page 32
Progressive Thinkers as of 12/1/2022
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
There are three major types of respiratory structures in the vertebrates: gills, integumentary exchange areas, and lungs. the oceans have been present for at least three billion years.
Three enlargements are prominent: the forebrain, midbrain, and hindbrain. The forebrain gives rise to two secondary expansions, the telencephalon and the diencephalon. The midbrain, which remains single, is called the mesencephalon. The hindbrain produces two secondary expansions called the metencephalon and the myelencephalon.
The telencephalon outpouches, right and left, into paired cerebral hemispheres, which overgrow and conceal much of the remainder of the brain before birth.
- Forebrain:
- Telencephalon
- Right cerebral hemisphere
- Left cerebral hemisphere
- diencephalon
- Telencephalon
- Midbrain:
- mesencephalon
- Hindbrain:
- metencephalon
- myelencephalon
By citing the recurring patterns-of-three in particle physics as a dominant theme of organization, one might say that Nature, at least in this respect... in this domain of Nature's expressibility, counts in threes and the repetition of "threes" can alternatively be called a rhyme... designated as you will... as a sound rhyme, a sight rhyme, a rhyme of functionality or simply a rhyme of human conceptualization about the topic in the present era.
The point is, do we as researchers frame the examples as four-line expressions and/or as a 3 -to- ratio. Or perhaps you prefer something else. Nonetheless the reason for including examples of rhyme is to think in terms of them as utterances of repetition not only found in infant babbling, but may have been a standard means of expression during a time when forms of communication were limited. Whereas historians of arithmetical counting have noted time and again the use of pairing and doubling to produce larger quantities, no doubt this same type of cognitive activity may have been used for multiple daily expressions... not least of which were the symbolic characterizations seen on early forms of writing. Repetition in vocal utterances appears to be just as common as repetition in symbolic expressions, just as it is when music is played. And this repetition may well have gotten its influence not only in the repetition of body movements such as bipedal walking, breathing in and out, feeding/defecation, wakefulness/sleeping, etc., but also from the external environment. Hence, to suggest that basic biology acquired its rhythms from environmental patterns is not a far-fetched idea, just as the consideration for a 1- 2- 3 development sequence in cognitive activity... and some would claim the bipolar, ambivalence and other mood swings are as well.
By identifying recurring patterns, just as a criminologist looks for patterns in fingerprints, the use of enumeration such as patterns-of-one, of-two, of-three, etc..., we enable ourselves to grasp not only the presence of such patterns in different activities (so long as we do apply too strict a rule or axiom), but the limitation of enumeration as well. For example, we have 26 letters in the English alphabet... not 40 million. Likewise, our current system of commerce is limited in the millions, billions, trillions range. We do not have a system of commerce affecting a "zillions" financial structure. And despite the presence of 8 billion people on the Earth at this time, we have a limited quantity of governments, limited quantity of political systems and limited practice of space exploration. We also have a limited Periodic table of elements, water on the planet and all of Particle physics has a dominant recurrence of a "three" theme.
Despite the fact that DNA is considered to be a product of evolution, the process or event we call "Evolution" has decided on using a triplet code despite some referring to the presence of 4 nucleotides, though one can also see the presence of a 3 -to- 1 ratio (as in Mendelian genetics). No less, we have 1 start and 3 stop codons which configures as another example of the 3 -to-1 ratio and may also hint at a type of cognitive activity such as the development of counting being interrupted by multiple stops along the way as opposed to the initial start which has no replicated model of emergence property; analogously noted in the property of emergence called the Big Bang or even an atomic explosion, to say nothing of the initial moment when life emerged. In other words, the dawn of counting as we label it, occurred once... though that "once" may have occurred multiple times on an individual bases. No less, the Electro-magnetic spectrum has a limited range for human visibility, providing us with only a 7-color spectrum, and not a selection one might find in a large box of Crayola crayons . And although there are some instances of large numbers being used to measure planetary activity, such numbers are not commonly used elsewhere:
On timescales of tens of millennia, the dominant radiative forcing of Earth's climate is associated with slow variations in the geometry of Earth's orbit about the Sun. These variations include the precession of the equinoxes (that is, changes in the timing of summer and winter), occurring on a roughly 26,000-year timescale; changes in the tilt angle of Earth's rotational axis relative to the plane of Earth's orbit around the Sun, occurring on a roughly 41,000-year timescale; and changes in the eccentricity (the departure from a perfect circle) of Earth's orbit around the Sun, occurring on a roughly 100,000-year timescale. ("global warming." Encyclopædia Britannica.)
