Threesology Research Journal
Novum Organum Threesiarum
(New Instrument of Threes)
- Preface page A -

(The Study of Threes)

In understanding the "Threes" Phenomena from any perspective, you will have need to survey some of the examples provided at several available websites found in the → → → contents ← ← ← section, though various other (largely unrecognized) uses of a "three"-dominant perspective by different authors may also be discovered from different resource opportunities such as the internet, public library, dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc...

You will also have need to appreciate that my usage of the word "Phenomena" is inclined towards a representation of a list of examples with an assumed similarity which poses itself as a curious fact being used as evidence to postulate a multiplicity of ideas with inter-relatedness other than that used to initially include it with the list. But my perspective is not the only one and different ways of listing and discussing a "threes" topic can be found.

But I AM NOT strictly focusing on a type of listing formula nor application that which will come to be identified as a traditional expression; in as much as one may be able to identify between traditional listings and applicable uses, for example:

  • Collecting and/or suggesting various "three"-based structures represent or illustrate a religious-based trinitarian composite occurring in nature which serves to "prove" the validity of one's belief:
    • 3-leafed clovers
    • Insect segmentation: head - thorax - abdomen
    • Three observable parts of the human eye: pupil - iris - cornea
    • Three basic rock formations: igneous - metamorphic, sedimentary
    • Etc.

  • Collecting and/or suggesting various "three"- counted occurrences observed to be repeating in one's life, thereby illustrating who and/or what the person is in terms of a numerologically- fashioned definition, for example:
    • I think in threes so this means I am a logical person.
    • I have three girl friends which indicates to me I am a great lover.
    • I have 3 dogs, 3 cats, and 3 kids that love me, so I have a great personality.
    • I check all locks 3 times because I am security conscious, honest and dependable.
    • Etc.
  • Collecting and collating various examples under the rubric of an enumerated "three" validation as an intellectual exercise that may or may not include personal commentary regarding typical questions such as:
    • Why does it occur?
    • Who saw it first?
    • How many people notice it?
    • What does it mean?
    • Etc.

And please note that my list is in no way THE definitive list, and that I incorporate a variety of "three"-based profiles that others do not and may not have considered to the extent of providing a discussion about. For example, I have included the reference that the Planet Earth is the Third planet from the Sun. While this example references the numerical value of "three", the example is not a pattern-of-three, unless we include the remark that the first three planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth) will one day be absorbed (consumed) by the Sun as it expands along its route of extinction.

Another profile (type) of the "three" is the geometric form called a triangle. The usage of this single word is not a pattern-of-three unless you associate its three angles and/or its three sides. By extension, using addition, this 3 and 3 arrangement yields a value of six, which can be construed as a multiple of the "three". However, such an admission is frequently used as a means of permitting a researcher from also including patterns-of-six, nine, twelve, etc., unless it is in a three-patterned form such as the 666 characterization of the presumed sign of the beast, frequently referred to as Satan. But we could also use another "666" example such as the make-up of Carbon-12 of which all life on Earth (along with water), is said to be composed of and is used as the international standard for atomic weight. It has 6 protons + 6 neutrons in its nucleus and 6 electrons orbiting in two shells.

While at this present juncture and moment I do not intend on presenting examples representative of a threes multiplicity (6, 9, 12, etc.), I may nonetheless do so when indulging in contemplations along those lines, for which might be established a "portrait of interactiveness". For example, here is a very short list of "12" examples:

  • Carbon-12
  • 12 (Christian) Apostles
  • 12 Enzymes (blood clotting factors)
  • 12 tables used for codifying Roman law (Emperor Justinian)
  • 12 tribes of Israel

It will take many more examples than this to establish a larger philosophical contemplation for the usage of "12".

It is not my intent to use the different profiles of the "three" in an attempt to validate any religious, political, or other belief. In other words, I am not studying the phenomena -of- three because it is evidence for you to be used as a presumed truth that you don't want to subject to verification or unwilling to be scrutinized from different perspectives. For example, I was once asked by a Representative for a large Journalistic source to provide comments about the "Death occurs in threes" view. I simply told her that I can't place over-valued credence on any single idea when there are numerous other examples of three-patterned occurrences.

For example, clothing sizes occur in "threes" more often: (small - medium - large, X large - XX large - XXX large). We could even cite the occurrence of peeling a banana with one, two, or three peels, depending on how green or ripe the banana is. (The greener it is the less peels.) One might also cite the widespread usage of holding a pen or pencil with three fingers. Each of these three-patterned examples occur more frequently than we assume occurs with death. Because of this, I did not want to indulge the public with more superstition by adding to it with some remark that might be interpreted to agree with the idea when in fact I do not. If we are to suggest Death occurs in threes, how then do we account for all those listed in an obituary newspaper column? Disregarding such easily accessible information, speaks volumes about a collective consciousness of active superstition.

