Threesology Research Journal
Sociological Threes
pg 1

~ The Study of Threes ~

website translator plugin

Flag Counter
Researchers as of 12/1/2019

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3
Page 4 Page 5 Page 6

I simply love starting a new page on the topic of "threes", even if it is to place previous ideas into a different context, or arrange a compilation of ideas from different contexts into an amalgamation. To describe such a "feel-good" exhilaration let me use the analogy I thought of yesterday after getting 4 new tires placed onto the back wheels of the small motor home I use in my travels. The ride was especially smooth and the motor home sat up like a child having had their ego stroked by being given new shoes to play, work or go to school with. While some readers might want to remark that the "4" wheels and "2" shoes are not a reference to a "3", my "Threesologically"-focused mind surveys the values of there once being three types of construction for tires: Bias ply- Bias ply belt- Radial, and that a person wears three types of "soles": The soles on their feet, the soles on their shoes and the soul of their spirit. Hence, we have a 2-3-4 three-patterned ensemble that I touched on in the Devils Advocate series on pg.14. However, the analogy may not be understood and appreciated if one has not had new soles put on one's favorite leather boots or shoes, and is a service that is becoming a lost art because it is less costly these days to purchase a new pair of shoes or boots than to have their old ones re-soled. But this was not always the case, which provides a hint as to my age and former experiences in my youth as a shoe shine boy going from beer joint to beer joint on the streets of Columbus, Ohio many decades ago. In those days, kids could go into beer joints to play dime arcade machines as long as they were accompanied by an adult.

But that is enough reminiscing. Initially, let me begin by reproducing some images with a sociological theme which necessarily involve philosophy, political science and the study of human cognition. Please note that the images have been used at the Cenocracy (New Government) site that I have provided information to for different topics. I do not want to defray from the intended usage by the authorship there, but do want to emphasize the information as part of a Threesological theme here.

The Standard Cognitive Model

For those of you unfamiliar with the "Pentadactyl limb" idea or need a bit of review:

A variety of Pentadactyl limbs

The next image was recently created as a Threesological analysis of the so-called 4 or 5 listings in the LGBT-Q abbreviation, which can be numerically viewed from a variety of vantage points, but presented a rather obvious division when one looks at the arrangement from an historical, psychological, and sociological view point:

The LGBTQ hierarchy

The upcoming image, though some people may not think of the bicycle in terms of its historical role in the development of socialization, describes the presence of differing orientations which can be culled from the same basic information, reminding me of the story in Gulliver's travels where two countries were at war over which side of an egg was the appropriate side to break open. Hence, we have two different countries and Gulliver as representing three different views that would have otherwise been only a contentious two.

One egg, two perspectives, three factions

...The 1726 novel by Jonathan Swift further describes an intra-Lilliputian quarrel over the practice of breaking eggs. Traditionally, Lilliputians broke boiled eggs on the larger end; a few generations ago, an Emperor of Lilliput, the Present Emperor's great-grandfather, had decreed that all eggs be broken on the smaller end after his son cut himself breaking the egg on the larger end. The differences between Big-Endians (those who broke their eggs at the larger end) and Little-Endians had given rise to "six rebellions ... wherein one Emperor lost his life, and another his crown". The Lilliputian religion says an egg should be broken on the convenient end, which is now interpreted by the Lilliputians as the smaller end. The Big-Endians gained favour in Blefuscu. Lilliput and Blefuscu

Do you see a two or three-patterned frame of reference?

The next selection, while not providing an explicit reference to a "three" theme, in fact describes the presence of discussing what is and what is not meant by the practice of Democracy, Communism and Socialism:

The Socialistic practices of a Ccommunistically based falsified Democracy.

I can not begin to tell you how many veterans are so deluded by their patriotism they can not appreciate the The Socialistic practices of a Communistically based falsified Democracy existing in the military. Whereas this is a good thing they are appreciably inebriated by the illusions created by being taught to have patriotism in order to "perform their duty" for those whose ulterior motives are often directed towards commercial interests that can have some meagre social benefit, it would be of greater value if they would collectively sober up from such a stuporous world-view in order that all militaries throughout the world could be seen for the nonsense they actually are... but are rationalized nonetheless as a need. Unfortunately, the creation of such an Institution as the military breeds those who like a military way of life and want to perpetuate it, to the point they will effect measures with confederates to instigate problems so that military activity can take place.

This is true for the Institutionalization of impoverishment. There is a widespread network of organizations, and foundations, and programs, and charities, and religions, etc., that have a philosophy which depends on the existence of one type of impoverishment or another... and thus help to perpetuate the social conditions which help to create such conditions, where their efforts are intentional, unintentional or simply a "butterfly" consequence.

