(The Study of Threes)
http://threesology.org
In my research efforts regarding the many examples of three-patterned ideas taken from a variety of subject areas, I have encountered various types of arguments against this reference of Threes as having any real value, or arguments which use the "three" to make a point for an alternative position of intellectual consideration:
Argument:
The activity of collecting examples which occur in a pattern-of-three is just plain numerology (or just another "flavor" of numerology).
Response to argument:
In traditional numerology, a Numerologist may attribute the "3" with a position of "power," but in Threesology, a Threesologist views it merely as a tool of reference that is akin to a Microscopist's staining technique or an Anthropologist's method of assessing fossil age such as in dating carbon deposits, or a Police Detective's procedure of dusting for fingerprints. A Threesologist may alternatively use the "three" as a type of Swiss Army knife, multi-tipped screwdriver kit, or as a belt from which can be hung a variety of tools that are needed by someone engaged in an eclectic task requiring different tools. And yes, a Threesologist will sometimes fashion their own tool for a particular task at hand, such as using a coat hanger to fish open a door latch.
Argument:
The "Three" is a representation of the profound influence and presence of the Trinity and therefore has no other meaning.
Response to argument:
We must wonder if this view is just another "personal interest centeredness" akin to the ancient religious view which insisted that the Earth was the center of the Universe and that anyone who believed that the Sun was at the center (like Copernicus) was practicing blasphemy.
Argument:
Collecting "threes" is a type of obsessive compulsion to conceal some form of mental illness.
Response to argument:
It could be argued that any type of collecting (such as antiques, marbles, baseball cards, aluminum cans, dirty magazines, comic books, CD's, photographs, etc.,) is an indication of obsessive compulsiveness. However, it is of greater value to point out that a "mental illness" form of obsessive compulsiveness typically interferes with an individual's ability to do anything else such as sleep, eat, work, etc...
Argument:
If we made a collection of Twos, Fours, Sevens, etc., these lists would be just as large (and hence, just as significant) as threes.
Response to argument:
The question to be asked is why don't we encounter such lists being made? Why is it that more effort is being expended on collecting patterns-of-three? Why are lists of twos, fives, sevens, etc., particularly small and do not contain a large assortment of different examples from a variety of subject areas, or in any respect, only a few subjects? Why is there a predominant recurring interest in finding and viewing the three in so many things?
Argument:
Interest in the "three" is merely due to cultural-specific influences.
Response to argument:
Does the recurrence of three-patterned organization in genetics (DNA's triplet codon system) and physiology (such as the three bones in the ear) represent a cultural influence on genetics and physiology or a cultural influence on how the human mind organizes perceptions? Is the placement of the Earth in the 3rd position from the Sun due to a cultural influence? Do infants babble in chunks-of-three due to a cultural influence? Can we alter the babbling structure of infants by subjecting pregnant mothers to a non-three referencing environment?
Argument:
Any number can provide a measure that is used as a statistical value.
Response to argument:
This is true, but why is the "three" being used in the way it is and no other number? Why do we find a recurrent usage of the "three" in so many subject areas under the guise of different labels and varying forms? For example, religion calls the three a trinity, genetics may call it a triplet, Sociologists may call it a triad, or the word triangle, pyramid, or Vee-shaped may offered.
Argument:
People tend to be more impressed by evidence that seems to confirm some relationship. Thus many are convinced their dreams are prophetic because a few have come true; they neglect or fail to notice the many that have not.
Consider also the belief that "the phone always rings when I'm in the shower." If it does ring while you are in the shower, the event will stand out and be remembered. If it doesn't ring, that non-event probably won't even register.
People want to see order, pattern and meaning in the world. Consider, for example, the common belief that things like personal misfortunes, plane crashes, and deaths "happen in threes." Such beliefs stem from the tendency of people to allow the third event to define the time period. If three plane crashes occur in a month, then the period of time that counts as their "happening together" is one month; if three crashes occur in a year, the period of time is stretched. Flexible end points reinforce such beliefs.
We also tend to believe what we want to believe. A majority of people think they are more intelligent, more fair-minded and more skilled behind the wheel of an automobile than the average person. Part of the reason we view ourselves so favorably is that we use criteria that work to our advantage. As economist Thomas Schelling explains, "Everybody ranks himself high in qualities he values: careful drivers give weight to care, skilled drivers give weight to skill, and those who are polite give weight to courtesy." This way everyone ranks high on his own scale.