No doubt you might come across an example in my different listings that you feel is incorrect. I have done this as well. For example, on the printed "threes" poster I came across a reference to three layers involving arteries, veins and capillaries. While the first two do, the third does not (it has two, according to one source I encountered). I don't know if this is the result of a typing error I made, or one that was made at the printer, since I was supplying the information by way of type-written pages and not the then in-vogue usage of a computer disc. Nonetheless, the Arteries - Veins - Capillaries is a pattern-of-three when referenced collectively as blood vessels. The numerous examples used for the poster collection as well as the necessity of using small type in order to incorporate as many as I could within the printing constraints of the printer, made proof-reading more difficult.

But I don't want to give the impression of making excuses for myself. I make mistakes. I make errors in judgment. I misspell words and sometimes write incomplete sentences; with half on the page and the other half of the sentence still lingering in some mental corridor that was hung-up by getting distracted by "conversing" with some other idea... like students stopping to talk instead of proceeding on to their next class. I may not notice a mistake for days, weeks, or even months, when I take time to re-read a page already placed on the internet. Clearly, most pages are "works in progress". As is the present case.

Whereas I can strive for an honesty, clarity and relevance within the corral of the prismatic kaleidoscope alternatively being used as a microscopic, telescope, or magnifying glass at a particular time; such an intent is not always as forthcoming to its foremost extent as I want at the moment the attempt is made. A greater level thereof may not appear until sometime in the future during a reflective moment of contemplation. A researcher can indulge in a personalized brutal honesty, a squeamish protraction thereof, or vagaries in between. However, this does not mean one has to be tactless, insensitive or unempathetic. One can apply both naked science and garmented artistry to their research.

But providing a list of "threes" is not enough for me. I want to know the many variations. Let me itemize several I have recognized, without trying to be exhaustive:

  • A Single "three": Earth is the third planet from a source of solar energy.
  • A Pattern-of-three: 3 sentence ending marks: Period - Question mark - Exclamation point.
  • A Geometric three: Triangle.
  • A Geometric pattern-of-three: Linear - Circular - Triangular.
  • A Numerical pattern-of-three: 1 - 2 - 3.
  • A Number Word pattern-of-three: One - Two - Three.
  • A single letter substitution-for-number pattern-of-three: I - II - III.
  • A (capitalized) Alphabetical pattern-of-three: A - B - C.
  • A (lower case) Alphabetical pattern-of-three: a -b -c.
  • A prefix pattern-of-three: Mono - Bi(Di) - Tri.
  • A singular idea (affix) with 3 individual references: Prefix - Infix - Postfix. (Affixed to the beginning, Affixed to the middle, Affixed to the end.)
  • A three-lettered abbreviation usage: ABC, KGB, FBI, USA, NFL, CBS...
  • A three-pattered phrase of redundancy: To tell the truth, The whole truth, Nothing but the truth.
  • A three-pattered phrase of redundancy concealing a 3 -"to"- 1 ratio: To tell the truth, The whole truth, Nothing but the truth; So help me God.
  • A maturational pattern-of-three: One Germ Layer - Two Germ layers - Three Germ layers.
  • A 3 -"to"- 1 ratio: 1st base - 2nd base - 3rd base, home plate/home base. (The first three have numbers the fourth one does not.)
  • A 3 -"to"- 1 ratio obscured by a three reference: DNA and RNA have triplet codon systems. (Both have the three "adenosine, cytosine, guanine"... with, respectively, {the one} Thymine and Uracil.)
  • A "natural" 3 -in- 1 pattern-of-three: The three "moments" of the Sun (dawn - noon - dusk) are "fusing" together as the Sun expands towards its demise.
  • An "artificial" 3 -in- 1 pattern-of-three: The three colors of traffic lights are "fused" into a single object.
  • A 3 - 2 - 1 word usage pattern-of-three: On your marks! (3 words), Get set! (2 words), Go! (1 word).
  • A hypothetical claimed as a real pattern-of-three: Father - Son - Holy Ghost/ Spirit.
  • A single word to describe a pattern-of-three: Trinity, Trio, Triple, etc.
  • A three words-for-numbers to describe a recurring cognitive limitation that is variably concealed in various patterns-of-three uses: One - Two - Many.
  • A single word abbreviated into three letters to describe the existence of many more: ETC...

It is of value for the reader to be familiar with the "One - Two - Many" theme related to cognitive limitation, because this series-of-three is a pattern which takes many forms and can be found in multiple subjects areas in various guises. This suggests that the recurrence of this same pattern, as a cognitive profile, is being exhibited time and again as a functional limitation. The reasons for this recurrence may be because it represents an adaptation in order to survive in the particular environment which humanity is presently situated.

However, despite all the interest in saving the Earth from pollution, erosion, etc., it nonetheless is headed towards a decadence and is taking humanity along with it... which includes influencing the adopted usage of a particular cognitive pattern to assist in its survivability within the incrementally- occurring decay. It is similar to the persuasions used by those who convince the young and naive to blow themselves up as a suicide bomber. The environment of Earth is doing the same thing to all of humanity. Humanity, when compared to the duration of existence that other life forms have had, is young and naive... and some might say in its infancy, if not some similitude of embryonic gestation period awaiting the right time and conditions to be born... a time and conditions which may never arise.