It is pretty naive for anyone to think that the current formula of the US government, despite its three branches (which frequently operate as one), to seek, much less solve outstanding social issues when it is the present government structure itself which participates in the persistence of such social sores. It also is naive to think that by replacing a woman for a man or a black for a white in Congress will have any appreciable effect on recurring social problems when in most cases, the people are simply voting in either the lesser of two or more evils or one inept person for another inept person. Coupled to the fact that Legislators are not confronted with a situation in which they can lose their jobs if they don't perform to the satisfaction of the people, there is no real incentive for them to actively participate in achieving a result when they are alternatively permitted to provide the public with yet another illusion that they are making an effort, but those efforts are typically in the form of creating a costly committee, or result in a management program that eventually becomes under-funded for the lack of results it eventually provides.

We also have the situation in which the people blindingly accept the notion that the current models of governments throughout the world is the best for all concerned. No less, when we couple this to the irrational expectation for a few hundred individuals elected by way of a political system which requires either a large personal wealth or be supported by a circumstance which garners for them a substantial amount of money in order to participate in what is laughably referred to as a "free" election; we are faced with the unenviable situation that those who get selected are not necessarily the most knowledgeable, most intelligent, most wise, most intuitive, most visionary, or whatever attribute might best fit for a given situation in solving a recurring social problem... and not merely creating another form of socialized dependency scheme that fails to address any root causes, though such interventions may be well intentioned and provide for the immediate needs of a given population at a meagre level of sustenance.

While one might argue that the US Congress is filled with far too many wealthy people who do not and can not represent the people because of their wealth, a survey of the presumed wealthy financial status of US Congressional members needs to be provided as a reality check. However, please note that in the following representation, the authors of the study placed the wealthy Representatives at the top and the poor at the bottom, signaling perhaps a widespread social deference to the wealthy, which may be that which occurs in Congress as well. It is not uncommon for a poor person to give a greater share of their own resource to a rich person who does not need it, but in the giving somehow expect to receive some eventual remunerative reciprocation, though their humility may want to disagree if they are pressed to validate such a perception. Yet, it is a common thread of expressed consciousness to find people generally thinking they can not be adequately nor accurately represented by those who represent some measure of wealth since it is wealth which helped them acquire their position, and that this situation creates the widely held view that they are thus out of touch with the man and woman on the street. The same idea is held by the public in Britain.

Along with the deferment given to the rich by many people, the same thing occurs when a large person is present, or a person introduced with some socially recognized credentials suggesting importance, or a man, or right handed people, even though laws have been created in an attempt to bring about an even playing field such as with parking spaces for the handicapped, elderly and pregnant women, though there are other customs which create deferments given to women by men such as assiting with getting a coat on, opening doors, etc...

The US Congress has 535 voting members: 435 representatives and 100 senators. And out of this handful the public expects to have created a pool of the most wise, the most intelligent, the most insightful, the most caring, the most selfless and public serving group of people on the planet, who will stop at nothing to solve all the social problems so that no future generation ever have to suffer for the same reasons as they currently are. Source for membership tally: United States Congress

Here is a chart reflecting the financial status of Congressional members for a given time period. While fluctuations occur, it nonetheless provides for a sampling which denotes that despite the high and low wealth, the overall mix does not provide the people with the needed pool of Representatives which have the necessary ambition, much less aptitudes, for solving the recurrence of festering social ills such as expressed by the three H's generality which is an approximation of financial support via resource distribution to address these three forms of nutrition requirements. (Health, Hearth, Hunger).

  1. Health: (body, mind, spirit: medical, dental, mental, social, clothing, hygiene, medicine, surgery, prosthetics, ambulatory accommodations, education...)
  2. Hearth: (home, furnishings [lights, stove, refrigerator, toilet, air conditioning, heating, laundry facilities], transportation, electronic-based necessities, utilities...)
  3. Hunger: (food, fluids... [even though "hunger" can be viewed in a much larger philosophical sense such as the hunger for being creative, inventive, entrepreneurial, etc...])

Wealth of Congress

The wealth of the US Congress
Every Member of Congress’ Wealth in One Chart

Let us now take a short look at Britain's Parliament as another example which is commonly expressed as a representation of how the public is not nor can be adequately Represented due to the wealth of the average Parliamentary member and the average wealth of the Commonwealth citizen. Please note that both governments rely on the usage of dichotomies: House/Senate; Democrats/Republicans... House of Commons/House of Lords; Conservative/Labour (though the British system is said to be a multi-party system... yet still uses a dichotomization: Conservative/Liberal, Party affiliated Commons/ Non-party affiliated Lords labeled "Independent").

