Threesology Research Journal: The Language Narrative
A Language Narrative
page 33

Flag Counter
Progressive Thinkers as of 12/1/2022

Language Narrative Series
~~~ Aesop's Fables ~~~
Preface 1 Preface 2 Preface 3
Prologue 1 Prologue 2 Prologue 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 32 33      
Standard Cognitive Model series:
Page (#37) is most recent:
37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30
29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22
21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14
13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6
5 4 3 2
Old numbering system (Hence, oldest writings)
1b 1c 1d 1e

In looking at the sun, along with feeling the affects as the Earth turned, the primivity of the human psyche would have basked in the impression of a pattern-of-three, that could later become realized (or at least reacted to) in terms of a 3 to 1 ratio... as suggested by the three "phases" (Moments: dawn- noon- dusk) to 1 sun. It is a pattern suggested as the influence (by way of Pagan solar worship) of the "Three persons in one god" concept associated with the Christian Trinity. Hence, an environmental pattern became cognitively embraced and translated into a concept by which a similar pattern of enumeration can be identified. And yet, if we take into consideration that such an environmental pattern predated humans, all the way back to the dawn of biological development, what we encounter when we look at the basic constituents of RNA and DNA, is the three-to-one ratio pattern that can be described as a "four pattern" in nucleotides and proteins. In other words, just like those examples of researchers seeking to refute Dumezil's Trifunctional theory by describing an auxiliary or fourth element, we see the same in the following senses:

DNA and RNA 3 to 1 ratio comparison

3 to 1 ratio in protein structure

We can easily describe the above images displaying a "Trifunctional structure" with an accompanying auxiliary. This same idea is evident in the Christian Trinity idea of 3 persons in 1 godhead, but also in the US presidential seal slogan of "E Pluribus unum" (out of many, one), when it is noted that the word "many", in a primitive counting sense, refers to a cognitive third position described in the counting sequence of "1, 2, Many". It is a three-patterned phrase where the third designation incorporates not only a cognitive limit, but a description of the limit in terms of a representatively entitled notion of "infinity" or Universe, or eternity, or an all-encompassing idea... Thus, when finding what some may describe as anomaly to Dumezilian theory applied to Indo-Europeans, it not only is the case (with respect to human cognitive development) for use to come across a non-Indo-European culture expressing the Indo-European tripartite social model, but that the presence of a presumed "4th" or auxiliary social division is will in keeping with an enlarged understanding of human cognitive development. Dumezilian tripartite theory is but a segment of a large organization principle that needs to be observed for all of humanity... at least for those interested in this particular focus.

As we see the origin of the trinity can be viewed as a symbolic representation of the sometimes labeled "pagan worship" of the sun with its three "functions" (phases/moments) called dawn- noon, dusk; which might respectively be correlated with: (birth/rebirth, habitation, (death). We might also try on for size the ideas of Son (birth), Father (maturity), Holy spirit (Wisdom/ desire of en"light"enment). So too might one conceive that such a three-part influence came to be represented in other ideas and activities, whether or not described as a metaphor or analogy to the Sun: (Dawn)... Temporal power/ peasant/apprentice, (Noon)... Secular power/warrior/Journeyman, (Dusk) Spiritual (religious) power. In addition, one might associate the ideas of Maiden- Mother- Crone or 1st, 2nd, 3rd place, Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, etc... to dawn, noon, dusk.

Sun worship relates to the veneration of the sun or a representation of the sun as a deity, as in Atonism in Egypt in the 14th century BCE.

By the end of Akhenaton's fifth regnal year, the Aton had become Egypt's dominant national god. The old state temples were closed and the court transferred to a purpose-built capital city, Akhetaton (Amarna). Here Nefertiti continued to play an important religious role, worshipping alongside her husband and serving as the female element in the divine triad formed by the god Aton, the king Akhenaton, and his queen. Her sexuality, emphasized by her exaggeratedly feminine body shape and her fine linen garments, and her fertility, emphasized by the constant appearance of the six princesses, indicate that she was considered a living fertility goddess. Nefertiti and the royal family appeared on private devotional stelae and on the walls of nonroyal tombs, and images of Nefertiti stood at the four corners of her husband's sarcophagus. ("Nefertiti." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

Although sun worship has been used frequently as a term for "pagan" religion, it is, in fact, relatively rare. Though almost every culture uses solar motifs, only a relatively few cultures (Egyptian, Indo-European, and Meso-American) developed solar religions. All of these groups had in common a well-developed urban civilization with a strong ideology of sacred kingship. In all of them the imagery of the sun as the ruler of both the upper and the lower worlds that he majestically visits on his daily round is prominent.