Yet, aside from all the New Age philosophical paraphernalia some readers might be inclined to associate with the present comments; the Earth is, so to speak, a living organism with "instincts" born from billions of years of experience. And like so many life forms that we would not necessarily attribute any human level of sentience or intelligence to, it nonetheless is very crafty, foxy, shrewd, mischievous, and reflexive, to name but a few applicable characteristics. Clearly, we do not understand all forms of "consciousness", and typically attempt to define such in purely human terms, even though human consciousness is not well understood except in some pseudo-related Descarte-ian "I think, therefore I am" presumption.

And despite any qualms against the usage of an anthropomorphic inference from one or another reader, let me say that the Earth "likes" humanity to be "intelligently naive" so that humanity can intelligently defend and support its naïveté in support of views (assumptions) which likewise support Earth's influence to keep the human form of resource nearby. While use of the word "instinct" requires a much broader definition than typically applied, if in fact we can apply the word to any recurring behavioral response... which likewise necessitates in using a broader definition of the words "behavior" and "likes", at least on some levels of comparison for purposes of conversation as a philosophy not yet applied. Instead of being parsimonious (as in an Occam's razor parsimony), let us be generous and stop trying to squeeze everything into a ritually-used suitcase of one or more ideas.

The following link introduces the reader to the notion of a 3 -"to"- 1 ratio, though you might prefer to say, with letters, words, or symbols, (3 + 1), (three and one), (3 into 1), (3 as 1), (the one is the odd man out), (three primary, one tertiary) (primary, secondary, tertiary and quaternary), (one as three), (one from three) etc...

--- Three to One ratios page a ---

The "New Instrument of Threes" is, in part, a discussion about the value that can be derived from making a list, even though some might think such a topic is not necessary since making lists is what most people are accustomed to do in one way or another. But many lists are more randomized and are not concerted efforts at categorization. Very frequently, one keeps a mental list of a few things they want to buy at a store, with additional items purchased because of either impulse buying, an unrecognized sale on a commonly purchased product, or seeing a particular item on a shelf reminded a person that they also needed something else that they forgot to include on either a mental or handwritten list.

While some lists are explicitly enumerated or alphabetized and seem to follow a logical plan or at least a conventional layout that gives the impression of resembling some measure of logic, or at the very least a beginning →to→ end formula; some lists appear to be conglomerations of miscellaneous items or facts that appear to have no order... not even to the person who created the list. Most people don't think in terms of "creative doodling" when confronted by such graphically displayed or mental lists. In other words, the items on the list are not placed sequentially into a conventional tool of measurement like an alphabetical listing, or any order that a particular reader is accustomed to with some familiarity and expectation.

Such an expectation is heightened by the information compiled on the list. For example, there is a higher expectation for a listing of historical persons, places and things to exhibit a coherent relevance. Likewise is it for subject matter that is considered to be serious such as science, logic and mathematics, as opposed to non-serious topics like a grocery list, house-hold chores list, or list of errands. ("Errands", by the way, that we say we have to "run", but don't say walk, stroll, skip, jog, bicycle, row, fly, somersault, jump, etc...) But all lists are just lists, no matter how presented, unless you want your collection to represent the consideration of an ideology. Yet most ideologies are presented with the intent of aligning themselves with (or against) a topic already devised. They are seldom original ventures like an undiscovered new species... even though the subject of life forms is not new. With the foregoing in mind, let me say that I am referencing the present perspective as a new way of thinking... at least about the "Threes Phenomena".

Some readers expect an idea to express some ideal of perfection that they can use as a shield and/or weapon to wield against one or more others in an effort to exert some dominance in a particular social setting. Whereas, I see myself as a jack-of-many trades explorer and not as an arms and military provisions dealer. The "threes phenomena" is an unexplored terrain and is not a text on how to scientifically engage an enemy artistically. Be it likened to a jungle, desert, ocean, galactic space or some other landscape such as a cavern, glacier or astro-physical contemplation pertaining to time-travel, Teleportation or inter/intra-dimensional (day, night or graveyard) shift.

If your metaphor is a cavern, then these pages are carvings on a wall meant for you. If you prefer some other form of left-behind text, then by all means, think in terms of a diary, journal, or archaeological artifact (with three languages of course). But don't expect perfection. If you want a study in the "threes phenomena" to represent perfection, then you must create that for your own preference. I am not Moses spending time on a Mountain etching out views on stone tablets to claim them as edicts by a god that everyone must follow. Whereby in an attempt to convince everyone of these presumed god-signatured contents there is a need to dramatize a return to the gullible social flock with wind-blown hair covered in stone dust that is viewed as an indication the countenance is due to having spoken with a god. If this is your expectation, you might as well go back to worshipping whatever golden calf befits your helplessly inebriated social interests and existence.

I am not Moses, I am not Jesus, Mohammed nor Buddha, and nor am I a god. Even though I came across an interesting philosophical journey that I collected into a portfolio-ed "journal" called: I AM God.

