Threesology Research Journal: The Standard Cognitive Model page 17
The Standard Cognitive Model
page 17


Flag Counter
Progressive Thinkers as of 5/8/2020

Language Narrative Series
~~~ Aesop's Fables ~~~
Preface 1 Preface 2 Preface 3
Prologue 1 Prologue 2 Prologue 3
Mesologue
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


While the idea of a "standard Cognitive model" may be new to some readers, it is not an uncommon idea. However, it takes on different types of referencing with respect to the interest(s) of a given researcher, such as myself with an orientation towards the recurrence of "threes" patterns in different subjects expressed in multiple ways; though quite often a researcher is oblivious to their usage of a specific pattern and how it compares to other ideas in other subjects they may have little interest in. Permit me to offer 3 examples of different cognitive model ideas which may or may not imply the presence of an underlying standard:


Cognitive Model Example 1

Abstract The Cognitive Model of Cognition (CMC) describes a consensus among many researchers about architectural assumptions that define aspects of humanlike minds, whether natural or artificial. This consensus combines ideas from several existing cognitive architectures. Our research group has been developing a theory and an implemented system to do humanlike language comprehension within an embodied autonomous agent. This paper analyzes how this theory of humanlike language comprehension maps onto the CMC, what extensions to the CMC it might suggest, and what major challenges for the CMC come from applying it to language processing. (The Common Model of Cognition and humanlike language comprehension by Peter Lindes.


H.O.B. Note: Like so many others who speak of language, they fail to take into consideration recurring patterns found in hearing. See for example: Language, Hearing, Cognition, and Language Threes page 1. If we take a look at several different theories about language (that is if you take the time to read them), what can be seen is the lack of referencing anything about the process of hearing. One need only look at a deaf person's attempts to articulate spoken language in order to see the importance of hearing is to language, but one after another linquist or educated lay-person excludes looking closely at the patterns to be associated with hearing and those associated with language. So many intelligent people have got their heads stuck in the sand and would make excuses as to why the subject of hearing and the structure of the ear is not included in their theory.

Here are some (7) examples of language theories culled from this webpage: The Search for a Unified Theory of Language Learning by Alex Breeden, Jan. 14, 2022.

These following three examples of "1st language" ideas come from here: Buckland's Third Revolution Poster column 3, and is entitled "3 rulers are noted for carrying out experiments (by isolating children from all spoken language influences) to determine which language would be spoken first, and hence, identify the first language." (All three of the experiments might be referred to as a "deprivation" study.)

  1. Egyptian Pharaoh Psammetichus (664 - 610 B.C.)
  2. James IV of Scotland (A.D.1473 - 1513)
  3. Roman Emperor Fredrick II of Hohenstaufen (A.D. 1200's).

    4. Cognitive Model Example 2

    3 Stratum cognitive idea

    A Standard Model of the Mind by John E. Laird, Christian Lebiere, Paul S. Rosenbloom, Winter 2017 (Toward a Common Computational Framework across Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Science, Neuroscience, and Robotics)

    Abstract The purpose of this article is to begin the process of engaging the international research community in developing what can be called a standard model of the mind, where the mind we have in mind here is human-like. The notion of a standard model has its roots in physics, where over more than a half-century the international community has developed and tested a standard model that combines much of what is known about particles. This model is assumed to be internally consistent, yet still have major gaps. Its function is to serve as a cumulative reference point for the field while also driving efforts to both extend and break it.


    Two additional examples with respect to language and cognition which has reached a status of philosophical discussion almost comparable to the debated of Nature/Nurture, Mind/Body, Heaven/Hell, Morality/Immorality, Normal/Non-normal, Intelligence/Wisdom, Rich/Poor, etc...:

    While not all cognitive models exhibit the usage of a definitive "three" theme, some do and should be catalogued as examples of alternative perspectives:



    Cognitive Model Example 3

    Abstract This paper aims to explore more efficient information processing methods through quasi-holographic space, knowledge and language cognitive systems. The method is as follows: First, the spatial computing system is understood as a formal abstract cognitive system; further, the five-loop traversal system is understood as a conceptual knowledge query system; finally, the language cognitive system is understood as a tabular text reusing system. The result is: quasi-holographic space, five-loop traversal and bit-list logic as three thinking modes or three types of cognitive systems, in the object form and knowledge content information processing on the same path. The significance is that not only the three types of cognitive systems, such as quasi-holographic space, five-loop traversal and order-sequence structure, all of them are difficult to understand, now are easily understood, and a new cognitive paradigm that is simplified is obtained. (How to Understand Three Types of Cognitive Models by Xiaohui Zou, Yizhen Qi & Dixing Wang).