The sun is the bestower of light and life to the totality of the cosmos; with his unblinking, all-seeing eye, he is the stern guarantor of justice; with the almost universal connection of light with enlightenment or illumination, the sun is the source of wisdom.

These qualities—sovereignty, power of beneficence, justice, and wisdom—are central to any elite religious group, and it is within these contexts that a highly developed solar ideology is found. Kings ruled by the power of the sun and claimed descent from the sun. Solar deities, gods personifying the sun, are sovereign and all-seeing. The sun is often a prime attribute of or is identified with the Supreme Deity.

In ancient Egypt the sun god Re was the dominant figure among the high gods and retained this position from early in that civilization's history. In the myth relating the voyage of the sun god over the heavenly ocean, the sun sets out as the young god Kheper; appears at noon in the zenith as the full-grown sun, Re; and arrives in the evening at the western region in the shape of the old sun god, Atum. When the pharaoh Ikhnaton reformed Egyptian religion, he took up the cult of the ancient deity Re-Horakhte under the name of Aton, an older designation of the Sun's disk. Under Akhenaton, the sun's qualities as creator and nourisher of the Earth and its inhabitants are glorified.

The sun god occupied a central position in both Sumerian and Akkadian religion, but neither the Sumerian Utu nor the Semitic Shamash was included among the three highest gods of the pantheon. The sun was one of the most popular deities, however, among the Indo-European peoples and was a symbol of divine power to them. Surya is glorified in the Vedas of ancient India as an all-seeing god who observes both good and evil actions. He expels not only darkness but also evil dreams and diseases. Sun heroes and sun kings also occupy a central position in Indian mythology, where Vivasvant, the father of Yama, corresponds to the Iranian Vivahvant, the father of Yima. There is a dynasty of sun kings, characteristically peaceful, that is quite distinct from the warlike moon kings. In medieval Iran, sun festivals were celebrated as a heritage from pre-Islamic times. The Indo-European character of sun worship is also seen in the conception of the solar deity, drawn in his carriage, generally by four white horses, common to many Indo-European peoples, and recurring in Indo-Iranian, Greco-Roman, and Scandinavian mythology.

During the later periods of Roman history, sun worship gained in importance and ultimately led to what has been called a "solar monotheism." Nearly all the gods of the period were possessed of solar qualities, and both Christ and Mithra acquired the traits of solar deities. The feast of Sol Invictus (Unconquered Sun) on December 25 was celebrated with great joy, and eventually this date was taken over by the Christians as Christmas, the birthday of Christ.

The most famous type of solar cult is the Sun Dance of the Plains Indians of North America. In the pre-Columbian civilizations of Mexico and Peru, sun worship was a prominent feature. In Aztec religion extensive human sacrifice was demanded by the sun gods Huitzilopochtli and Tezcatlipoca. In both Mexican and Peruvian ancient religion, the Sun occupied an important place in myth and ritual. The ruler in Peru was an incarnation of the sun god, Inti. In Japan the sun goddess, Amaterasu, who played an important role in ancient mythology and was considered to be the supreme ruler of the world, was the tutelary deity of the imperial clan, and to this day the sun symbols represent the Japanese state. ("sun worship." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

While I have written numerous times about the Three to one ratio, it is of value to mention it again, so that multiple varieties can be seen as to how a cognitive expression might be adapted. It stands to reason that an impressionable biological organism could well get is developmental pattern cues from the environment. Hence, even the presence of a triplet code in DNA could be preferred from the motion of the three-phase solar activity if we were to look at the biochemical effects involving photo-viability such as described by the subject of photo-chemistry, but we could as well speak of electro-chemistry, surface-chemistry if not some sort of gravity-chemistry, time-chemistry, oxygen-chemistry, heat-chemistry, etc... In a more general and perhaps crude sense, we could say that the triplet code is a brand, like a three-part brand one might use on the hide of a cattle or horse tattoo on a human. By this I mean to say that the pattern-of-three has been sustained over time just as one might say are other (quantitatively low) number patterns. We do not see very large quantitative descriptions being used on a recurring basis as we do such numbers as 1, 2, 3, etc..., where such numbers can alternatively be referenced with words, symbols, or other criteria perceptible by life forms within the constraints of their particular biology.