If you are seeking perfection or are in need of enhancing a frail ego by subjecting something or someone you think is standing on a hill claiming to be a king, you will no doubt want to point out one or more errors in a "threes" examples listing and claim all of it to be of little value. If this is what your ego needs so that you can feel better about yourself, go ahead and knock it down to where you feel you have accomplished a sense of personalized purpose. Everyone will applaud you for your destructiveness and then ask, "So when do you begin your efforts at constructing something better?" But be forewarned: there are those just like you who will want to tear down what you are attempting to construct. And even though you should find them agreeable because you both share the same need to be destructive, you may not enjoy looking at a true reflection of yourself.

While a "threes list" might be called a conglomeration of miscellaneous facts arranged according to some numerological disposition, a given list maker may be using an undisclosed system of ordering. Sometimes I organize information according to a given topic (such as Fairy Tales), and at other times according to whatever comparison I am making at a given moment. At other times I look at information from a scientific perspective and at other times it is more artistically inclined. Just because I reference a "three" orientation does not mean the list has to be enumerated. While this may be difficult for readers to follow because they are expecting some conventional ordering system as if they are in a library, reading a dictionary, or listening to some memorized speech, poem, or musical selection; this does not mean I have the same memories even though we might share the same neighborhood, go to the same schools, etc... Believe it or not, a person is allowed to see things differently, even if you think the same information you know, should conveniently be organized according to how you see things. Imagine a writer, singer, actor, etc., not sharing your sensibilities. Such ungracious impertinence!

For me, thinking in terms of the "threes phenomena" has required the exploration of different perspectives. I may not always accurately convey the position from which I am making the observation, but this single reference should thus indicate this knowledge to you to make amends for. Sometimes, I attempt to collate different perspectives into a singular portrait, but must admit that some of the attempts look more like an abstraction that some chimpanzee might have a better notion of pasting together into some understandable découpage. That is if any découpage has a larger meaning aside from a portrayal of bits -and- pieces put together and entitled "art" in an attempt to apply some justification and credibility to an extended period of directed energy expenditure.

As such, my adventure into the "threes phenomena" might well be termed an art project that uses the fragments of words to create a découpage of ideas placed upon a canvas called a page that, collectively, might alternatively be viewed as a portfolio. Some of the "artistically exemplified" ideas may be found to be to your liking as you peruse the portfolio, while others you may not think too much of. Some might be interpreted as pornographic, according to one's expectations when a particularly favored subject area is viewed. However, it should be noted that my usage of the word "Pornographic" in the present sense is metaphorically applied to describe differing levels of distastefulness as measured by different perspectives. While some of these perspectives are nude in the sense of exploring virgin repositories of ideation that may be unfamiliar, only a perverted mentality would construct such expressions into an actual physical self-indulgence.

To me, encyclopedias and dictionaries as well as textbooks are all découpages of ideas. Some books are about a particular subject, but most authors provide different examples like looking at the same landscape or object from different vantage points which are alternatively described as perspectives. In effect, they are lists gathered into a single medium. Like an art gallery show-casing artists of a particular genre such as modern art, tattoo art, graffiti art, Renaissance art, Revivalist art, plastic art, quilt art, handicraft art, etc., that in some instances a few might preferably call a particular style as being trash, instead of culture, according to one's artistic tastes. The same goes for music. Some collections are of different "artists", while others provide differing perspectives (songs) of a single person who may or may not sing about multiple topics instead of the same topic; such as love, from different perspectives called moods, experiences or a rendition of someone else's perspective in one's own words.

Many text books contain samplings of different ideas which may also include short representations of individuals who are noted as having developed a particular idea such as Charles Darwin in Biology books, Albert Einstein in Physics books, Mozart in music books, etc., all of whom may also appear in discussions about genius or creativity. Yet, such books typically are portraits about a singular topic being focused on that is widely accepted as a conventionalized model of thinking about a human activity. In contrast, the topic of "threes" is, at present, still roaming around the graveyard remains of:

  • Superstition such as: "the third time is the charm".
  • Urban legend such as: "death occurs in threes"... (which is also a superstition).
  • Religious ideology such as: the notion of the "Trinity" (which is imposed on past cultures that may not have practiced a "Trinitarian" perspective).

Yet, many topics that are considered as conventional today, were not so in ages past. By gathering examples of "threes" examples used by those in the past, it can be identified that they had a very superficial account and typically used such examples to validate some religious predisposition. But they can be excused for not having the depth and breadth of knowledge we have today. We of the present, however, can not be excused for not seeking out examples of "threes" from every single subject matter. There are enough of us living today, and many have countless hours of leisure time, that research into the "threes phenomena" can not be relegated merely towards reflecting the same types and quantity of "threes" examples as did those of ages past. We people of the present day like to think of ourselves as enlightened, so let us apply an enlightened perspective to the "Threes Phenomena", with the word "Phenomena" not to be pigeon-holed into a simplistic explication of a measured-by-listing superficiality of observation.

