(Realization of Trichotomic Thinking)
→→→ Tripartite Collection 1 ←←←
| EP 1 EP 1b |
EP 2 EP 2b |
EP 3 EP 3b |
EP 4 | EP 5 | EP 6 |
| EP 7 | EP 8 | EP 9 | EP 10 | EP 11 EP 11b |
EP 12 EP 12b |
Trichotomizologists as of Nov. 22, 2024
The word "Evolution" belies itself because it does not mean that it too is evolving as presently defined by humans. In many instances that which we describe as having been originated by an Evolutionary process, does not appear to be a statement of being dynamic. In other words, whereas we have some product of biology that has been created by an evolutionary process does not mean the product nor the particular process for this product also continues to evolve. They appear to be stationary in their re-appearance and not show a change. The perceived changes appear to be changes in humans are changing their opinion about a given form and/or function. Additional features not seen before can become mistaken for a new development where the development has more to do with human perception than that being observed.
For example, the Triplet code of DNA appears to be static though there are different forms of it as well as different forms of RNA. With DNA we humans count three main types labeled A, D and Z and with RNA we count 3 main ones labeled Messenger, Ribosomal and Transfer. My usage of the word "count" is so that I can use the analogy of that described as an Ordinal number system such as 1, 2, 3... etc... The Letters A, D, Z are arranged in an orderly way according to the English alphabet. Whether the letters are arbitrarily placed or not, they describe the use of an applied cognitively arranged sequence. In common usage both the alphabet and numbering systems are provided as a quantitative system expressing designated values such as ones, tens, hundreds, etc... With respect to numbers, in such a value system of notation (where money is often though of) we find the additional use of a three-patterned grouping followed by a comma, whereby the ones-tens-hundreds are followed by a comma before we begin designating higher values referencing three valuations of thousands followed by a comma before another set of three values called millions are applied; and then we do the same thing for each higher set of ones-tens-hundreds for larger valued groups. And whether you say the grouping rule is derived from some arbitrary idea originating long ago, this does not change the fact that a pattern-of-three grouping is used and that grouping is marked off as a distinction by using a comma. Likewise for the triplet code of DNA in association with RNA and Proteins, even if the idea of a similar value system of enumeration does not come to mind.
At this moment let me point out I am trying to show a difference between cognitive behavior where individualized patterns can be acknowledged and listed so as to indicate states of mental activity. The Persistent usage of dualities in Psychology, Mathematics and Computer language remind me of the "2" standard of conceptualization that primitive peoples no doubt experienced when developing a counting system, but that the persistent usage of dualities suggests human cognitive behavior is somehow stagnant, though it has the potential to move forward. This stagnation occurring with institutions having such a profound effect and control of human behavior in many regards, is rather disturbing when many of us are expecting the human species to evolve, yet its evolution is being forced to comply with practiced philosophies of antiquated perception. People are being forced to comply with a usage of dichotomy when their brain is stretching out for a trichotomy. And yet, this may not be the case for every single person.
Like the presence of an evolved person such as a Cro-magnon showing up amidst a clan of Neanderthals, so too may the human psyche crop up for different people in terms of having a different mindset occurring by way of that which is generally called a Consciousness, but needs to be more definitively defined and described in order that Evolution can proceed. Like plants and animals (including people) which have been domesticated to achieve a desired outcome, so too does human consciousness... away from its current state of being randomly defined and described to fit the predisposition of a given Institution's leadership... be it religion, psychology, philosophy, mathematics, computer language, etc...
Because history reveals that different human groups in different eras for different reasons have engaged in practices of binding early developments so as to produce some perceived standard of excellence or the greater ideal of normalcy, it is of need to consider that the persistent use of dualities is a similar application, whether or not its users are cognizant of doing so. Examples of binding are to be counted along with deliberate attempts to create a desired end result or shape, such as foot binding by Chinese, skull shaping by Africans, castration and circumcision, slavery and indentured servitude, taxation, tithing, laws and wars... if not every aspect of human behavior if we look closely enough at and are not then dismissive of the reference by claiming every behavior is and therefore make allowances for all and not make any attempt to curtail any. Since some people are overwhelmed by small quantities, it stands to reason that they provide themselves with an excuse not to act when confronted by an interpretation suggesting some universality. For some, a count of 1 (such as a god) is over-welming, while others speak of a count of 2 (dualities such as good/evil) as a universality, and still others adopt some third option which they likewise treat as a 1 or 2, but call it by number such as three, four, five... or name it with a word such as plurality, multiplicity, many, etc..., or attempt to describe it by some symbolic referencing which may or may not be adopted by others as a standard conversational tool to be used among a few like-minded others.