The House of Commons, officially the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, is the lower house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Like the upper house, the House of Lords, it meets in the Palace of Westminster. The Commons is an elected body consisting of 650 members known as Members of Parliament (MPs). Members are elected to represent constituencies by the first-past-the-post system and hold their seats until Parliament is dissolved. Source for tally of membership: House of Commons of the United Kingdom.

  • The basic annual salary for MPs is £74,962, not including expenses, while the UK median pre-tax full time salary is £27,600. MPs earn more than the bottom 90% of the country.
  • Less than 2% of UK adults are millionaires, while at one point two thirds of David Cameron's cabinet were millionaires. Theresa May's cabinet was similarly unrepresentative.

Source: These figures show how out-of-touch UK politicians are from everyone else by Ed Jones, 2 June 2017

With respect to offering a 3rd argument against the Democrats and Republicans, the current three-branch government of the US, with its frequently occurring non-checks and balances formula, must be altered to create the functioning presence of a Peoples Legislative Branch; an idea similar to the functionality in which a jury duty activity is performed, though it will have to be altered to accommodate a politically-based scenario. In effect, the out-moded 3-branch checks-and-balances model is to be replaced by a 3-to-1 ratio model where checks and balances can be monitored, protected, initiated and fully applied by the public. If a "jury of one's peers" is valid for determining guilt/innocence, freedom/incarceration, life/death, then it should be valid as a practicing model to be implemented for governmental affairs in the creation, establishment, and enforcement of laws, policies, provisions, etc...

This is the present so-called checks and balances formula

This is the revised checks and balances formula

It is rather idiotic of the public to expect a small pool of Representatives who are either billionaires, millionaires or are supported by resources involving millions and/or billions of dollars, to provide the necessary intelligence, wisdom, experience, and vision required to actually solve festering social problems such as those of homelessness, hunger and health care (though there are others). Being monetarily wealthy does not guarantee someone will have the necessary acumen for solving a given social problem. What it does provisionally present us with is someone who might be quite skilled in either offering excuses or finding some means of diverting attention from their ineptness such as by way of pursuing a military conflict, occupying the media's attention towards relief efforts for a natural disaster, or in the present social vogue, create conditions of insinuation involving a potential means of impeaching someone from office; which is little more than an effort to try to disparage them in the eyes of the public so as to make them a non-threat for a future election.

Situations involving desperation for a given candidate can take different forms, including the presence of former officials who support or argue against someone for their own party. Typically in the U.S., there are two major political parties called the Democrats and Republicans, while all other perspectives can be lumped into a third party, though they view themselves as being separate entities. Nonetheless, there is an inclination to see the overall situation as a pattern-of-three.

Interestingly, when speaking of Democrats, Republicans and the "others", we come faced with the ideas of Conservatism and Liberalism, with variations of the two spanning some proposed centralization. Whereas the Republicans are now viewed as the Conservative party, this was not always the case. They began in the US as the liberal party and thus the Democrats could in hindsight be viewed as the conservatives. Words have a way of representing a mirror image of themselves at some later date. Another example of this is found in the bible where the current verse about Jesus saying not to let the children being hindered from being around him was once read as keeping the children away from him, because the word "let" as described in today's definition had an opposite definition in olden days. We frequently find the utilization of a dichotomous cognitive orientation flip-flopping about like some landed fish, whereby in one generation a word, interpretation or belief will have one meaning, and the next generation it will have the exact or nearly exact opposite, which occurs quite prominently within the realms of religion and politics, to which we can add business as a third item, so as to present the existing trio of human activity.

The Democratic and Republican Parties have undergone a long transition from their founding ideological principles. The Democrats started out as the conservative party but are now the liberal party, and the Republicans were once the liberal party but are now the conservative party.

The Democratic Party we know today evolved from the conservative Democratic-Republican Party of the 1790’s. The first contested Presidential election was in 1796. The Democratic-Republican Party nominated the conservative Thomas Jefferson as their first presidential nominee. Party members were anti-federalists who favored state sovereignty, free markets, a decentralized federal government, and an originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution and the attendant Bill of Rights. The Democratic-Republican Party also supported the institution of slavery.

Democratic and Republican Ideologies Undergo Dramatic Role Reversal by Rich Rubino, Political Author, 06/13/2013 09:24 am ET, Updated Aug 13, 2013

Here is one of several variations of the current usage of the word "Let" regarding children and Jesus:

English Standard Version - Matthew 19:14: but Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven." Compare Translations for Matthew 19:14

The translation here: Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come to me, does not accurately describe the definitions of the words as they were meant, such as the word "suffer" meaning to let someone pass by and not hinder (molest? harass?) them.