A discussion of the "threes" in the past might well have brought a conclusion resting on the advocacy of some religious affinity because culture after culture was steeped in a religious focus. To not do so might well have resorted in social ostracism, if not imprisonment or death. The social atmospheres of the past had little tolerance for ideas which did not advocate some glorification of a god, some religious doctrine, or the pretensions of a presiding social authority. While such remains the same in various social enclaves, these three have taken on various substitutions such as, for example, particular orientations of gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, age, occupation, etc...

Whereas Democratic ideologies in some venues purport an insistence on non-discrimination, the topics listed as items not to be discriminated on are thus used as bulwarks of personalized preeminence termed civil rights. The label "Civil Rights" then becomes the titled chapter in a larger book of law review which outlines a host of different examples which becomes an authoritative injunction for thinking in a specific way as did religious and pseudo-scientific perspectives in the past... and still do today in some social environments. Different ideas are espoused, but there remains the same underlying formula of thought processing: It has been expressing a 1 - 2 - 3 developmental sequence which in some instances is incorporating a "fourth" item that may not explicitly be denoted with a numerical value or uses one or another numerical values to give the impression of superiority of thinking by way of exhibiting multiplicity. For example, some say there are 3 (Universe) dimensions Length ~ Width ~ Depth, with an "odd man out" fourth called Time. And like adolescents or siblings playing a "one-upmanship" interactivity, some have claimed the existence of multiple dimensions.

Traditional 3-layered cone

Traditional 3-layered Universe "cone."
Multi-dimensional Universe

Multi-dimension Universe, cellular division, Big Bang, or...
Spinning Universe layers (7K)

3- layered Universe spinning and expanding/collapsing from a "triangular cone."
Multi-dimensional layers

A mathematician's eyes (on multiple dimensions) are sometimes bigger than their stomach.

The usage of a "cone", or triangular representation of an expanding and collapsing Universe is simply an alternative perspective from a single-point singularity towards a multiple-point singularity in a singular direction as opposed to a Universal (everywhere at once) direction like an explosion might be envisioned. If perturbations of planets can "assume" elliptical orbits due to planetary/geomagnetic-gravitational (large body) influences, the purported "Big Bang" explosion might well have to follow "rules of direction/behavior" we are not yet privy to. Such an illustration contains "threes" in the usage of a triangular cone and the 1-dimension, 2-dimension, multi- dimension ideas. The underlying "threes"-related ideas (such as a 3 -"to"- one ratio), very often go unrecognized.

A discussion of the "threes" as a singular topic requires a collection of examples from many different subject areas. Comprehending the "threes phenomena" requires a scientific appreciation to permit artistic explorations in order to be available for verification. The exploration of new Scientific frontiers sometimes requires venturing forth with a directed singular purpose, a serendipitous or haphazard approach, or for something not at all labeled artistic or scientific such as searching for some treasure. While some delight in finding maps to use for exploration, some of us delight in constructing the maps. From my perspective, the development of "threes"-related maps requires an account of everyday well known threes expressions such as the three-patterned phrase "Home Sweet Home", as well as ideas from other subject areas which the common person on the street may not be familiar with.

Scientific methodologies are maps of orientation, just like star charts, chemical formulas, codes of law, codes of conduct, game rules, etc... Most often, people use a strict adherence to rules because deviation creates too much confusion and frustration. In the absence of rules, or when rules seem antithetical to a given purpose or desire, new ones are designed, fabricated or altered according to the needs of a given moment when traditional ones are useless, abusive, or obstructive. For example, years ago I used to play a game of cards (Rummy) with some friends with whom we routinely engaged in permitting the dealer to determine alternate rules such as which cards were wild and how many points would be allocated to a given card, for the hand they were dealing.

On one occasion, which has stuck in my mind all these years (since the late 1960's early 1970's) because it indicated a particular behavior that was, at the time, perceived (by me but others shrugged it off) as a very curious thing; by the forthcoming actions of another friend who had not routinely played with us, but decided he would like to play. The first game was played with the acknowledgement that deuces (twos) were wild. Thereafter, we began adopting the typical routine of allowing any card(s) the dealer wanted to be wild such as one-eyed jacks, Aces, threes, etc., which included the Queen of spades being worth 40 points.

I could not believe that this person whom we had all known for years, and who had a reputation of being a strong and tough guy, become so childishly upset by our "alternative rule making" methodology for playing a simple card game. He became so upset and frustrated by being unable to play outside his conventional game-playing mental box, that he expressed his confusion and disorientation by quitting and leaving after throwing the cards on the table and accusing us of doing something that was tantamount to a sacrilege! He never again played with us and for the most part, didn't come around anymore. And as an epilogue to this person's future behavior: while the rest of us had eventually worked at multiple jobs (sometimes two and three at a time) and went on to get more education, he remained at the same job his entire life (cutting grass at a golf course), and did not pursue any further education that I am aware of. When I made an attempt to contact him several decades later, it was obvious that the thinking he held in his youth was now in the body of an older man. However, he always gave me the benefit of the doubt when my ideas differed from everyone else's... which they very often did.