    There is different ways of looking at Cognitive Modeling which may suggest to some that there is no "standard", and yet the first standard is to make note of the fact that there is a limitation as to the cognitive models being explored, because (despite human ego and its assumption that imagination is unlimited), there is a limitation to imagination since it is an instrument created by and constrained by the incremental deteriorations taking place in nature (such as the burnout of the Sun, slowing rotation of the Earth, and receding Moon), to which all life forms are being forced to adapt to as a survival mechanism, from which is sptouted mutiple types of rationalization which we see in religion, politics, science, commerce, sports, etc..., though we frequently refer to them as reality and truth. Rationalization is very much a product of human imagination.

    My way of looking at cognitive modeling is through the prism of assigning numerical values to expressions... to thoughts (ideas), which are one type of behavior. The numerical value which I am particularly interested in is the presence of "three", though its absence in multiple contexts is of interest as well; thuns enabling one to see which alternative pattern is being used and which patterns are most (as well as least) dominant. Since I am dealing with language, one needs to adopt a working model of how language needs to be treated, and whether or not someone else's idea is appropriate, or must it be viewed as just another example of how humans are cognitively arranging a particular study of language, since every subject has its own language system containing words, abbreviations, definitions, jargon, word coinings, etc., that are used quite frequently, even if a word has been culled from another subject and is being used in an attempt to faciliate a greater illustration of a given idea that one believes has suffered from a degree of intelligibility, confusion, distortion, misunderstanding, etc...

    Sometimes the language being used can be confusing when it appears because different subjects are being focused on without the intent of an author referencing the presence of an underlying theme which they then enumerate for easier identification in other subjects, though they may profess that they used standardized tools of mathematics. A standard cognitive model need not be identified by the use of complex matrices, scaffoldings, blueprints, schematics, complicated equations and the like, when it appears that a standard cognitive patterning uses a simplified counting theme, or at least a sequence which is easily identifiable by a standard serialization of numbers such as 1... 2... 3, even though we can sometimes find a higher count than the "3" value in some contexts. For example, though complex mathematics may have been used to unravel the 3 laws of motion (by Isaac Newton) and 3 laws of planetary motion (Johannes Kepler); the underlying "3" repetition can not be overlooked or relegated to some dismissive evaluation as a practice in numerology, particularly when we find the same value in multiple other subjects' defining orientations for landmark specificities. Is Nature engaged in the practice of exercising an interest in numerology when it uses a recurrence of only a few number patterns identified by human consciousness (is not human consciousness a part of the same nature as Nature or is it a different nature whereby there may be three (unrecognized) types, even if some prefer to use a bifocal (dualisitc) type of magnifying glass); or is the usage of a few number patterns in different subject areas an unrecognized exercise of superstition aligned with numerology being conducted by humanity... though vocabulary, context, application and commercial value helps to camouflage such an activity to be defined in such a manner?

    In as much as this site is about the previously unarticulated notion concerning a standard cognitive profile (model), its substantial effort is to provide examples about the phenomena of "three" which at times may express some quantitative value, and/or qualitative value, and/or quintessential-tative value as applied or implied. (In other, more common words... different people may use a given example for a specific reason and rationale that another may not use in the same manner or at all.) Education and experiences along with interests can and do vary widely from one person to the next.

    For example (despite differing opinions as well as some may be included in other categories):

    • Quantitative three: 3-legged stool, 3 fates, 3 furies, 3-headed dog Cerberus, 3 Macbeth witches, 3 Gorgons, 1 point- 2 points- 3 points (shots in basketball)...
    • Qualitative three: The Trinity, Tripod, Triptych, 3 heads are better than 1, Third time's the charm, Tripod gait (insects), 3-colored flag, 3 strikes your out (used for other occasions besides baseball)...