A discussion about Georges Dumezil's "Tripartite Functionality" dealing with Indo-European peoples should be addressed for those who have an interest in the "threes phenomena" and may encounter objections to the three-patterned formula because more than three divisions of a society may be encountered and want to be used by those inclined towards specifically refuting the repetition of the "three" based on 1) because they secretly hold a passion for another number, 2) too much information is condensed into three partitions (thereby leaving out information which would be better served by having more than three divisions) 3) because the person opposing the idea are like a young gunslinger wanting to gain a reputation by dueling with someone identified as holding some measure of an upper pecking order perch.

Here are some objections to Dumezil's Trifunctional idea, culled from the Wikipedia Trifunctional hypothesis article:

Nicholas Allen concludes that the tripartite division may be an artefact and a selection effect, rather than an organizing principle that was used in the societies themselves. Benjamin W. Fortson reports a sense that Dumézil blurred the lines between the three functions and the examples that he gave often had contradictory characteristics, which had caused his detractors to reject his categories as nonexistent. John Brough surmises that societal divisions are common outside Indo-European societies as well and so the hypothesis has only limited utility in illuminating prehistoric Indo-European society. Cristiano Grottanelli states that while Dumézilian trifunctionalism may be seen in modern and medieval contexts, its projection onto earlier cultures is mistaken.

Indeed, how far back in time did humanity begin using a three-part organizational methodology as a means of categorizing observed material? Were there multiple "threes" ideas in place that Dumezil used due to unrecognized (or recognized) cultural standards, but may not have not have been realized how much such ideas came to influence the use of a "threes" formula? Was the Trifunctional idea merely the result of encountering multiple "threes" references in religion and mythology, along with additional encounters in philosophy or even Fairy tales? If we include Sociology as a parameter of influence on thought, and the person who coined the term "sociology" (Auguste Comte: born January 19, 1798, Montpellier, France... died September 5, 1857, Paris); let us note that he developed a "law of three stages":

Comte's "law of the three stages" maintained that human intellectual development had moved historically from a theological stage, in which the world and human destiny within it were explained in terms of gods and spirits; through a transitional metaphysical stage, in which explanations were in terms of essences, final causes, and other abstractions; and finally to the modern positive stage. This last stage was distinguished by an awareness of the limitations of human knowledge. Knowledge could only be relative to man's nature as a species and to his varying social and historical situations. Absolute explanations were therefore better abandoned for the more sensible discovery of laws based on the observable relations between phenomena. ("Comte, Auguste." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

Let us note Georges Dumezil's birth and death dates, so as to have some idea of a time-line of events: 4 March 1898 – 11 October 1986. This period of time must be kept in mind in an effort to establish when and how Dumezil came up with a 3-part idea instead of some other pattern, since others came to use a three-part organizational theme in their respective work, not least of which was the eventual presence of Hitler's Third Reich. One might well make an account of all the "threes"-related ideas which came into focus around the time as Dumezil developed his tripartite idea. In short, what could have influenced the development of using a three part division subsequently labeled a Trifunctional Hypothesis? Did he get the idea of a tripartite social order from an other-than tripartite source attributed to Indo-Europeans such as the 3-part Stone, Bronze and Iron ages? Or perhaps, in addition to this, he derived an impetus from Plato with his threes ideas?

  • Three parts of the soul according to Plato: reason, spirit, and appetite.
  • It is thought that his three trips to Syracuse in Sicily (many of the Letters concern these, though their authenticity is controversial) led to a deep personal attachment to Dion (408–354 BCE), brother-in-law of Dionysius the Elder (430–367 BCE), the tyrant of Syracuse. Plato, at Dion's urging, apparently undertook to put into practice the ideal of the "philosopher-king" (described in the Republic) by educating Dionysius the Younger; the project was not a success, and in the ensuing instability Dion was murdered.