The point to make is that thinking in terms of a "Threes" perspective is not conventional thinking. You may want to apply conventional thinking to it as I do when providing examples, but you must permit the appearance of appraisals and even conclusions if they seem unconventional. While I realize it is a difficult thing for many to accept or even permit themselves to try to think differently, a larger appreciation of the "threes phenomena" as a collection of maps into unexplored territory, is a necessity. You can't experience throwing a Frisbee, spinning a yo-yo or hula-hooping unless you try. Acknowledging the existence of something is wholly different from experiencing it... though there are many things I won't try such as taking drugs, adultery, robbing banks, etc...

I guess I shouldn't be, but I am astonished when I encounter someone who doesn't know how to swim, hasn't seen the ocean, nor driven a vehicle. And I am likewise taken aback by the level and type of assaults levied on those who served in the military by those who did not; but find a need to incorporate some criticism though I've never encountered anyone who has served in the military to harbor ill feelings towards those who, for one reason or another, didn't serve.

For example, one individual, whose father didn't want him to serve even though the father and an uncle did serve; angrily defended his absence from serving by claiming this or that veteran didn't serve in a war. I simply agreed that most veterans don't do any actual combat and only provide some measure of support for those who do. He was visibly perturbed that his observation of a few veterans he personally knew, was felt to be not only not an insult, but was turned into an agreeable admission of truth when applied to the whole of the military. In other words, veterans would not be shamed if someone told them that they didn't serve in a war (as if this indicated whether or not a person was a "real" soldier), because most take this same observation in a matter-of-fact, (so-what?) way.

I have never met a veteran professing some uniqueness because he (or she) went to war and killed people. Many, many, many veterans do not talk about their experiences. Perhaps, in some instances, because they give an indication that the person was not as invincible as their teenage hubris and idealism had led them to believe. There is nothing to be proud of when killing another person. To kill a person to keep them from committing a crime against you is another thing. But it is not the person you are desirous of killing, but killing their ability to carry out an undesirable act. Whereas it may be one's assigned "patriotic" duty to comply with orders, to which one may or may not feel some personal gratification; but killing another human being just because a government labels them the enemy is not something to be proud of. This is not to say that one can not have pride when forced into a position where they must either kill or be killed, but the overall circumstances of the killing event must be weighed from the larger perspective of all considerations.

But a larger perspective in any given situation can not be garnered without larger amounts of information. A listing of "Threes" examples and a listing of "Threes" ideas related to such lists as they may be collated and presented, is a necessary commodity that must be part of one's intellectual diet as a staple, though some may view it as a several course meal, if not a dessert. Providing only a few examples is not adequate. Nor is providing examples from only one subject area.

In the forthcoming metaphorically "paginated" portraits in this Novum Organum Threesiarum portfolio, I hope to sculpt out a new way of thinking. But the process may be a long one. And, like the Egyptians of old that used smaller pyramids as a type of holographic architectural modelling of back-to-the drawing (black) board imaging for the construction of a larger pyramidal structure; information on previous pages will be selectively regurgitated like parts of equations extracted and placed into a newer formula. Previous pages about the threes phenomena are flipped over details in a sketch book of related "studies". It is a notion which many an artist is familiar with; and is used to remind them of perspectives and techniques in thinking to be once again used (or not), for some at-the-moment presumed culminating effort. It is an effort that may itself, nonetheless, eventually be seen to be yet another sketch to be applied as a model of information for developing what may eventually be described as an avant-garde artistry. Such artistry occurs in all subject areas, be it music, theater, comedy, architecture, dance, science, photography, journalism, mathematics, teaching, medicine, biology, chemistry, modeling, business, sports, philosophy, oration, etc...

But please understand I am not going to wait for you to come along on this journey. Nor should you wait for me if you see a path that I do not. Follow your instincts, your gut, your intuition, your guesses, your assumptions, your intellect, your naïveté, your genius, your creativity, your ignorance, your notions, you impulses, or whatever signpost beckons you forth or to detour from, because I will be doing the same. And as Captain Kirk once replied to the question of what course? to take, he said, to some effect, with a wave of the hand: Out there.

For those of you who are fearful of intellectual adventure that will cause some measure of surveying history to be used as examples, you might feel comforted by calling my intended voyage the quixotic exercise of someone who is already "Way Out There". Any way, bring along a notebook so you can sketch your own list of experiences along our route as we venture to this "Threelapagos" island where there are sure to be many unusual (if not strange) life forms with which to develop your own Threesological theory which may be taught in schools sometime in the future. That is, after a Scopes-like court battle, many detractors have died off, and the young have come to rebelliously entertain a new way of thinking as an acceptable form of (3 -in- 1) Abductive- Deductive- Inductive methodological empiricism.