    • Quintessential-tative three: Father-Mother-Child, Id-Ego-Superego, A2 + B2 = C2, Three fingers for holding pen or pencil (Technically: 2 fingers and 1 thumb), Cigarettes-Cigars-Pipes, Beer-Wine-Hard liquor, White ball- Black ball- Color balls (Billiards)...

    Let's look at the "threes" phenomena from the perspective of a 1-2-3 maturational development "time line" (knowing full well one might attempt to create a similar view using a different numerical value), but the reader may not even think to do so without being confronted by such an illustration:


    Timeline illustrating a 1, 2, 3 developmental theme

    (With respect to eating, some countries eat with three fingers while others choose amongst three utensils: knife- fork- spoon, though one should not overlook the usage of two chopsticks which did not evolve, possibly owing to a "two-patterned" mindset. In the U.S. it is not uncommon to be offered 3 different meats to choose from for breakfast: Sausage- Ham- Bacon. One may also choose between Pancakes- Waffles- French toast, as well as Coffee-Juice-Water... "milk, tea and no beverage" are substitute selections. As for eggs, one or two may be more standard than requesting three, thereby constituting another cognitive reinforcement that many readers would offer some rationalized reason for. As for lunch, one may choose a "Combo-meal" consisting of three items such as a Hamburger (sandwich)- French Fries (or chicken nuggets)- Beverage. In some cases an additional dessert item might be included, thereby producing a 3-to-1 cognitive ratio. And nor should we overlook the well-known three meals (breakfast- lunch- supper/dinner), even if one does not practice this sequence, you are nonetheless cognitively aware of it. See the old The Number Three in The American Culture by Prof. Alan Dundez at Michael Eck's Book of Threes site, or here: The Number Three in The American Culture. In any event, I think Dundez' conclusion is wrong since we do in fact find "Threes" in Nature. The title of this essay comes from a book on readings in Cultural Anthropology entitled "Every Man His Way", ISBN: 0132928051, ISBN13: 9780132928052)

    If one is sincere in their research of the "Threes Phenomena", they are invariably confronted by multiple instances in which a "three" pattern is intermittent, vaguely (slightly) expressed, or non-existent in a given instance. Another numerical value may or may not be used as well as the overall absence of any quantitative value by a given author. (Some authors do not routinely resort to the use of quantity as part of their writing or speaking style.) In short, when one confronts a situation where another pattern (other-than-"three" with respect to a patterns-of-three intention) is being used, it is of need to catalogue such an occurrence to see how often it too repeats in presence or absence. The need for this is to attempt a measurement of human cognitive activity so as to establish (over time and place) whether a change is taking place, thereby indicating an evolutionary progression, incremental deterioration, or some other characteristic not presently being focused on or perhaps even understood.

    The presence or absence of a given pattern in physics, chemistry, biology, linguistics, music, mathematics, sports, games, commerce, politics, slogans, murder, rape, statistics, etc..., can help us establish which patterns are used more than others, and establish an understanding if such a behavior is persisting over time. In doing so it is of need to identify both individual and collective quantities. For example, while the FBI may keep a record of total rapes, murders, etc., they do not necessarily take into consideration the quantity of individual acts... such that whether the rape/murder/robbery of a single person is the typical pattern and which quantity may be the extreme. (See: Uniform Crime Reporting Handbook.) It is uniquely necessary to make a correlation with other types of cognitive activity in other subjects in order to mark similarities or differences. We need to establish the (numerical) range of cognitive activity amongst the species in order to access limitations and how fast or slow (if any) changes cognitive-behavioral changes are taking place due to time, place and the incremental deteriorations taking place with the planet and solar system. It is a type of infinitesimal calculus that has not been on the radar of most researchers of human behavior.