  • Three classes in the well-functioning state: rulers, guardians, and producers. ("Plato." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)
  • Whereas the school of Archytas apparently sank into inactivity after the death of its founder, the Academics of the next generation continued "Pythagorizing" Platonic doctrines ("Pythagoreanism." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013... BTR Poster column 5):
    1. Supreme One
    2. Indefinite Dyad
    3. Tripartite Soul
  • Tripartite soul conception of Plato: Rational - Libidinous - Spirited(various animal qualities)
  • In Plato's ideal state all three classes (Guardians - Auxiliaries - Common People) were to be persuaded to believe a myth: That their creator had fashioned them of three different substances (Gold - Silver - Baser Metals, respectively) and that failure of any individual to adhere to his station would be contrary to the nature of things.
  • 3 false beliefs by Plato that are fatal to moral character: Atheism - Denial of the moral government of the world - Believing that divine judgment can be bought off by offerings
  • Aristotle syllogism: Major premise- Minor premise- Conclusion.
  • Aristotle divided the sciences into three kinds: productive, practical, and theoretical. ("Aristotle." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)
  • Supposition theory, at least in its 14th-century form, is best viewed as two theories under one name. The first, sometimes called the theory of "supposition proper," is a theory of reference and answers the question "To what does a given occurrence of a term refer in a given proposition?" In general (the details depend on the author), three main types of supposition were distinguished: (1) personal supposition (which, despite the name, need not have anything to do with persons), (2) simple supposition, and (3) material supposition. ("logic, history of." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)
  • Medieval Guild divisions: Apprentice- Journeyman- Master

This three-part functionality is typically described in a manner exhibiting a top to bottom hierarchy that Sociology adopted in the manner of the Upper class, Middle class and Lower class as a traditional model of social divisioning, while later thinkers thought to add sub and super-levels much in the manner as one sees in how clothes in the U.S. are arranged in small- medium- large designations with the two "outer" assignments attached with three additional criteria involving the use of an "X" in an additive fashion such as X-large, XX-large, XXX-large; whereby the three-part partitioning effect is retained, though the developers of the system may not have necessarily been aware they were continuing the usage of what appears to be a Indo-European standard model of Trifunctional structuring. Take for example, the following excerpts which gives a representation of the three-part formula in Indo-European thought:

Christian Jürgensen Thomsenm Dec. 29, 1788- May 21, 1865, Copenhagen, Denmark

Danish archaeologist who deserves major credit for developing the three-part system of prehistory, naming the Stone, Bronze, and Iron ages for the successive stages of man's technological development in Europe. His tripartite scheme brought the first semblance of order to prehistory and formed the basis for chronological schemes developed for other areas of the globe by succeeding generations of archaeologists.

Jens Jacob Asmussen Worsaae, March 14, 1821- Aug. 15, 1885, (Vejle, Denmark/Dopenhagen)

Danish archaeologist, a principal founder of prehistoric archaeology. His Danmarks Oldtid oplyst ved Oldsager og Gravhøie (1843; The Primeval Antiquities of Denmark) was one of the most influential archaeological works of the 19th century.

At an early age Worsaae studied stone monuments in Denmark and proved them to be tombs rather than altars, as had been supposed. From 1838 to 1843, while a student, he served as an assistant to Christian J. Thomsen, curator of Danish antiquities, and prepared Danmarks Oldtid. He then spent several years in Germany, France, England, and Ireland carrying on stratigraphic study and research that enabled him to refine Thomsen's tripartite (Stone, Bronze, and Iron ages) classification of prehistory.

A striking pattern for a number of epic traditions has been found in a so-called tripartite ideology or “trifunctional system” of the Indo-Europeans. The concept was based on the discovery of the remarkable philosophy of a prehistoric nation that survived as a system of thought in the historic Indo-European civilizations and even in the subconsciousness of the modern speakers of Indo-European tongues.

This philosophy sees in the universe three basic principles that are realized by three categories of people: priests, warriors, and producers of riches. In conformity with this philosophy, most Indo-European epics have as their central themes interaction among these three principles or functions which are: (1) religion and kingship; (2) physical strength; (3) fecundity, health, riches, beauty, and so forth. In the long Indian epic the Mahabharata, for example, the central figures, the Pandava brothers, together with their father, Pandu, their two uncles, Dhritarashtra and Vidura, and their common wife, Draupadi, correspond to traditional deities presiding over the three functions of the Indo-European ideology.