Perhaps the most important mental habit we can learn is to be cautious in drawing conclusions. The "evidence" of everyday life is sometimes misleading.
http://bwxixi.myetang.com/cet/read/b4_lcw_5.html
Response to argument:
If evidence doesn't confirm some type of relationship, some association, then we use the absence of evidence to infer a non-relationship characteristic. In addition, we must also ask why it is "three" that is used to frequently define a so-called flexible time period and not some other quantity. Surely the frequency of usage of a particular "time period qualifier" (by so many people) indicates something other than arbitrariness or a singularly selective belief system.
Argument:
Collections of "threes" (or any number value) is an indication of numerically rationalized superficial correlations.
Note: this was one of the considerations I came up with when I began to seriously reflect on the development of a long list of threes. I honestly wanted to know if my behavior in collecting examples of "threes" from a variety of subject areas was just some neurotically designed diversionary excursion from so-called "normal" interests. Then again, (as I came to my own defence,) if we look throughout history, the "weird" interests of some have produced some of our greatest medicines, technology, and... (let us be honest,) nonsense as well. I wanted to think I was part of the "misunderstood" group of individuals like Copernicus and Columbus and not those who have engaged in unapplicable flights of fancy such as turning lead into gold, finding a passage way to China through the interior of the Earth, able to leap tall buildings with a single bound, being able to make air, fire, water, or earth do one's bidding, etc...
Response to argument:
I "answered" my own consideration with another consideration of asking why such a number value was used and not other numbers when there are so many to choose from? Why is it that those who would claim that the number 7 is of primary importance don't provide examples from a variety of subject areas? Why are researchers and idea developers not using a 7 pattern or some other numerically identifiable structure? Why is a "pattern-of-three" such a dominant recurring theme in so many subject areas? Some examples are no doubt due to cultural influences, but others appear to be a recurrent formula used by human mental activity. For example, are there actually three families of fundamental atomic particles or is this structure merely and intellectual convenience shared by the world's physicists? But, again, why is a value of "3" used and not some other organizational pattern?
Argument:
(In Regards to threes information found at the old Buckland's Third Revolution site:)
This author uses extensive pontification to argue that we are evolving from bi-symetrical world to a tri-symetrical world. The main and most important outcome of this will be a three party system.
http://www.travel.com/World.dir/Bookmarks/A/angela45/Worst_Webpages/
Response to argument:
Angela has misinterpreted the information on the old "Buckland's Third Revolution" web pages in which I posted information from the "threes poster".
In fact, I am arguing that we are evolving along a 1- 2- 3 maturational development sequence of which adopting a three-party political system would seem to be a logical outcome of necessity if there can in fact be made a case for a three-patterned developmental trend in human cognition.
http://pub5.bravenet.com/guestbook/show.php?usernum=402126608&vid=
Argument:
In Bayesian terms, however, a probability is really an estimate of the degree of belief (as in confidence, not blind faith) that a researcher can put into a particular hypothesis, given all she knows about the problem at hand. Your degree of belief that threes come out once every six rolls of the die comes from both a priori considerations about fair dice, and the empirical fact that you have observed this sort of events in the past. However, should you witness a repeated specified outcome over and over, your degree of belief in the hypothesis of a fair die would keep going down until you strongly suspect foul play. It makes intuitive sense that the degree of confidence in a hypothesis changes with the available evidence, and one can think of different scientific hypotheses as competing for the highest degree of Bayesian probability. New experiments will lower our confidence in some hypotheses and increase it in others. Importantly, we might never be able to settle on one final hypothesis because the data may be roughly equally compatible with several alternatives (a frustrating situation very familiar to any scientist and known in philosophy as the under-determination of hypotheses by the data).
http://www.2think.org/rs-2002-1.shtml
Response to argument:
If God doesn't play dice with the Universe as claimed by Einstein, then perhaps God doesn't play chess, checkers or billiards either (irrespective of quantum particle entanglements). But nonetheless, we humans have designed a pair of dice with dots arranged in a 1 - 2 - 3 fashion. And we have board games in which pieces can be moved horizontally- vertically- diagonally. No less, with respect to billiards, we not only frequently organize the balls with a triangle shaped (geometric "three") rack, but typical shots include a one, two, or three-ball interaction. With the increasing complexity defined either as luck or skill, depending on whether or not the action is repeatable (like reproducible experiments). Yet, many observes overlook the "one- two- three" arrangements and focus only on a singular pattern such as two dice, opposing players (or teams), and the singularity of number pattern associated with the face value of dot arrangement or individual billiard balls.