The Language used may not have a strict compliance with that which is being described. Hence, numbers may or may not be used to describe a repeating cognitive pattern. Contexts may not necessarily alter the underlying pattern though how a cognitive pattern is used in a given context may have more meaning for some observers who think that the human brain works in specific contexts with specific meanings and does not basic patterns regardless of context and applied meaning. Analogously, one researcher may make a count of different life forms and another research make note of the fact that all of them have DNA. In this respect, one Psychologist may assert that what a person is saying in a given context is more important than any underlying linguistic pattern. If you are looking strictly at humans as complex animals in a dynamic social setting or strictly at them as biological entities derived by a process of (dynamic) evolution, will determine the meaning of the perception; even if the perception of both views reveals a similar underlying pattern such as a recurring preference for using dualities. Using two words such as white and black remains a duality even if an author takes 15 volumes and hundreds of contexts to describe variations. The derivative of a duality remains a duality, unless it reveals the context of a derive triplicity in actual function and not mere labeling.
Clearly we are dealing with an issue of linguistics regarding how, where, when, what for and why particular words, gestures and symbols are used. Yet, another issue to be dealt with is the issue in which Linguistics itself, like Psychology, the yin/yang, computer language, Mathematics and Philosophy all turn to the use of duality without ever paying reference to the notion of Trichotomization. Whereas the idea of more than three may arise and in fact be thought of in terms of plurality or Multiplicity, a third, stand alone category is not part of the intellectual paradigm in use. Let me list a few examples of the duality to be found in Linguistics:
The field of linguistics may be divided in terms of three dichotomies:
- Synchronic versus Diachronic.
- Theoretical versus Applied.
- Microlinguistics versus Macrolinguistics.
- A synchronic description of a language describes the language as it is at a given time; a diachronic description is concerned with the historical development of the language and the structural changes that have taken place in it.
- The goal of theoretical linguistics is the construction of a general theory of the structure of language or of a general theoretical framework for the description of languages; the aim of applied linguistics is the application of the findings and techniques of the scientific study of language to practical tasks, especially to the elaboration of improved methods of language teaching.
- The terms microlinguistics and macrolinguistics are not yet well established, and they are, in fact, used here purely for convenience. The former refers to a narrower and the latter to a much broader view of the scope of linguistics.
- According to the microlinguistic view, languages should be analyzed for their own sake and without reference to their social function, to the manner in which they are acquired by children, to the psychological mechanisms that underlie the production and reception of speech, to the literary and the aesthetic or communicative function of language, and so on.
- In contrast, macrolinguistics embraces all of these aspects of language. Various areas within macrolinguistics have been given terminological recognition: psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, anthropological linguistics, dialectology, mathematical and computational linguistics, and stylistics.
Macrolinguistics should not be identified with applied linguistics. The application of linguistic methods and concepts to language teaching may well involve other disciplines in a way that microlinguistics does not. But there is, in principle, a theoretical aspect to every part of macrolinguistics, no less than to microlinguistics.
Source... Author: Eric P. Hamp, Robert Maynard Hutchins Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus of Linguistics, of Psychology, and of Slavic Languages; Director, Center for Balkan and Slavic Studies, University of Chicago. Co-editor of Readings in Linguistics, I & II; "linguistics." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.
The occurrence of multiple disciplines using dichotomies as an underlying supportive cognitive structure of orientation is a problem... particularly when we notice that not a single one of them has an established view of Trichotomization, despite the recurring presence of this structure in particle physics, evolutionary biology and human anatomy. So what is wrong with humanity not having established such an obvious recognition occurring in Nature and establishing it as a bona fide fact for indulging in the recurring observation thereof as a validity of interpretation?
(For example, such disciplines as: Psychology, Philosophy, Mathematics, Warfare strategy, Game/Gaming Theory, Religion, Eastern spirituality, Computer language/A.I. development, Sports theory, Politics, Commerce/business (in the red/in the black), etc...)And because human civilization refuses to recognize the existence of such a basic structure without subjecting it to dismissiveness or derogatory assassination, what human societies the world over have done is subjected countless generations of children to not exercise the potential development of a 3rd consciousness because it is a language that has a critical venue of opportunity that needs to be taken advantage of, or else-wise be lost, unless a person navigates the terrain of dichotomy and finds a niche for development on their own, within the environment where it can be established with the vernacular of the milieu to which it is applied like a given set of tools a professional may use as they have learned to use them. The recurrent force of so many institutions using dichotomization as a standard by which all adherents must abide, forces the critical window period to collapse, be stunted, or be pruned to the point of incomprehensibility, negligibility or abstraction. Human neither knows how to identify the critical period in which a 3rd consciousness occurs in a given issue, or even that its potential, its possibility of existing is realistic.