In this Novum Organum Threesiarum I will try to introduce you to a new way of understanding and thinking about the "Threes Phenomena". Typically, three different forms of logic are used in the public arena that are academically referred to as Abduction, Deduction, and Induction. However, what is not recognized is that these three are intellectualized reflections of traumas experienced as actual experiences by many people over long expanses of time. The present New Instrument of Threes will not only (momentarily) state what the traumas are but will also help to establish a means by which we can begin a catharsis towards the development of a New Methodological Empiricism. First, let me briefly review the three traditionalized forms of logic:

  • Abduction— Is the making and testing of hypothesis or theories based on the best available information at hand. In other words, this is intelligent guesstimation. For example, a doctor (deductively) concludes that a patient's illness is psycho-somatic (psychological instead of physiological) in origin since all (inductively considered) tests regarding the person's multiple symptomatic complaints have turned up negative. Yet, the patient may not have a "psychological problem" per-se in terms of a mental illness, since their activity may have some ulterior motive such as an old person using the situation as a means of going someplace to visit someone because they have no friends, family or relatives with whom to visit with socially. Whereas it is psycho-somatic, it is not necessarily a mental illness. Hence, while the diagnosis might be correct to suggest the presence of a psycho-somatic illness, the nature of this illness may not be determined. This then results in a partial truth being established despite all the rationalizations which might be offered to defend the position. (For example, claiming it's not one's job, no time, I did what I could, etc.)
  • Deduction— is the development of a specific conclusion from multiple considerations of a single theory or hypothesis, or the same consideration from multiple (examples of) theories and hypothesis. For example, you have a basket of apples. You pick up an apple to eat but find a worm in it. You then pick up another apple to find a worm in it also. You conduct the same type of search for the singular (same) tell-tale (worm hole) sign for the presence of a worm. You deduce that all the apples have worms, but your deductive conclusion is an intellectual guesstimation because you did not verify the presence of any worm by cutting each apple open. In other words, the apples may not now have worms, but did have. This then results in a partial truth being established despite all the rationalizations which might be offered to defend the position. (For example, I don't want to cut upon "ALL" the apples, I don't have a knife, I will get more apples, etc.)
  • Induction— Relates to the development of broad generalizations based on one or more specific observations. For example, we are involved in the same vehicle accident with several others during a winter storm on a road with detour signs due to nearby construction. Causes of the accident are mentally listed as being due to the bad weather conditions, inexperienced winter driving, physical or mental impairment from intoxication, and possible distractions such as drinking a hot beverage, talking on a cell phone, arguing with someone, thinking about one's report that was due yesterday, being late for work, etc... However, despite all the possibilities, the general consensus is to conclude that it was the poor weather conditions and not any single person's fault, though it could have been caused by several independent factors having interacted at a given moment of time and place. This then results in a partial truth being established despite all the rationalizations which might be offered to defend the position. (For example, there was a white out, the snow plows forgot to clear the road, I was driving slow in my lane, etc.)

Comments about Abduction, Deduction and Induction can be found here:

Live Science: Deduction Versus Induction

Each of the above three are examples which clearly indicate that a partialized level of acceptable truth is achieved, though some might accept the result as a fixed, personalized value of truth. In a broad analogy, we might cite this (two-patterned) either/or propositional positioning in terms used in the analysis of coal:

  • Poximate Analysis- gives an empirical estimate of the amounts of moisture, ash, volatile materials and fixed carbon.
  • Ultimate Analysis- determines the total percentages of the elements present (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, sulfur and nitrogen).

The key words in the preceding example are "estimate" and "percentages". While both are indicative of partialization, they can each be used to signify some measure of completeness when combined within a whole listing of others. In other words, lists by themselves may appear incongruous, but when applied in context, can yield important information. The difficulty arises when the context of application is unknown, like an unknown variable in a mathematics equation. The point to be made is that a list of "threes' seems incongruous to most people only because they don't or won't attempt to apply it contextually. Most contexts to date have been either religious, superstition, or some urban-legend form. My intent is to travel way beyond such horizons which can be likened to ideas concerning the falling off a flat Earth if you travel too far.

Clearly, One's logic is defended with whatever resources are available to them... and some can be quite elaborate, being sanctioned by law, by force of arms, by an adopted community standard, by an organization, through teaching, etc... And despite the Deductive method being singled out to be that which portrays a syllogistic form of logic (for example: Major Premise - Minor Premise - Conclusion).

The above three, when taken as a whole, might well be construed as a syllogism themselves. Yet, though we can count three separate parts or types, two of the three are considered to be opposites. The question then is to determine if we consider the instance of a polarization as two separate entities, or the splitting apart of one which retains a singularity instead of singular independent organizations. If not, the presumed two must be considered in the same breath and we have the developed circumstance of a 2 + 1 ratio representing not a three, but an underlying two formula. For the sake of discourse, let us view as a 2 + 1 organization that can be compared with other presumed three-based formulaic representations:

  • In the example of the syllogistic pattern of Major Premise - Minor Premise - Conclusion, we can see and thus say "Three" elements, but there is a two representation which can also be denoted:
  • The usage of "Major" and "Minor" terms are polarizations that can be construed as opposites. Hence, we have the underlying formula as (Major Premise/Minor Premise) and [Conclusion]. This can numerically be written as 2 + 1, or 2 = 1.

