, or differently named to give the impression of a separate individuality, though the stated individuality is paired in context with a particular duality. For example, the rock-paper-scissors trio of game partners are recognized as a singular group or (loosely defined) family association like sibling rivalries. Each have an inter-connected identity and shared equality.
It is quite typical to find intellectual considerations proposing some entirely new structure of cognitive enterprising to be built on the ruins of some past civilization of ideological pursuit. Hence, new labels may be applied and new technologies employed in the constructions, but the foundations are place in accord with the perspectives of old dualities refashioned by the adopted languages of later eras. Instead of developing an external structure deemed "trichotomization", the multiple structures of duality/dichotomy seen in different subjects, are simply repackaged in accord with the packaging materials of a given era, and relevant mode of delivery. The precursive situation of providing an explanation for the emergence of such a formal structuring of cognitive activity does not typically enter into discussions about the emergent potential for an entity called Trichotomization, though examples of structural forms in different structures may be used as evidence foe persisting in the discussions about dichotomization, with no actual proposition of structuring anew... independently from attempted renovations of already developed cognitive architectures using a two-room mentality with a single fireplace centralized to warm and illuminate any intended separation, for whatever purpose.
Notice that although those advancing a discussion of cognitive patterns called dualities or dichotomies may provide a list of examples, neither the the idea of "duality" nor the list of dualities is ever appended with an activity of quantification, (in other words no numbers are being used) whereby they are not formally viewed as engaging in numerology. Heaven forbid such investigators begin describing dualities/dichotomies as cognitive patterns-of-two or apply some enumerative count to the examples they are providing.The development of human consciousness can be characterized as an unfixed sequential ordering of perception and illustration. While I can speak of a 1, 2, 3 sequencing, I am also speaking of a 1st, 2nd, 3rd process, that may be at times stalled, play leapfrog, and even engage in reversal. Nonethe less, generally speaking:
- The 1st of three involves plurality and singularity which are sometimes viewed as a duality, with an a developmental advancement towards dichotomization portrayed in fanciful notions commensurate with the mental state of humanity in ancient periods. Dualities at this time are imaginatively metaphysical, illusory constructs.
- The 2nd of three involves duality, though singularity and plurality may be viewed as well as images of trichotomization, typically in geometric or ideological constructs we of today would label as fairy tales, mythology, or relgion... generally featuring some triad.
- The 3rd of three involves alternations of thought which frequently portray some tridic or "three" concept, some of which are not more real than the illusions and delusions of an imagination which may be harbored by some charismatic individual(s) who can persuade others to believe in some fantasy.
Initial posting: Thursday, july 10th, 10:33 AM