However, let us look at some patterns of DNA:
- 1 purpose?
- 2-helix strandedness
- 3(triplet) code
- 3 to 1 ratio of so-called 4 bases, which can be more easily recognized by comparing with RNA:
- (DNA: Adenosine- Cytosine- Quanine/Thymine)
- (RNA: Adenosine- Cytosine- Quanine/Thymine)
- 3 stop and 1 start codons (another 3 to 1 rati)
- 5- and 3- ends (and "4" in the middle, hence... a 3- 4- 5 Pythagorean theorem)
This number ("3") also is an expression of the social order in its fullness and particularly the threefold structure of Indo-European society. According to Georges Dumezil, if all social structures are analyzed, it will be found that this threefold division only evolved into an all embracing world-view and value structure among particular peoples. Although its origins are unknown, this threefold division of duties or orders is perfectly clear. It is given expression in various triads which easily embrace (3 functionalities): (This example culled from: 3s poster column 6)
- religion, warfare and work
- kingship, martial strength and fecundity
- Jupiter, Mars and Quirinus
- Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches
- the senatorial, equestrian and plebeian orders (ancient Rome)
- the priesthood, power and productivity
- priests, warriors and producers (Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva)
- Brahmans, Kshatriyas (warriors) and Vaishyas (farmers and merchants), and...
- Shudras or slaves being as it were outcasts
Note: this so-called fourth caste of India is said to have produced some quibbling against the Dumezilian Trifunctional Hypothesis applied to Indo-European cultures. What it does support is the need for a larger ideological characterization featuring all cultures which may exhibit a different pattern of enumeration relative to the cognitive development of the species... thereby describing not only continuity amongst related peoples who may stem from a similar genetic background, but those who are what might loosely be described as different human offshoots— even though our current types of genetic analysis do not have the ability of discriminating subtleties of this nature. While we lump everyone into a common human gene pool, this may not be the case as related to a supposedly shared cognitive development. Hence, differences may show up in the social structures we can come to numerically describe.
For example, we can see stark contrasts of philosophy between the Chinese culture which adopted a dualistic yin/yang pattern, but do not ascribe such a pattern as a prominently developed theme among western cultures, until we take into consideration that such a two-patterned cognitive frame might well have been used in a form which is more subtle or camouflaged... for whatever reason(s)... perhaps racial/terrain/nutritional differences; whereby even the users of a concealed pattern-of-two shaped philosophy do not recognize it because of the overlayed symbols used instead of calligraphy. Whereby, the underlying dichotomous arrangement of Mathematical ideas is not recognized. Whereas the cognitive development of the Eastern (Asian) peoples developed a yin/yang ideology with a professed link to sexuality, the Western (European) peoples constructed a philosophy with a similar underlying two-patterned formula in their mathematics. And in addition, where the Chinese community tried to exhibit a cognitive development beyond the "2" into a next stage "3" perspective through the I-Ching with assumed Triads (which are actually embellished dyads), the European community has tried to exhibit a cognitive development beyond the "2" into a next stage "3" perspective through such ideas as applying a triple Boolean (And- Or- Not) logic to the Binary code of computers, as well as by trying to develop a trinary or ternary computing system to replace the present binary one. In addition, Mathematics has developed such three-patterned ideas as the Pythagorean theorem and Trigonometry.