The power exercised by the Indo-European ideological pattern on the Roman mind even under the empire is seen in the Pharsalia of Lucan (39–65 CE). In this historical epic, Cato, Caesar, and Pompey are depicted respectively as moral, warlike, and popular in a way that gives the story a clear trifunctional structure. ("epic." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

Most scholars of the 19th and early 20th centuries accepted the view that history is largely a story of progress, in which occasional periods of decline— such as the Middle Ages— are succeeded by periods of renewal. The most articulate attack on this view was by the American medievalist Charles Homer Haskins in The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century (1927), which applied Michelet's and Burckhardt's term Renaissance to the 12th century rather than to the 15th or 16th.

Although the teaching responsibilities of academic historians of the Middle Ages still generally reflect either the original tripartite division of European history or the more recent and more common quadripartite division (ancient, medieval, early modern, and modern), most scholars specialize in only very small parts of a very long period. With the emergence of late antiquity as a distinct field of research and teaching since the mid-20th century, the early part of the conventional Middle Ages has been rethought and rewritten. The distinctive post-Classical period of late antiquity is now considered the medium through which ancient Greco-Roman traditions were passed on to later Europeans. The older image of a Classical antiquity despised by world-rejecting Christians and wiped out by savage barbarians is no longer credible. ("Europe, history of." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

Emile Durkheim born April 15, 1858, Épinal, France/ died Nov. 15, 1917, Paris

Emile Durkheim was a French social scientist who developed a vigorous methodology combining empirical research with sociological theory. He is widely regarded as the founder of the French school of sociology.

...Durkheim's religious faith had vanished by then, and his thought had become altogether secular but with a strong bent toward moral reform. Like a number of French philosophers during the Third Republic, Durkheim looked to science and in particular to social science and to profound educational reform as the means to avoid the perils of social disconnectedness, or “anomie,” as he was to call that condition in which norms for conduct were either absent, weak, or conflicting. ("Durkheim, Émile." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

Mauss and the "sociological" school

In a similar way, Marcel Mauss, in France, influenced the characteristic tendencies of a whole generation of European sociologists and cultural anthropologists, including Alfred Métraux and Claude Lévi-Strauss, and founded the Institute of Ethnology of the University of Paris; he also influenced such men as the noted British cultural (or social) anthropologists Bronislaw Malinowski and Alfred R. Radcliffe-Brown. In general it may be said that Mauss, like Boas, was insistent upon studying social phenomena as a system—but in a slightly different fashion. Like many others of his time he conceived of systems as self-regulating or equilibrium-seeking, composed of elements that operate to maintain the integration or adaptation of the system. Mauss gave impetus, in fact, to what was called structuralism or the structural approach, which focussed more on society as an indivisible social organism than on society as an interrelation of individuals (the functionalist's emphasis). Like Boas, Mauss also tried to twin culture and personality—that is, cultural anthropology and psychology.

Whereas the name of Malinowski is supremely associated with the school of functionalism, the name of Radcliffe-Brown is known as one of the most important proponents of present-day structuralism. Relying on the concepts of formal mathematics and linguistics, Radcliffe-Brown and other structuralists tried to determine whether in cultural anthropology it was possible to reveal that which "suggests the character of a system" beyond empirical reality and which "alone is the true object of science" (Lévi-Strauss). A structure is not a sum of social relations, which are only the primary material from which the observer extracts "structural models." A structure is a system of which the members of the society being studied are not aware or only partly so. The model that the cultural anthropologist constructs from the system is valid when the model's operation can account for all the observed facts. This exacting approach has proved particularly useful in studying kinship and marriage relations as well as myths. The difficulties of using this approach in other fields, as well as the fact that historical changes are difficult to include in this sort of static analysis, strengthen the objections that many workers in the field have raised against it.