Here is my rough interpretation of the phrase as it was written with intention, since in the time of Jesus it appears to be of little doubt that children did not hold an esteemed place in the lives of such primitive-minded adults who were egotistically preoccupied, as are many adults today:

"Leave the children alone (to play or carry out chores and suffer the loss of a potential victim) and don't try to exploit (i.e. "hinder") them because I value them." The intent of the phrase in the original has been reassigned by later interpretations (as a type of advertising slogan) to represent some especially unique place held by children, only in as much that since the ignorance of adults makes it easier for educated clergy to manipulate them, it is of value to make adults think that retaining a child-like world-view is of value in being attractive to god.

Linguistic mechanisms: Auto-antonym

Some pairs of contronyms are true homographs, i.e., distinct words with different etymology which happen to have the same form. For instance cleave "separate" is from Old English cleofan, while cleave "adhere" is from Old English clifian, which was pronounced differently. The King James Bible often uses "let" in the sense of "forbid", a meaning which is now uncommon, and which is derived from the Old English verb lettan 'hinder, delay, impede, oppress', as opposed to the meaning "allow", which is derived from the Old English verb lætan 'leave, allow, let on lease (etc.)'. Still, the alternate meaning of "let" can be found today in the legal phrase "without let or hindrance" and in ball games such as tennis, squash, table tennis, and racquetball.

However, we find the word "let" in the phrase "to let" a room as opposed to "to rent" a room. The former refers to the owner or leasing agent while the latter to the person who is paying the rent or providing some other service for the provision being "lent" to them.

Another reversal from the bible, with sociological, psychological and philosophical application is the reference in Matt: 10:34 which clearly describes Jesus as being opposite from the present day role of being cast as a "Prince of Peace": {American Standard Version: "Think not that I came to send peace on the earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." Compare Translations for Matthew 10:34

The bible has been so adulterated from its inception, there is no real value of truth except that it truly is a made up instrument of manipulating the hearts, minds and souls of billions, both for good and ill.

Likewise, we find the same nonsense occurring with the interpretation of the US Constitution which is conveniently altered by the reigning mindset of those who align themselves with a given party they have an allegiance with, particularly when Supreme Court Justices are selected by the President who may be either a Republican or Democrat (most often), instead of being chosen by a process in which the public is in charge and thus making the court answerable to the people who should be able to get rid of them instead of providing them with a life-long position that suggests they are immune from the effects of old age, ill health, and the vagaries of human-induced proclivities of preoccupation which can affect judgment.

As a representation of how one mindset, though with good intentions, can appear to be representative of the perception of many in the public by addressing what appear to be social concerns that need to be addressed— and if they are typically receive the routinely applied superficial "managerial" attention which will not solve the underlying sociological infrastructure which participates in the creation of the problems; and then contrast this rather dichotomous approach with a different perspective that advances a trichotomous approach; we are presented with yet another variation of the 2 versus 3 orientation. The "2" or dichotomous orientation of addressing a social problem by addressing immediate needs (such as providing immediate relief in the desire for necessities such as providing food, clothing, shelter, health care, etc.), can be viewed as a maternal/paternal approach, while the "3" or trichotomous approach as listed here, can be viewed as a step beyond the traditions to find solutions which resolve the need for the typical responses of designing programs to manage the social problems... which, because of an increasing population growth can only lead to a more costly and convoluted dependency which is either dealt with by letting the people suffer, or finding an acceptable (excusable) means of reducing the population.

Two different perspectives
Another Barking Dog

There is enough money and raw resources available to provide for the immediate needs of the impoverished. This is not the problem. The problem arises when the act of providing immediate relief is interpreted as the most viable means of addressing the issues all the time in the same manner at the same level. It can not be sustained because the level of immediate relief is connected with funds generated through taxes created by the conditions of commerce according to the vagaries of the Stock Market. In addition, social programs typically find themselves under the knife of those who want the limited sources of tax provided funding for some pet project that one or more politicians define and label as being of greater social and humanitarian importance, such as the frequently used "security of the nation" argument. In addition, social problems are often compounded by misinformation and misinterpretation originating from one or another journalist, not to mention the underlying attitude of those in religion who think it a necessity to have some needy person available in order to do a good deed and thus be looked favorably on by their god, so as to have a place in Heaven reserved for them.

Origination date: Sunday, December 1st, 2019... 5:45 AM
Initial Posting: Sunday, December 1st, 2019... 11:01 AM
Updated Posting: Thursday, December 26th, 2019... 6:07 AM

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