Thus, it would not be surprising to find cultures fitted with a two-pattern social organizing orientation... even early Indo-Europeans, and cultures whose social organizational pattern would appear to exhibit a 4-patterned model some might want to claim as being superior, but actually represent an early method of cognitive counting activity in which pairing... that is doubling, occurred. Therefore, a four-pattern might easily be representative of a two-patterned doubling or a 3 to 1 ratio, or a 3 to 2 ratio... all of which are describing a process of human cognitive development that may not necessarily mean it was sequential for all groups in the same manner at the same time or with the same achieved results.
Interaction takes place between the socio-political and the mythological organizations, each structure being reflected in the other, but they do not always develop at the same pace. Myth changes more slowly than reality, although sometimes it may anticipate it.
It may be easy for some to conclude the deduction that Georges Dumezil came up with his Trifunctional Analysis idea concerning the social structure of Indo-Europeans, arose from his (primarily western culture) reading of Religion and Myth which contains numerous three-patterned group examples that functioned as a socially collective culture. A tripartite patterned perspective of the world prevailed in such information whereas proto- Indo-European civilizations may have exhibited a pattern-of-two preference. A dominant "two" or pairing perspective would necessarily precede a culture that later relied on a three-patterned organizational methodology, if we allow ourselves to think of a continuity of thought proceeding along a path similar to the ideological development of counting. Whereas counting would have preceded in a one→ two→ three fashion in agreement with the cognitive ability of a given group whose development of a number system may have had fits and starts, digressions, stops and even periodic reversals that were aligned with efforts to associate natural phenomena as a symbolic expression of a natural counting system; the point is that we should not be alarmed upon finding differences in how a people organized thoughts or simply lived in a manner that later observers would come to recognize with an enumerated pattern. Patterns of thought can change and even remain the same, depending on the pressures directed towards influencing such a behavioral phenomena as thought... or even activity with no real conscious realization that a given pattern is being exhibited... because a people are too close... and therefore lack the objectivity needed to discern one or another pattern.
Far too many researchers engage in very narrow interests and do not place their observations into a much needed larger context. For example, the idea that Indo-Europeans exhibited a recurring three-patterned structural division in their societies which lasted for millennia, needs to be placed into the context of all of humanity. If the same pattern did not occur amongst all cultures, which pattern(s) did;... and what is especially important, is to decide whether or not the assigned functions of three (or more) different divisions actually represent what took place or is the result of an imposition due to the preferences of a given researcher who may gain a following and mimic his or her same views?
If there is a larger developmental trend of human cognitive activity which can be plotted on a graph assigned with numbers equated with a simple arithmetical serialization 1 followed by 2 followed by 3, then it stands to reason we need to identify the different orientations of different cultural groups, noting that periods of cessation or fixation can occur as well as adopted borrowings which can overlap with different people in the same culture, whereby additions, subtractions, etc., can take place. For example, if we spot a culture which gives a researcher the impression that the value of "4" is preferential, is it an actual quantity beyond three, or is it a mirror-imaged portrayal of two pairs? Similarly, while one may express a "7", underlying the representation is a 3 + 4 cognitive association which is being emphasized... though observers see only the figure "7" because they impose this on the situation. Another problem when we use enumeration as part of our analysis is that a perceived "quantitative more" may be a cognitive exercise related to a primitive's inability to go beyond a given point of cognitive development, whereby upon reaching a "two patterned orientation" such as in the yin/yang ideology or an interest in pairing such as the Janus figure or hermaphroditic couplings; the trend is to practice a cognitive position where everything beyond a "double, two, 2, pairing, duality, etc..." is referred to in some fashion as we might assign the words "much, many, plenty, heap, a lot of, a whole bunch, Universe, infinity, plurality, poly-", etc... to, so as to give the impression of completeness in thinking by way of some supposed expression of comprehensiveness. In other words, instead of indicating an inability to develop cognitively further than where we are, we provide an excuse by some symbol, some word, some indication of that which is thought to lay beyond our comprehension, but in thinking that it does exist fulfills the need to try and portray in by some measured assumption.