Cultural psychology

One development of the interwar period led certain cultural anthropologists to speak of a new subdiscipline, cultural psychology, or ethnopsychology, which is based on the idea that culture conditions the very psychological makeup of individuals (as opposed to the older notion of a universal psyche or human nature). In the 1930s, for instance, in her studies of the American Southwest, Ruth Benedict found that the ways in which the Pueblo Indians thought and reasoned were strikingly different from the ways in which their immediate neighbours thought and reasoned, even though their geographical environment was virtually identical. Her conclusion was that each culture over the ages had evolved and given to its members a unique “psychological set” or orientation toward reality and that this set actually determined how the members saw and processed information from the environment. Culture, in effect, affects the ways in which the mind works. ("cultural anthropology." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)

From my perspective, since we can cite the usage of a "three-partition" being used by different investigators, and the usage of non-three types of partitions by other investigators; what we are paying witness to is a portrait of human cognitive activity that typically uses small-numbered models of partitioning. In other words, we don't find systems of ideas with large quantities of divisions. Either such a usage is too cumbersome for a brain that humanity has, or humanity generally occupies itself with small-quantity exercises of expression, whereby even in the presence of multiple issues there is an inclination to condense, symbolize, and abbreviate into a pattern which is more manageable for research and articulating to others. And yet, if a pattern-of-four is better, or five, or six, or seven, etc..., why is there a recurring inclination to use a tripartite structure? Is it due to some environmentally based physiologically attributable psychological influence that is pressuring humans to do so as part of a survival requirement?

A brief summary of the Tripartite ideology of Georges Dumezil might not point out that there may have been a tendency for early peoples to view many aspects of their world in pairs. As with early methods of counting where a pairing method was used; doubling a pair would have created a pattern-of-four as seen through the ideas of later researchers who may have been far removed in ideological temperament fro those who developed a given idea. The developer of a given idea using two groups of two placed together may not have counted the collection as a "four" but as a 2 by 2. Similarly, while we of the present may view a pyramid as having four sides, those in the past may have counted them numerically in a different fashion with respect to their perspective and ability to portray depth. And example of this is seen in images where the shoulder of a person being illustrated are shown turned in the direction of the viewer, instead of displaying an artist's ability to illustrate depth.

Additionally, the foregoing also points out that while the tripartite ideology of Georges Dumezil is useful, it does not appear to resolve issues concerning examples were there are three distinct "functions" (instead of cumulative over-lapping ones) and the presence of another auxiliary component such as the so-called four-caste system once used widely in India. Clearly the idea of a 3-to-1 ratio conceptual formula was not being thought of, though one might describe this in terms of 3 + 1.

Also, the three-part Proto-Indo-European function system of Georges Dumezil leads many researchers into thinking that his system is supremely flawed when they cite that a non-Indo-European group such as the (Asian-related) Buryat Mongols have a three-part social structure. For example, from page 272 of J.P. Mallory's book "In Search of the Indo-Europeans":

Indeed, one may argue that tripartition itself need not result in the Indo-European system. Lawrence Krader, in his study of the non-Indo-European Buryat Mongols, observes that their 'triple division of the social world' is carried through into the spirit world and the three souls of men. The Buryat spirits are arranged according to the three different Buryat social classes: Aristocrats, Commoners and Slaves, categories that are tripartite but not those of the Indo-Europeans.

Tripartite slogan of the French Revolution: Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.

And yet, let us ask when such a social structure came into being and whether it was influenced by some Western-styled philosophical idea?

Such an occurrence of the tripartite phenomena seemingly outside a standard of expectation leads us to the suggestion of a larger tripartite organizational theme that is not addressed by the conventional Dumezilian theory. In other words, what is not being considered is that the Dumezilian form of tripartite ideology of Proto- (and Modern) Indo-Europeans does not address the appreciation of an ideology which incorporates a larger overlapping developmental structure of singularity, duality, triplicity, and the 3- to- 1 ratio circumstance with respect to the human species as a whole.

The existence of an overlapping transitional development amongst differing human species groups is being overlooked, dismissed and denied any consideration. The Dumezilian form of Indo-European scholarship is being used as a tool fashioned into a weapon intended for a singular objective that limits a larger appreciation of the tripartite phenomena. It is an inept form of scholarship when such a usage is limited primarily to specifically recognized attributes of Proto-Indo-European groups, when such a weapon can be re-fashioned into a tool that can also delineate transitions between races and cultures as well as genders.

Hence, an occurrence of a tripartite social system being used by Non-(Proto)-Indo-Europeans may say something about regional/environmental influences during a specific time period inasmuch as it may indicate a transition in human cognitive development connected to an underlying 1-2-3 maturational development sequence related to biological life forms... perhaps distinct and even separate from cultural transmissions and disseminations.

(Above comments taken from an older webpage: Internet 3s selection 4)

Date of (series) Origination: Saturday, 14th March 2020... 6:11 AM
Date of Initial Posting (this page): 9th January 2023... 12:37 AM AST (Arizona Standard Time); Marana, AZ.