    With respect to statistics about Gangs (for example), the names of gangs typically indicate 2, 3, and 4 words, where the word "the" is a common 1st word in several, but not all cases. The usage of numbers does take place but one must notice that the values do not go into the thousands range. For example, a gang may name themselves in association with a street such as 116th Street Crew, with several gangs taking on the value of 13, 211 or 311. Interestingly, while there are some which have a "triad" reference, we do not see the usage of "Binary, Dual, Double", etc., but we do see the "four" in the "four seas" group and the "five" in the "five families" group. On must wonder why the values of "666" or "555" are not being routinely used, since the former has the reputation of being associated with the "power" of the anti-Christ and the latter is the number associated with Hitler's membership in the German worker's Party, even though he was actually only the 55th member, but those in charge of membership wanted to give the impression of having more members... and thus more (growing) power. While the aforementioned link to the Wikipedia list of gangs is not meant to be a definitive list, one should look at other sources before placing the names of gangs into lists in order to identify the quantity of words being used most frequently and those less so. Aside from the typical interests of gangs espoused by Law Enforcement, the names of gangs reveal a standard cognitive profile. Law enforcement agencies do not typically reference the correlated dimensions of linguistics and cognitive profiling beyond the Modus operandi distinctions. Though useful as it may be, it does not tell the larger story of human cognitive development through a comparative approach of enumeration. No less, let us also include a reference to nicknames of individual gang members in order to notice the predominant usage of single-word references.

    An excerpt taken from the last example provides an interesting insight not only into how we view names as reference words, but I argue that the recurring quantity is indicative of a cognitive profile we need to take a closer look at when we combine examples of enumeration from multiple subjects. Many of the references give the impression that millions of people have a cognitive profile similar to that of ancient primitive peoples learning to develop a counting system, that we may generalize with a three-word designation as "one- two- many", which means numbers have names (and are given entitlements such as being "number 1, First", or 2nd place, or part of a Trinity, etc...) just as some names are provided with social entitlements which others are not, and may otherwise be part of those names we see as commonplace/standard, those which are related to strength, beauty, social position, and those which are frowned on, egotistical exaggerations, questioned, to be suspicious of, seen as affectations, etc... Indeed, the idea of "what's in a name" can have different discussions. Take for example:

    We also need to note that the idea of having power over someone is granted by knowing their name is depicted in the story of Rumplestilskin, and is an expectation in common business discourse, not to mention the idea of "dropping a name" during a conversation as if to suggest some personal identification with someone thought to be important, tough, strong, rich, popular, etc... However, we don't typically view this same idea with respect to numbers, even though we have given names to numbers and use certain patterns of numbers more frequent than others, just as Nature does. Whereas in the case of the "teens" we repeat ourselves and many people are not consciously aware there are seven "teen" (stands for "ten") descriptions: 10+3 (13), ten+4 (14), ten+5 (15), ten+6 (16), ten+7 (17), ten+8 (18), ten+9 (19).

    Hence, let us ask the unusual question of whether (anthropomorphically speaking) Nature is playing some "name game" by its repeated usage of certain numbers and certain number patterns across the spectrum of different subjects? Indeed, why does Nature use certain numbers more so than others, and yet alternates in its usage in different contexts, as if the alternation is a type of code which humanity has been appreciably too ignorant to consciously acknowledge or ever consider beyond the stage of simple observation and philosophical exercise? Or is humanity simply projecting its own number/naming cognitive activity onto perceptions and such patterns do not actually exist in Nature... we only think they do? For example, do we actually exist on the 3rd planet or only think we do, and prefer the "3" designation more than a 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 position.... or otherwise?

    When we find that jokes frequently end with a 3rd placement punch-line, is the designation of the Earth as the 3rd planet to be interpreted as a joke's punch-line used by the supposed God or some other perspicacious being, that uses the punch-line format as a Rule of Three? Jokes typically have a primary, secondary and tertiary structure, with the 3rd as the punch-line, just as we see in the typical Syllogism (Which I refer to as "silly-gisms" when I come to think about the child's syllogism noted as "Fuzzy Wuzzy was a Bear- Fuzzy Wuzzy had no hair- Fuzzy Wuzzy wasn't fuzzy was he?". If not labeled as a syllogism, one might prefer to use the more elaborated three-pattern of Major Premise- Minor Premise- Conclusion.) Many jokes revolve around the use of three characters (see also: Three Characters in Polish Jokes; Rule of Three (writing) ) just like in Fairytales, and in fact may be an adult rendition of the same practice used by adult-created stories for children. Indeed, we find the use of a three-pattern in many contexts and as a rule-of-thumb by some educators.