If there was no recurring evidence for the "three" there would be no need to consider it as being representative of something other than a mere common occurrence under particular circumstances. An alternative to using the "three" as a referencing tool has been exercized such as in describing individualized qualities (for example the Priestly, Warrior, Artisan functions of Dumezilian theory). Nonetheless, there are three individual qualities. Does a description of quality as opposed to a description of quantity suggest something more important and non-numerological?
In addition, it should be noted that a usage of the value "7" as having some significance in gambling environments may identify the perpetuation of an interest in this value as it related to a perception of the number of stars in the Big Dipper, as viewed and counted by some ancient cultures which also made usage of the Swastika symbol derived by observing the Big Dipper during the two Solstices and two Equinoxes (which give the impression that the 7-star constellation is spinning). In other words, it is an indication not necessarily of any "7"-value significance, but of the antiquity of gambling itself.
For example, instead of the 3 blind wisemen and the elephant scenario in which the 3 wisemen give their personal qualitative assessment of a part of an elephant they are examining, be it a leg, the trunk, or tail, and then adamantly claim that what they have found has no commonality, let us use a similar analogy involving 3 shirts:
While the above group of shirts would generally, in a collective way, be called T-shirts, they might individually, in different contexts, be referred to with a specialized name attributed to some specific function or occasion. It will then be this reference which takes on relevance to the observer and other referencing labels may not be considered, be overlooked, or even be intentionally disregarded because they imply a lesser form of distinction than that which the observer is using as a means of promoting an ideal. In this same way, by referring to a "three" as a specific Trinity, a specific Triad, a specific form of Trebling, etc., such delineation may act as a reverse type of dilution that obscures a commonality.
If we were to lengthen the sleeves of one of the above shirts, some observers may still refer to it as a T-shirt because its shape resembles the letter T. However, even though other shirts also give an impression of the letter T, they have been given individualized names referring to the context in which they are worn. For example, someone may not want to identify an undershirt as a gym shirt, because a gym shirt, to them, is associated with dirty, smelly sports activities, but an undershirt implies cleanliness and social appropriateness. Likewise, some may view the wearing of a t-shirt as inappropriate attire for gym class since, to them, it refers to the wearing of street clothes and the person is not participating in a class activity like everyone else who does comply with a particular dress code, even though a gym shirt and t-shirt are actually the same. A more imaginative observer might choose the letter W, M, E, or the number 3, by simply rotating the shirt either visually or manually. Given another context and socialized acceptance of a commercialized product logo, the so-called everyday T-shirt might be labeled the W-shirt, M-shirt, E-shirt, or 3-shirt:
While such labels might be viewed as weird or strange, they are nonetheless just as applicable and recognizable once we permit ourselves to look beyond the boundaries of conventional acceptance.
Another argument that may at sometime arise due to the perception of some readers is my reference of the 3 to 1 ratio:
| THREE Items | Separator type | ONE Item |
| North~ South~ East | "and" | West |
| Winter~ Spring~ Summer | "and" | Fall |
| 1- potato~ 2- potato~ 3- potato | no signifier "potato" | 4 |
| 2 bits~ 4 bits~ 6 bits | "a" | Dollar |
| 1st example 2nd example 3rd example | "comma" | 1 example |
| 1- "st" 2- "nd" 3- "rd" | subtle cognitive change? | 4- "th" 5- "th" 6- "th"... |
In this context I am giving reference to a distinct division between three items and a single item, which are separated by a sort of "demarcation line" in the form of a word such as "and," "a," or a "comma," though other forms undoubtedly exist. However, in referencing an expression such as Tom, Dick, and Harry as a three-patterned example, and not calling it a two to one ratio example, it is understandable that some confusion may arise to the point of appearing contradictory or even unprofessionally biased towards the "three," to an extent of disregarding rules in order to fit a preconceived desirable outcome. If in fact that there is a cultural bias taking place so much so that the Tom, Dick, and Harry example had some initial two + one beginning, it is clear that in many contexts, these three names do in fact reference a "3" orientation and not a 2 and 1 organization. Nonetheless, other similar formulations may indeed be a reference which identifies two that are different from a singular, even though they are associated together as a group.
Your Questions, Comments or Additional Information are welcomed:
Herb O. Buckland
herbobuckland@hotmail.com