This second example brings to the fore the recognition that the I Ching Trigrams are actually Bigrams. Whereas we see groupings of "three" lines and call the groupings "Trigrams", there are actually only two types of lines organized in a pattern-of-three way. Thus a representative 2 = 1 formula is present; in that two lines are used to represent a singular concept referenced as a "three" with the usage of the word "Trigram".

These so-called Trigrams are actually Bigrams
(with two different line types)

8trigrams (1K)
With short and long lines

trigram3 (1K)

The closed lines are said to represent yang (male) and the open lines yin (female). Quite possibly they were originally intended as allusions to procreative "instrumentation".

  • A third example can be provided by referencing a much older but widely considered philosophy known popularly as Yin and Yang. While denoted as representing individual characteristics, the ancient Yin and Yang perspective is said to represent a "singular whole" defining balance, harmony, or equilibrium... depending on the vernacular you care to use. It has sometimes been said to be illustrated in the form of a (three-patterned) triangle. Thus, the "two" become as one and can be represented numerically as 2 = 1. Again, whereas we can see and say "three", no actual third is present. In other words, you can't take one or both away and have an independent third entity left to consider on its own merits.

YUY (3K)

  • This next example, is to cite that the used (primary) binary code of Computers (0's and 1's) allied with the (polarized) on -and- off disposition of electronic-based switching, is overlayed with a three-patterned Boolean logic (And, Or, Not gates)... plus its compounds (frequently called permutations such as NAND, NOR, XNOR), which include propositionals such as "If Then" and "Except".

With respect to Abduction, Deduction and Induction, these three could be denoted as the Three Intellectual Traumas, or at least recognized as intellectualized portrayals of traumas experienced by humanity over many generations because the colloquial usage of these three logic forms reeks of the following circumstances humanity has experienced. You must think globally and historically:

  • Abduction— Refers to kidnapping, which can involve any age or gender which results in a deduction and induction.
  • Deduction— Refers to loss. Loss of freedom, testicles, eyes, extremities, liberty, property, money, love, food and/or water (starvation), affection, medical treatment, salvation, life, social status, etc...
  • Induction— Refers to Service (or Servitude). For example, induction into the military (which might have situational relevance that causes death such as in battle), social service, household service, community service, etc...

The logic humanity is using is based on traumatic experiences. We will defensively rationalize our logic by calling it natural and normal. It is so much of our human culture we don't know how to think otherwise. For those that do, they either think themselves going mad, or are looked upon with suspicion of using an erroneous form of thinking because to do so, is reacted to as if one is professing something that is sacrilegious... because it goes against the established order of things. And even it is met with attempts to absorb it into dominant beliefs about logic, just as did religion when it absorbed elements of paganism in order not to exclude the very many who believed in such. Those who are viewed or view themselves as representing the authority on dominant forms of logic will no doubt attempt to inculcate, trample on, or minimize that which displays their views as indications of a cognitive limit that we not only can go beyond, but must do so.

The pages to come are sketches. But they are "working model" sketches like smaller Egyptian pyramids next to a larger one are considered to be. And whether factual or a false presumption, it matters not. My usage of the phrase "working model" derives its intent of illustrating a dynamic (movement), in that it can be worked at within one's mind and eventually applied. Let me reiterate, as a means of instructive repetition; that I am about to set sail on a journey to a "Threeslapagos" island where you will no doubt find many familiar as well as unfamiliar species. So make sure you bring along a sketch book so that in later contemplations, you might well develop your own (Threesological) Origin of Species to be defended and fought over; and eventually taught in schools throughout the world... but only after many detractors have died off, there is a Scope's-like trial, and your ideas are entertained by younger minds who come to rebelliously accept your new way of thinking that has now become old by frequently having been referred to.

While we might want to use the words "Logic", Logical, and Logistically" to imply a sophistication of mental activity to impress upon ourselves and others a notion of intelligence; what actually takes place most often is a colloquial usage which translates the above three into an associative commonality with:

In other words, the logic we use today has an underlying affinity with human behavioral characteristics which were once a stark commonality and remain as lingering ghosts which are presented in myriad forms of intellectualization. They have been carried from the past into the present as echoes of widely experienced and practiced social traumas. Attempting to mitigate the effects of the traumas by using one or another form of logic has been deemed the foremost logical approach. It is time to move on towards the realization and practice of a 3 -"to"- 1 (3 in 1) ratio which has several combined simplistically renderable formulations which frequently expressed as myriad components.

The point to be made is the existence of a cognitive limitation I will attempt to portray, in the forthcoming pages, as being surmountable.

Initial Posting Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Updated Posting: Friday, April 4, 2014
HTML (4.01) update: Friday, May 31, 2019... 4:17 AM

Your Questions, Comments or Additional Information are welcomed:
Herb O. Buckland