    In a 2013 article for the New Yorker, Maria Konnikova wrote about the social phenomenon of "name-signaling" — essentially the implicit messages we send through our names, these labels for ourselves we don’t even choose, without realizing it:

    I

    n a study of children in a Florida school district, conducted between 1994 and 2001, the economist David Figlio demonstrated that a child’s name influenced how he or she was treated by the teacher, and that differential treatment, in turn, translated to test scores. Figlio isolated the effects of the students’ names by comparing siblings — same background, different names. Children with names that were linked to low socioeconomic status or being black [...] were met with lower teacher expectations.

    While the study Konnikova discussed ultimately probably dealt with how public school teachers in Florida from 1994 to 2001 were apparently kind of racist, Konnikova writes that the name-signaling effect can also play into our biases about which mediocre people we should elevate. "We see a name, implicitly associate different characteristics with it, and use that association, however unknowingly, to make unrelated judgments about the competence and suitability of its bearer."

    As a final note on gangs, it is of need to list International gangs, National gangs, and local gangs, as well as reference the names of gangs (criminal or otherwise) from the distant past, such as work gangs (sometimes called work details); which include the groups assigned to given tasks such as when building a pyramid, canal, ship, and other groups such as collective and individual military units, explorations, etc... And despite the egotistical multi-name referencing used by some individuals (typically described by motion picture script writers for the Hispanic nobility), the acquired standard appears to be three names (first-middle-last), while some prefer two names (first-last or the arrangement of last-first such as in the Chinese culture), and the usage of one name used by way of familiarity or trying to establish some familiarity.

    Let it be stated that Yes... I see alternative patterns such as 1s, 2s, 4s, 5s, 6s, 7s, 8s, (double numbers, triple numbers) etc... I am not so obsessed with the "three" that I disregard its absence and the presence of other 'enumeratable' patterns. Indeed, if the "three" is so important, why then do Astronomers speak often of a Binary star system and not some other pattern... unless theirs is an exercise of repetition, and there are other star groupings which can also be routinely named? No less, why is it that transitional development stages between quantities are largely unseen or not mentioned in different subject areas? Why is it that when a person asks others which is their favorite number, they do not compare the result with other patterns which arise in multiple subjects? For example, this post: (And the World's favorite number is..., describes the number 7 as the "World's" favorite, but doesn't emphasize that the word "world" is a generality and refers only to the small number of people ho voted.

    What should also be discussed is the absence of most numbers, when the infinity of number possibilities are taken into account. Indeed, why only a handful of numbers being mentioned, as well as only a small quantity of numbers referenced by Numerologists on their different webpages? Why is humanity only using a handful of numbers in a repetitive fashion, such as two numbers on sports jerseys, where the usage of three numbers frequently occurs by way of pinning some square or rectangle piece of paper or light cardboard to a sports outfit such as seen in jogging or cycling? Rationalize the reason any way you want, but the fact remains we see the same activity of conservation-of-number being used in all subjects. We see "threes" in physics, story telling, and anatomy... and yet I have not encountered anyone making note of the fact that Mathematics appears to be a Westernized rendition of the Easternized Yin/Yang list of dualities; where in the case of the Yin/Yang development we see an attempt to reach a "three" formula of cognition by way of I-Ching Triads (which are actually embellished Biads); and the case of Mathematics we see a few examples of the "three" orientation in such uses as Trigonometry, Pythagorean theorem, and the Mean-Median-Mode reference, but that Mathematics is appreciably stuck in the usage of dichotomies, giving us an indication of where human cognition is... or let us say hasn't achieved yet, just like those seeking to establish a Trinary (Ternary) computing system to replace the present Binary one, and biology, by way of genetics, established a Triplet code for the duality of paired amino acids... not to mention the Three Germ layers used by more complex organisms compared to the previous Two Germ layers used by less complex life forms... unless of course we say that going from a 2 to a 3 pattern has nothing to do with an evolutionary advancement and references more so a step further along a course related to a relatively short shelf life?