And here is where we run into the problems of logic which also are constructed of dualities despite syllogisms (that I prefer to call "sillygisms") being constructed in triadic expressions such as Major premise- Minor premise- Conclusion. Logic is considered to be correct thinking, irrespective of the individual content of the words or symbols being used. Hence, the Alphabet sequence as well as the convention of the number sequence are said to be constructs of logical reasoning... or at least viewed as being logical by the repetition of how the symbols are arranged, regardless of what the letters or numbers are used to reference. Hence, if we say that A and Z are the final items in a series, this is true of the series are viewed right to left... or in any fashion which places them last. While any common person not knowing the rule being applied to this formulaic interpretation will say the logic is wrong or the person is thinking backwards, false, or incorrectly; the logic is proper so long as those involved in the interpretation agree with it.
Analogously, if those of a court are determined to find someone guilty so as to give the impression that their ruling is based on a rule of law, the person can still be innocent though they are judged as being guilty, because the court is the adjudicator of what is to be determined guilt and innocence. A lynch mob carries the same weight of determining guild or innocence, so long as no other model of justice in brought to bear for a comparison. Many governments even forego the use of a trial to claim someone is guilty if that person is perceived to be a threat whose presence in court will show that the court is indulging in falsehoods. Similarly, we see multiple instances in which the U.S. Government has falsified reports, or deliberately lied, or deliberately put innocent people in harms way, in order to create the view for justifying its own criminal activity. Not only governments, but religions and businesses, including the fields of science, medicine, pharmacology, etc... A good example of how a person can be forced into death are the historical images of Joan of Arc, Jesus, and Socrates.
With respect to the current discussion (I have momentarily strayed from), everybody is being taught to interpret evolutionary biology in the same way so as to confirm the views of those who are teaching it in a given way, and thus the notion of applied trichotomization to it and the possibility of discovering a new dimension of consideration of human cognitive activity never comes to mind.
Let us take for example the word duality expressed as one and two lines and then call it a triplicity or triad by simply adding one or the other of the previously stated two. Adding one or two lines to a configuration already containing 1 and/or two lines does not make it an actual third configuration with a distinctly new feature. In other words, it is an embellished duality being offered as an expression that seeks to convey a new concept, but actually needs a different type of symbology to more accurately represent an accomplished achievement and not merely be an expressed opinion of that wanting to be achieved. In such a case, the one-line and two-line configuration needs to have a 3-line configuration but that this may reguire the adoption of a new basis upon which the previous idea of a duality was based. What I am referring (again) to, is the situation that can be seen occurring with the I-Ching representation of an entity called a Triad. It was initially derived from the duality expressed by the earlier Yin/Yang ideology, in which the single line represents the male and the double line the female, corresponding to their sexual "principles". While we can add a 3-line configuration, the underlying duality may well have to be discarded in order that a more suitable platform of original influence be adopted.
Even though I have already spoken of the above 3-part sequencing activity occurring in biology, it is of value to repeat myself just incase the previous information has been glossed over. RNA has a single strand. DNA has a double strand. Corresponding to the old Yin/Yang association, RNA would represent the Male and DNA the female. In order for biology to evolve beyond this duality, a new basis for the adoption of a triplicity was needed. For those readers having difficulty with this word problem, the word "single" references the quantity of "1" and male penis and the "double" references the quantity of "2" and the female vagina. I am not trying to be vulgar and crude, but simplistic for the sake of simplicity. While we see expressed patterns-of-triplicity, in order for biology to evolve beyond this basic pattern-of-duality, a new approach at development has to occur. As for the "3" occurring in this Biological model of value notation, we see a triple strandedness both in Protein structure and... let me add, the very important Collagen. And I don't care if you want to mention the use of the word "quaternary" when speaking of proteins. It is the secondary- tertiary- quaternary structures which represent the conformation or configuration of a protein. A distinction is needed in order for some readers to come to terms with seeing a word such as "quaternary" because they will be thinking in terms of cardinality instead of ordinality. In other words they will read "Primary- Secondary- Tertiary- Quaternary" as a numerical sequence of one-two-three-four, instead of as 0-1-2-3. However, even if your mind does not engage in such conversions, let me point out the overall structure as a conservation. Let me also supply some references to proteins some readers may not be familiar with but may find of interest:
- Although more than 100 amino acids occur in nature, particularly in plants, only 20 types are commonly found in most proteins.
