Threesology Research Journal

3s Enthusiasts

(The Study of Threes)
http://threesology.org

With respect to the Out Of Africa hypothesis in terms of hominid progression, even though there is some controversy concerning the direction of the expansion there-from, for this present discussion; I will say that the expansion spread out in a dominant fashion towards Asia along the coast or other bodies of water where food was easiest to obtain due to prevailing knowledge at the time, and then spread inland towards Europe. This is not to say there weren't individuals nor individual family groups which didn't venture inland prior to a larger expansion, nor that there weren't those that followed a western coastal trek along the European continent, but that the dominant trek out of Africa was towards Asia. Hence, from Africa, into Asia, then into Europe. From this is then derived the group of peoples know as Indo-European. (India[n]-Asian...European)


Yet, let's take a look at some other ideas regarding modern human origins.



It may be more appropriate to say Afro-Indo-European though the usage of the "Indo" (for India-n) obscures a readily visible acknowledgment of the underlying Asian label. While a person from India might acknowledge themselves as living on a continent that we of today label Asia, the dark complexion easily suggests a link with an African past that some might conclude is provocatively sustained by environmental conditions beneath a torturously hot sun. However, irrespective of other considerations that some readers may entertain, the point to be made is that the word (or label) "European" is placed last... in the third position. We wouldn't customarily say Euro-Indian, nor Euro-African, nor Euro-Asian, even though there are some people who may consider themselves as such. They do so only in an after-the-fact re-appraisal of their present circumstances and personal heritage. Nor do we frequently read, hear or speak phrases such as Asia-African, Asia-European, or Asia-Asian. And we quite possibly would never hear the phrase Afro-African, though the term Afro-American has been used with humility and conscientious (and at times, ostentatiously) by Blacks in America seeking to establish a personalized cultural identity in a culture that has been a stew of many cultures, most of which did not develop a brought-to-the-fore identity crisis (righteously defined by a civil rights movement), by being displaced from their original homeland by way of enslavement.


In terms of the hominid Afro-Asia-European progression, where Africans and an African culture appear to have come first on the scene, followed by Asians with an Asian culture, and then Europeans... the operative word may be "culture." Even though there may have been individuals and groups that went against the grain of their hominid brothers and sisters by venturing forth into the wilderness while most of their tribe remained close to a particular body of water, these adventurous rebels did not establish a culture. Sure, we may uncover their fossils due to events which make us fortuitously able to find them, this does not mean they contributed to the development of a later peopling of the area. Whereas we might want to respect them for their courageous spirit in braving the unknown, they did not contribute to later arrivals that established a sustaining culture. While they contribute to our own culture of anthropological inquiry, it must be further added in this statement that our analysis and usage of information may turn out to be, and have, as much value as the rebel who heard a different drum beat that no one in their coming future would hear, or understand, or march in cadence with. In other words, our scientific efforts of the present may have little if any impact on a future culture.


I am not talking about research into the "threes" phenomena as an isolated act of rebelliousness in the face of dualities, dichotomies or any double related formula. While we of the "threes community" would quite possibly acknowledge that we don't know why we have an interest in "threes" — though some might well provide a plausible reason— let me offer a consideration. However, let me first provide the names of a few of those who have taken time to consciously make a list of "threes" in one fashion or another, a compilation in which I myself am included:


Vladimir Igorevich Arnold
Mitch Axelrod
Patricia Barry
Michael Begeman
T.J Biggerstaff (and C. Richter)
Dr. Paul Boroff
Greg Boyd
Michael J Brabazon
Herb O. Buckland
E. W. Bullinger
R.H. Charles
L.B. Croft
Sean D'Souza
Aloysius Dalli
Chelsea DeArmond
Bob Dorough
Alan Dundez
Neil Earle
Michael Eck
Rich Enz
Sally Faubion
Henry Gee
Anthony Giddons
Jeff Grigg
Molly Gordon
Geoff Hart
Daniel A. Helminiak
Deborah Houlding
Carl Jung
Edward Kalinowski
Robert Keidel
Simon Kelsey
Dr. Young Kyoon Kim
Mark Kleinhaut
Bill Long
Iain MacAnTsaoir
Patrick and Peggy Mazzuca
Maimu (?)
Richard D. Marcus
Tim McElligott
Dr. McNulty
Allen H. Merriam
Brian Miller
Graham Morehead
Charles Sanders Pierce
Richard Phillips
Michael C. Pickett
Patricia Wyche Post
Yvonne Rathbone
Diana Ratliff
Fred Showker
Matthew Arnold Stern
Douglas Stringham
Henri Sullivan
David Tarrant
Kirby Tepper
Variety5160 (Internet 3's page 21)
Herbert George Wells
Kenneth R. White
Montague Whitsel
Donald Wilson
Yaybob (Internet 3's page 21)
Zoroaster (Internet 3's page 21)
John Zuchero