An example of the foregoing is in the case where a culture has adopted the view to accept the existence of multiple gods ("many gods"... beyond the counting range of known cognitive ability where even the attempted naming of a single god implies a cognitive position "beyond.... (apart from, superior to" the norm). Such a practice is not necessarily evidence for a people with an advanced form of cognitive activity measured in terms of an arithmetical (1, 2, 3...) series, but instead suggests it has reached an impasse in cognitive development that must alternatively indulge in copying the views of others to give the impression of a like-minded cognitive achievement. In so very many cases the act of mimicry, of parroting and embellishment suffices to give the impression of having achieved not only a parity with others, but an implied superiority often brought about by way of adding more financial resources to a given project. Analogously, from a different perspective, a person with a million dollars will be looked differently on than someone labeled as a millionaire. The same person labeled as being smart or a genius, can give a different impression to different observers. Such is the case with the labels appended to Dumezil's Trifunctional system theory. Trifunctionality, when placed into the context of all of humanity, needs an interpretation appropriate for the inclusion of all cultures whose organizational themes of society may change from one era to the next, but nonetheless exhibit a cognitive number which appears to represent a similarity to the development of initial counting efforts for which the basic structural systems of society are accordingly represented. The observation of larger elaborations requires the usage of an enlarged counting system to accommodate the many variables, but basic systems require only a basic numbering system. Elaborate systems of enumeration are merely elaborations of simple number lines involving very few numbers, much in the sense that primitive peoples needed only simple counting systems for basic social activities.
Dumezilian theory speaks of basic social functionalities, and is not meant to represent a researcher's deliberate attempts to find fault by citing elaborations requiring a different formula that needs to be applied to all of humanity, and not a select group of peoples sharing a language, dress code, philosophy, music, medicine, gaming interests, illegal activities, mythology, monetary system, trading interests, warring interests, exploration interests, imperialism, colonialism, etc... Again, basic cognitive enumeration relies on expressions of basic orientations and expressed application thereof, such that all cultures have some form of leadership. All cultures express some use of a military/policing practice. All cultures engage in some measure of commerce. Etc... The point is to establish what sort of cognitive number line is being used with a given system of socially expressed practices. Typically, social practices do not involve calculus, or trigonometry, or even algebra. They are functionalities of simple arithmetic. Social circumstances that are interpreted as involving higher forms of mathematics are impositions of observers. Instead of a simple sequence such as import/export, they impose a Boolean type of Algebra so as to provide a means by which they can emotionally offer themselves an intellectualized paradigm that may allow for them to create a form of personalized interactivity that others come to share, and thus provide for the possible insertion of practicing a mental craft that enables them to increase their level of survivability, like many a stock market analyst attempting to see a pattern within a pattern within a pattern that serves to deduce a basic simplicity amenable to providing an increased income for themselves and perhaps an investor.
Some researchers are not satisfied with simple patterns of deduction. They seek to impart an alternative so as to imply they have deduced a greater simplicity by way of a personalized complexification; one's vocabulary notwithstanding. All of which brings me full circle to the simplicity of Dumezilian theory, with and without this or that exception that some do not allow because they are working with Dumezil's idea as if it with a math formula with a set of axioms... or set of rules written on a pamphlet accompanying a board game, deck of cards or a do-it-yourself furniture assembly. There is no present consensus on describing the idea of Dumezil as a "cognitive signature". In fact, the idea is quite foreign in any research venue. Repeating patterns that come to be identified as enumerations by observers concerning ideas and behavior or collectively designated an event or activity; have not reached the stage of interpretation which designates the existence of cognitive development being expressed in terms of an arithmetical progression, which also allows for stops, starts, restarts, digressions, regressions, stagnation, and other interruptions or leaps/mutations in expression that may die out because there is no relative environment for sustaining a level of progression exceeding the norm. Larger enumerations need the support of smaller ones or they can be lost and have to wait for some later emergence when the environment is more conducive to sustaining the appreciation of an enlarged conceptual framework of reality.