- Plants can synthesize all of the amino acids; animals cannot.
- Chemical analysis of Proteins reveals different but recurring numerical valuations.
- The importance of proteins was recognized by the chemists in the early 19th century who coined the name for these substances from the Greek proteios, meaning "holding first place." Proteins are species-specific; that is, the proteins of one species differ from those of another species. They are also organ-specific; for instance, within a single organism, muscle proteins differ from those of the brain and liver.
- The high protein content of some organs does not mean that the importance of proteins is related to their amount in an organism or tissue; on the contrary, some of the most important proteins, such as enzymes and hormones, occur in extremely small amounts. The importance of proteins is related principally to their function. All enzymes identified thus far are proteins. Enzymes, which are the catalysts of all metabolic reactions, enable an organism to build up the chemical substances necessary for life—proteins, nucleic acids, carbohydrates, and lipids—to convert them into other substances, and to degrade them. Life without enzymes is not possible.
Levels of structural organization in proteins:
Analytical and synthetic procedures reveal only the primary structure of the proteins–that is, the amino acid sequence of the peptide chains. They do not reveal information about the conformation (arrangement in space) of the peptide chain–that is, whether the peptide chain is present as a long straight thread or is irregularly coiled and folded into a globule. The configuration, or conformation, of a protein is determined by mutual attraction or repulsion of polar or nonpolar groups in the side chains (R groups) of the amino acids. The former have positive or negative charges in their side chains; the latter repel water but attract each other. Some parts of a peptide chain containing 100 to 200 amino acids may form a loop, or helix; others may be straight or form irregular coils.
The terms secondary, tertiary, and quaternary structure are frequently applied to the configuration of the peptide chain of a protein. A nomenclature committee of the International Union of Biochemistry (IUB) has defined these terms as follows: The primary structure of a protein is determined by its amino acid sequence without any regard for the arrangement of the peptide chain in space. The secondary structure is determined by the spatial arrangement of the main peptide chain without any regard for the conformation of side chains or other segments of the main chain. The tertiary structure is determined by both the side chains and other adjacent segments of the main chain, without regard for neighbouring peptide chains. Finally, the term quaternary structure is used for the arrangement of identical or different subunits of a large protein in which each subunit is a separate peptide chain. (Article by: Felix Haurowitz, Distinguished Professor of Chemistry, Indiana University, Bloomington. Author of Chemistry and Function of Proteins. "protein." Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.)
RNA, DNA, and Proteins can be referred to as epiphenomena or higher ordering of chemistry but need not be limited to an attendant notion of being second in order. And Chemistry is a higher order functionality of basic atomic structure. Chemistry is oriented towards an understanding of two or more interactive molecules (and compounds) and not underlying sub-atomic realm. The three germ layers pertaining to animal life, are an epiphenomena of that which preceeded them in Evolution. However, instead of looking at the word "Evolution" and thinking of it as referencing an earlier type of cognitive activity which also needs to be viewed as having the potential of exhibiting an ephiphenomena, human philosophy centered on Biology lumps all ideas into the shoebox labeled "Evolution" and does not consider that the mind of humanity needs a different type of container if it is to expand into a greater realization.
Just each layer of biological activity has been part of some precursor to a later complexity, it is foolish for us to think of such complexity in some metaphysical spiritual or religious sense, but this is exactly how humanity has often come to view its emergence when contrasted to other life forms. In other words, if we view the existence of humanity as a higher consciousness, it is clear that ancient views of humanity regarded itself as an expressed spirituality, just as in today's terms the use of the idea of a higher consciousness frequently becomes associated with some spirituality, though we do not think of the three Germ layers as such... even though it is a "higher" development of more simple biological activity. Nor do we label DNA as a higher spirituality from RNA or proteins from amino acids.
Whereas we humans are good at noticing the recurring value of a triple code, we have blinders on when it comes to recognizing the recurrence of a dual code in the thinking of humanity and what it may mean as a stagnation... an impediment in terms of a potential for further development. We don't see the triplet code as an impediment, nor the use of three large sub-atomic particles as an impediment, but then again, neither are we quick to point out the reigning recurrence of the same enumerated value analogous to the Earth's position in the solar system or its placement in a triplex of Sun-Earth-Moon.