Even though I may have placed the name "Young Kyoon Kim" in the incorrect slot of alphabetization since some Asian names present the surname first and not last as is the custom for some cultures, the above list nonetheless points out a dominant male European assemblage. This is not to say there aren't others in the African and Asian cultures, the compilation of which would require the ability to read different languages, I am not aware of any predominant Asian nor African-based interest in "threes." Though this interest may be nothing more than an indication of a culture-specific orientation or even obsession, it doesn't excuse the fact that there is a dominant presence of "threes" in order for such an orientation or obsession to take place.


But out of all the millions of people in (a) threes prevalent culture(s), why are there only a small handful who take the time to write something about the recurring instance of "threes" even if it is only within the confines of their personal interest such as a job, profession, or hobby? Why don't Africans or Asians? Or do they but off-handedly dismiss such an acknowledgement as a curiosity or irrelevance to their specific interest because others involved in the same interest are mentioning a recurrence of threes? Perhaps more Indo-Europeans recognize and acknowledge the recurrence of "threes" because the "three" is part of the maturational development of the third born group of hominids called European, or if you prefer, Indo-European? For example, the "Tripartite Ideology" idea of Georges Dumezil with respect to the identification of three socio-economic classes or divisions which may be labeled Priestly- Warrior- Artisan/laborer. Along with this we must ask if those who see the "three" are somehow more maturationally developed than those who do not. While many can be taught to recognize the "three," most do not do so on their own with any sustained personalized interest. Are those that see the "three" (in a broader sense then mere religion), those who are born with a "threes" gene?


Are "threes" oriented individuals carrying a gene specific to this mentality, whether we might want to derisively call it an aberration or pompously announce it as some especial attribute? Are all of us "threes" oriented individuals harboring an expressed trait of a gene that remains dormant in others? But what makes this presumed genetic characteristic manifest itself in some while in others it hibernates or is absent? Why do some experience a gradual realization of the "threes" but others experience what may be described as an epiphany... a very bright illumination of some realization that may momentarily overwhelm one's consciousness to the point of wanting to shout it to the world as some relevant "answer" to questions that may or may not have been adequately articulated with any measurable coherence in agreement with contemporary assumptions?


Humorously, maybe we were all dropped on our heads too often as kids. Or may be we all ate the same hitherto unknown strain of genetically altered food. Or maybe every "threes" person is an alien like myself. HA! But all said, what's next? Are we the precursor to a new branch of hominid in the making? A new form of consciousness, whether described as a "third consciousness" or not? Or is our "threes" orientation just another flavor of Crop Circle, Big Foot, sports, television game show or soap opera orientation; or the basic innumerated beginnings of a complex structure with its own presently unknown mathematical extrapolations? Is it an alchemy or astrology that will blossom into a science... a doodling that will become a full-blown artistic endeavor... or misunderstanding because we are unable to recognize (metaphorically speaking,) the forest for the "threes?"


Time will tell... all three by three parts of it: Past- Present- Future... Hours, Minutes, Seconds... Days- Weeks- Months... Years- Decades- Centuries...


Note: Some readers might suggest that the Philosopher Charles S. Pierce should be included in the above list of 3s Enthusiasts because of his recurring usage of different "threes" structured ideas. And though I might well agree on some points, it should be realized that it does not appear to be the case that he actually had a "threes phenomena" perspective. But I could be wrong. So let's include his name as well as others activities involve the usage of threes, such as Herbert George Wells. just for the sake of conversation. While some in the foregoing list did or do have an interest in the threes phenomena, I am equally not sure that all of them did or do have a personal interest therein. Hence, we come up with three divisions to the list with respect to those who:


  1. Describe the "threes" as a phenomena occurring in a variety of subject areas (and who may or may not develop a theory as to why such occurs).
  2. Describe the "threes" occurrences as supporting the belief in a given subject area which uses a "three" model of self-identification.
  3. Describe a "threes" usage without a knowledge of the threes phenomena diversity.

While some readers may want to add their own varieties, this short list provides a beginning point of departure for other considerations.




Updated Posting: Saturday, 08-July-2017... 6:49 AM
Your Questions, Comments or Additional Information are welcomed:
Herb O. Buckland
herbobuckland@hotmail.com