Where a culture such as the Chinese developed an extensive (and overly-entrenched) orientation of having reached a "two" model of conceptualization as portrayed by the Yin/Yang system of dualities, the cognitive development towards adoption of a "three" perspective took the form of proposed Triads in the I-Ching. Unfortunately, the two-patterned yin/yang orientation had become so entrenched into the psyche, that all that was developed was a philosophy of embellished dualities. Whereas the Yin and Yang formulated a close association with the duality of the male and female spheres of existence, this notion was maintained in the I Ching whereby the triads were expressed with a duplication of either a single or double line configuration, and no true figure which exhibited a one, two, three-line illustration. They had not reached an actual "three" cognitive orientation, just a masqueraded model thereof. However, what is overlooked by researchers is that the human brain having to follow this same developmental path that we also see in the one- two- three germ layers; is that the human brain in a different cultural context adopted their less developed two-frame of cognitive orientation to a form of symbolism called Mathematics, instead of a pictorial representation called calligraphy. The western development of mathematics is primarily an expression of dualities concealed by words and ideas referencing opposing views or positions, just as we see in the words more plainly illustrated in a list of ideas referencing the yin and yang philosophy. And just like the Chinese mind which attempted to develop into a triadic ideation formula by way of the I Ching, we see that the system of duality expressed by Western Mathematics has attempted its own variation of triplistic cognitive activity with ideas such as the (triple) Pythagorean theorem, trigonometry and the application of the And- Or- Not (triple modeled) Boolean Algebra applied to the binary language of computers... not to mention the attempt to develop a trinary (ternary) computer system to supplant the present binary one.
When speaking of a developing cognitive orientation of humans that we can enumerate, it serves as an introduction to consider that there have existed observable (or at least influential) activities/objects in nature which set the stage, even if the idea for creating a "1- 2- 3..." formula does not appear to be explicitly pointed out, to the extent that humans were subjected to such a formula in a recurring fashion to be copied in such an order. In other words, while we observe humans having developed a sequential numbering system, we might not readily say that such a sequentiality is observable and humans "know" that this is the way they are supposed to learn to count. And yet, humans did learn to count in a sequential fashion of 1- 2- 3... eventually, despite how long or what hardships, obstacles and the like had to be confronted and overcome. Thus, when we observe a culture such as the Chinese developing a philosophy with a dominant pattern-of-two orientation and Indo-Europeans with a seemingly dominant orientation towards the use of triple structures; we are confronted by the possibility of witnessing an expressed illustration of cognitive development as it occurred in different cultures and time periods, though another culture's dominant orientation may not be manifested with a similar largesse (liberality) of application. Hence, while both the East and West cultures exhibit a measure of a two and three-patterned orientation, the way in which the same cognitive patterning (described as a number) was cloaked in different raiments of language and cultural regards attendant with commerce/trade, cosmological interpretations, and social stratification of one's respective citizenry and what might be at times described as "outsiders" or fringe groups (criminals, vagabonds, slaves, captives, wanderers, vagrants, warriors, priests/magicians, crafts-persons, etc...). Nonetheless, we can see a similar cognitive patterning for which we can find numerical parallels in different subjects.