The persistent presence of dualities in Psychology, Mathematics and Computer language is not yet a fact in the minds of some readers. They will have to see the presence of such dualities in these subjects listed together in order to identify what I am talking about. Such people are naive. In fact, let me describe all of humanity as being particularly naive. It is this naivete' which caused NASA to send out a welcome sign in the form of a plague attached to the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft's antenna support struts in a position that would shield them from erosion by interstellar dust. The reason I and others claim this may actually have been a bad thing to do is because humanity was acting (like in many instances) as a DoDo bird. Imagine thinking that sentient beings from other worlds will view humanity as a kindred spirit to engage with in peaceful terms, and not view humans as an infestation on a planet rich with resources for their own civilization. When human history is filled with examples of first encounters with natives being viewed as primitives to be raped, enslaved, killed, or whatever, how is it that humans can view themselves as some sort of standard being with superior sentience? Because they believe in a god? Ludicrous! No less, we have idiot movie script writers who think that human mathematics is so superior that if humanity encounters another sentient species, it will automatically understand the language of mathematics that humans think they have cornered the Universe on as some sort of expressed perfection. Like I said, DoDo birds.
When we of today think that humans of the present are far superior to those civilizations of the past which have died out, how does one introduce a new model of thought that need not claim itself to exhibit a next stage in Evolution, when such an idea is wrapped up in views which have unrealistic expectations by multiple people who imagine they will see Evolution's development occurring in a given way? How does one describe a potential for a different consciousness when the idea of such has been created alongside preconceived expectations amongst the public and professionals alike? Those life forms born of one Germ layer could not possibly grasp the meaning of Evolution in terms of having two Germ layers and those life forms with two Germ layers could not possibly grasp the full meaning of being an evolved life form with three Germ layers. And even though religion is an expressed belief in superstitions of different kinds, even those believing in one religion recognize some type of distinguishing difference in conceptualization between themselves and others that is more in terms of an Evolutionary step into greater realization than based merely on differences due to culturally-imposed word order or semantics.
In many studies one can find the topic of language acquisition being described as having a dependency on one's biology and sociology. Whereas we may also encounter the idea that every subject has its own vernacular, we do not necessarily describe the vernaculars as separate languages, though the word "language" may well be used to describe different types of thinking as being representative of a different language such as the symbolic thought of music, or mathematics, or dance, etc... However, it is not typical for us to describe different areas of study within a given discipline as being different languages. Hence, the "language" of genetics is not differentiated from a "language" of anatomy, though there are clear differences of anatomy seen between species when one adopts the research model of comparative anatomy, even though similarities do exist, such as those described by the "Pentadactyl limb" idea. And while we may speak of "computer language" being distinct from the "language" of animals or that logic has its own language differing from the language of Diplomats, it is not characteristic to find anyone speaking of the mind, body, and soul has having different languages or that consciousness has the potential for developing into a more sophisticated language.
And though we do not think of the 3 Germ layers as being different languages, we could do so and also remark that there are distinctive differences but also similarities, as if one were looking at a comparison of Romance, Asian, or African languages. Yet, we could simply say that the 3 Germ layers are dialects of the same "Mother tongue" without even trying to identify what that mother tongue might be, or subjecting the Germ layers to a typical linguistic analysis. Claiming the 3 are different but overlapping languages and that they were developed during critical periods of Evolutionary development may help you to better understand if I say that Consciousness can be viewed as a language ability which has the requirement of critical periods or miss out on a full development. That which interferes with the critical window for an expansion of consciousness is due in part to the fact that we do not have a standardized idea about consciousness having critical period requirements or that it has the potential of successive stages of development.
Since we have no established view that consciousness may have divisions of potentiality which are typically pruned, circumcised or intentionally directed along a given institutional course of adopting some model of dualism, the very notion of being able to achieve a "higher consciousness" is kept in a rudimentary state of knowledge and forced recital of redundant themes of duality so as to create a culture for permanence through perpetrated practices of how, when and where to think about a given subject or be viewed as engaging in an irrelevance, an off-topic genre of consideration, or simply labeled as a "senior citizen moment" akin to dementia or senility... just so established members of established institutions are left in charge to direct the orientation of their supporters.
The idea that consciousness is a language, has three potential levels, and requires critical periods of developmental support, is a group of three ideas far outside conventional considerations of consciousness related to Evolutionary Psycho-dynamics whose common definition is just as dry, stale an unimaginative as some of its researchers whose ideas remind me of the rationalizations used by couch potatoes in choosing why they do what they do instead of helping to clean up the mess they've made.
Page Initiated: Friday, 24th January, 2025.... 5:54 AMInitial Posting: Sunday, 2nd February, 2025... 6:39 AM