    In my research I have found multiple alternative references to the "phenomena of three" to the extent one might encounter (for example) such labels as:

    The usage of dualities appears to be paramount in Mathematics, suggesting it is ripe for an evolution into a "trinary" (ternary) stage, just as those who are trying to do the same with computers (moving beyond the binary to the trinary). Whereas Mathematics as it presently is plays an important role in many sectors of society, I view it as a crude tool whose partitioners have a long history to cull methods (and mistakes) from, but that like any tool, crude or otherwise, it can be seen as very effective in the hands of a skilled technician. Let me provide a few examples of Mathematical dualities which (to me) reads like a Westernized (transformed) list of dualities seen in the (far East originating) Yin/Yang:

    • Rational numbers/ Irrational numbers
    • Add/ Subtract
    • Multiply/ Divide
    • Less than/ Greater than (yes I know, "equal to")
    • Subscript/ Superscript
    • Both sides of an equation
    • X axis/ Y axis
    • Numerator/ Denominator
    • Positive/ Negative
    • Real numbers/ Imaginary numbers
    • Secant/ Tangent (of a circle)
    • Major segment/ Minor segment (of a circle)
    • Radius/ Diameter (of a circle)
    • Whole number/ Fraction
    • Lines/ Line segment
    • Equal to/ Not equal to
    • Periodic/ Non-periodic functions
    • Logarithmic function/ Exponential function
    • Percentage/ Original amount
    • Right angle (but no opposite "Left angle", it is called the Hypotenuse)
    • Integer (but no "Outeger", it is called a Negative number)
    • etc...

    Prime numbers— Various proofs that every odd number is prime:

    • Mathematician: "3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime. The result follows by induction."
    • Physicist: "3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is experimental error..."
    • Engineer: "3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is prime..."
    • Computer programmer: "2 is prime, 2 is prime, 2 is prime, 2 is prime, ..."
    • Economist: "2 is prime, 4 is prime, 6 is prime, 8 is prime..."

    Source: 3-patterned jokes: Engineer, Scientist, Mathematician


    In my search of the "threes phenomena", I search multiple subject areas and frequently find them named or displayed differently, sometimes without any specific enumeration. While some people may argue that any number can be found if one looks for them, I have not found this to be the case; and neither do these same people take the time to catalogue what they find either to support or refute their initial ideas concerning frequency of one or another pattern. Most often I find a person reaches a cognitive limit after a short period of time or cataloguing and provide an excuse for not continuing by stating that "there are a lot of them", or hundreds, thousands, or some other word used to reference a limitation of effort (or effort with no personally required reward). The following image provides a very short list of enumeration examples and the list following are some of the ways in which "threes" may be presented.


    Examples of enumeration from different examples

    In the following image, I elaborated and added to the previous list of enumeration examples:


    Enlarged list of enumeration examples

    • groups of three
    • sets of three
    • three-patterned ensembles (see for example: The Devil's Advocate page 14A)
    • patterns-of-three
    • two-plus-one
    • five-minus-two
    • seven plus or minus two (yielding a 5-7-9 triple)... [This is seen in the oft' cited paper: The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two by George A. Miller]
    • triad(s), trinity(s), Trimurti, triple(s), triangle(s), triplet...
    • ternary (such as in a ternary/trinary computer code as opposed to a binary code)
    • etc...

    Let me also make reference to ideas such as: three items in close proximity to one another and three connected events which may take place over a short, medium, or long period of time in one area and time period or multiple areas and time periods. Widely spread time periods and places give some researchers and casual readers a point to argue about concerning groups of three, since their mentality is to believe in only those patterns with items taking place at the same time in the same sentence, paragraph or story in a given text and do not allow for examples to be constructed over vast distances, time periods or different cultures. They feel that such a methodology is akin to "fudging the numbers" on a tax return or accounting ledger and others colloquially suggest that one can find any pattern if one looks for it... even though they overlook and fail to comment that not all patterns are either easily identifiable or readily available to provide an example thereof.

    (Second half of this page moved to page 17)



    Date of (series) Origination: Saturday, 14th March 2020... 6:11 AM
    Date of Initial Posting (this page): 1st March 2022... 6:04 AM
    Updated Posting:Sunday, 18th September 2022... 8:17 AM