One of these numerical parallels is the Dumezilian Trifunctional theory of Indo-European cultures. Apparently, if we look at what may be described as cultural patterns of basic social functionality, we see the use of small quantitative values aligned with a simple arithmetical scale and not some deep and vast cognitive complexity of organization. No less, we do not see social systems with basic functionality exhibiting large quantifications of inter-relatability involving enumerations requiring the processing ability of a sophisticated computer. Simple models of enumeration appear to be the standard, and no non-standard example has ever existed according to recorded accounts. In other words, we do not find any cultures which have or presently do exhibit a level of cognitive ability far in excess of what can be described as normal or usual human cognitive ability. There is no indication that a superior type of cognitive activity every existed, despite attempts to suggest this is what existed with the fanciful notions of an Atlantean culture... which, despite of its supposed superiority, became extinct.
However, inasmuch as one might see a numerically-aligned cognitive development, we are not seeing vast leaps of cognitive development expressed in this manner. Low numbers seem to be the limit, despite interpretations involving simple (paired) arithmetical operations such as add/subtract/multiply/divide. Something has occurred to cause a repetition of development along a simple and small-numbered account, as if the environment has imposed a limitation on human physiology from permitting an increased cognitive ascension. Like records in sporting events, there is a limitation of cognitive ability to attain to a certain level, afterwards attainment is rationalized by way of inter-mixing of cultural attitudes, events and exercises. In other words, an artificiality of development has become the "standard operating procedure" (SOP).
Let us momentarily take an example of cognitive development as expressed in accounting. Whereas the eventually of a double-entry system entry was developed, it was sometime later supersede by a triple-entry system of accounting. And some have ventured to offer the use of a devised quadruple-system and perhaps someone has thought to consider a quintuplet system... of which indicate a low numerical value and also the extent to which the basic functionality of social intercourse is such that no greater level of enumerated accounting formula is warranted. In other words, the triple system being used by many is well-enough, though some may prefer the earlier double-entry model instead. Nonetheless, the functionality of the social character in accounting does not require a complex arithmetical system of thinking.
Even when we look at such an idea as humans having "multiple" intelligences as an idea to compete with those ideas of intelligence which number less than ten, what we are paying witness to is a limitation (for example, there is no model suggesting we have billions of intelligences), and the use of the word "multiple" as a substitute for the primitive's "many" to describe something larger, and therefore superior. Those inclined towards using the designation of "multiple intelligences" not only want to suggest such an idea ("their" idea) is superior to some measured quantity (usually less than ten), but also that their own intelligence needs to be accessed in terms of a supposed larger comprehension of intelligence where common identifications do not suffice to adequately label or measure that which they invite to entertain as being representative of themselves.
In referring back to the notion that the development of a numerically identifiable cognitive theme (arithmetical stream) as having had some environmental influence, the establishment of a "cognitively assigned one-ness", could very well have been in the observation of a recurring sun, moon, stars, night, or even particular animal for a given time of day. Movement of such an object might well have served to attract numerous recurring attractions and eventually solidify the notion of "one". While I realize the idea is speculative, it is nonetheless understood as a possibility. The pairing of the bright moon with the bright sun might well have introduced the human psyche to the notion of "two", whether or not some actual word (vocalization such as a grunt) was articulated. When we get to the value of three, this can be seen... and as well felt, when taking into account the position of the sun during sunrise, noon and dusk time. They are "moments" which not only overlap but are also used by some animals whose behavior has been attuned to the cycle. However, when we attempt to look for some account of a "four" object that does not use the human body as a direct referent such as in the case of using it to described directions (front, back, left side, right side)... and the up/down orientations as another "two" formed by pairing; it is difficult to see such a quantity. Whereas we can double the moon (daytime moon/nighttime moon) and add it to the sun, we have a "three" quantity. Attempting to use the multiplicity of stars as a cognitive guide would have initially been an improbability because the level of cognitive attenuation would not have been yet established... thinking that some sort of physiological or psychological preparation was needed before a higher counting ability could be attained.
Date of (series) Origination: Saturday, 14th March 2020... 6:11 AM
Date of Initial Posting (this page): 9th January 2023... 12:36 AM AST (Arizona Standard Time); Marana, AZ.