page 10
As can be seen in the accompanying image, life forms have descended from successively less complex models that, when aligned with a pristine view of ancestry, arose from three domains of living creatures called the Archae- Bacteria- Eucaryota. Similarly, Marx and Engles tried to describe an historically identifiable of succession with respect to sociological development specifically centered around an exposition of the three social classes labeled Proletarian- Bourgeoisie- Aristocracy, and GWF Hegel likewise had portrayed the notion of idea development with the labels Thesis- Antithesis- Synthesis. It is rather unfortunate that only a few Communists and Socialists are making larger distinctions of cognitive parallelism by including large swaths of other subject matter into their assessments of sociological development, of which it is thought that the sequence follows along the lineage of Socialism- Democracy- Communism, and others view a different scenario, just as there are other views with respect to the discussion of life domains.  |
 |
The well known "Cambrian Explosion" of life forms can alternatively be described as an example of "punctuated equilibrium":
(The Cambrian Explosion refers to) the unparalleled emergence of organisms between 542 million and approximately 530 million years ago at the beginning of the Cambrian Period. The event was characterized by the appearance of many of the major phyla (between 20 and 35) that make up modern animal life. Many other phyla also evolved during this time, the great majority of which became extinct during the following 50 to 100 million years. Ironically, many of the most successful modern phyla (including the chordates, which encompass all vertebrates) are rare elements in Cambrian assemblages; phyla that include the arthropods and sponges contained the most numerically dominant taxa (taxonomic groups) during the Cambrian, and those were the taxa that became extinct. Source: "Cambrian explosion." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite, 2013 Gradual and Punctuational Evolution Some Paleontologists have proposed that the discontinuities of the fossil record are not artifacts created by gaps in the record but rather reflect the true nature of morphological evolution, which happens in sudden bursts associated with the formation of new species. The lack of morphological evolution, or stasis, of lineages such as Lingula and Sphenodon is in turn due to lack of speciation within those lineages. The proposition that morphological evolution is jerky, with most morphological change occurring during the brief speciation events and virtually no change during the subsequent existence of the species, is known as the punctuated equilibrium model. Whether morphological evolution in the fossil record is predominantly punctuational or gradual is a much-debated question. The imperfection of the record makes it unlikely that the issue will be settled in the foreseeable future. Intensive study of a favourable and abundant set of fossils may be expected to substantiate punctuated or gradual evolution in particular cases. But the argument is not about whether only one or the other pattern ever occurs; it is about their relative frequency. Some paleontologists argue that morphological evolution is in most cases gradual and only rarely jerky, whereas others think the opposite is true. Source: "Evolution." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite, 2013. |
What the above references illustrate is a recognition of patterns, just as Marx, Engels and Hegel had done, and so many others. However, most people specialize and no longer generalize like the old Encyclopedists did such as Gaius Plinius Secundus, Vincent de Beauvis, William Caxton, Voltaire, Ephraim Chambers, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Denis, Diderot, Claude Adrien Helevétius, William Chambers, etc...
Source: Novum Organum Threesiarum page 3
However, there is no recognized speciality of study which may be termed a "Speciality of Generality" from which correlated patterns, taken from many subject areas, is a commonly accepted rationality from which observed patterns, as if they were different life forms like those in the above chart; may be used to create a lineage leading back to a common ancestry. In other words, denoting a commonality in pattern structure between Marx/Engles and Hegel is one thing, particularly when the usage is denoted as an acknowledge transference of ideas; but assigning the notion concerning a commonality between diverse subjects that have no acknowledged transference, might be looked upon with skepticism, particularly when basic patterns are not being sought, a researcher's ego is aligned deeply with a particular pattern that they may consider as having no equal, or such an activity is not a commonality of wide-spread interest because typical attention spans focus on a conservative number, if not type of subject interest.
As long as pattern recognition is limited to a single or maybe two other subjects, correlations are more easily permitted the indulgence of possibility, but credulity for a larger area of subject matter strains the limits of typical cognitive reliability and thus confidence in establishing truth. For example seeking out patterns occurring within a religious text can be permitted, so long as the deduced patterns help to support and substantiate religious claims. Likewise, the addition of seeking patterns in archeological evidence is fine so long as it too is supportive of belief, but may just as easily be rejected if such evidence is used to contradict established belief. Likewise, if information culled from multiple subjects is used to support the adoption of a given social belief, governing practice or economic program... such may be accepted more easily than if the same information creates the birth of a model which subjects all such practices to a negligibility.
Granted that all beliefs and so-called "established truths" are products of subjectivity, including mathematics with contrived order of basic algebraic operations (Parenthesis, Exponent, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction) since a different order of operations based on a practiced system of belief, could well be the standard by which truth is surmised, whether or not a belief-purchased validity is experimentally verifiable through repletion of results (within given experimental constraints). In other words, a lot of pattern recognition is due to subjective interpretations... regardless of how many believe an idea is truth. Take for instance a belief in a Supreme being labeled "God". Because humans are unable (as yet) to create multiple life forms or a planetary system or a galaxy or that described as the Universe with an emphasis known as existence; it is generally thought that something or someone must have intentionally created all of it... (and some conclude for our specific benefit). And even if Billions of people the world believe this is true, it doesn't mean this idea is true nor the employed methodology of analysis is beyond question.
When a species called humanity is subjected to different environments which can influence its thinking about life and death, but share commonalities of thought despite language differences, such a commonality is a clue which leads us to suspect there is a common method of mentally and emotionally processing diverse information in a similar way. If there are too many variables to consider existing outside humans, it is of value to catalogue interior similarities as well as differences. While there are some who can be shown patterns and remain unable to reverse engineer developmental processes which are thought to have given rise to such patterns, there are those who can not process pattern structures if the details of the patterns overwhelm their practiced ability to readily recognize similarities without being distracted by attempts to decode definitions applied to different labels in the context where the pattern originated. For example, the pattern of "Proletarian- Bourgeoisie- Aristocracy" is required by some to set into the conventionality of a given subject to make any sense of it or the individual parts, even though a person has been instructed to focus explicitly on the overall three-patterned structure as an example of a cognitive expression. In this type of generalized examination, the individual values are secondary to the stressed value of the quantitative arrangement. For such people, use of a number label to designate the grouping very often becomes assigned with the notion of numerology.
In fact, the cataloging of multiple three-patterned examples from different subjects might come to be referred to a system of numerically rationalized superficial correlations. Interestingly, when we use the same technique of comparing patterns in a single subject area such as anatomy and discover a remarkable regularity of this same pattern, the same notion of this being "a system of numerically rationalized superficial correlations", is altered to an alternative explanation that may coincide with an attributable coherency such as being a product of deductive reasoning. In one instance a recognized pattern is deemed absurd or at the very least unbelievable, and yet in another instance the same recognized pattern may be given an applied level of respectability. The same goes for whether the pattern is being applied to a conversation by a Nobel Laureate, or if it is being espoused by an homeless person with a torn suit of clothes. Why is this the case? Where on the one hand we take for granted the information of someone with an advanced degree, yet on the other hand we won't even give a person the benefit of a doubt and simply await the passing of judgment until we come across numerous misrepresentations? Is it because of prejudice, discrimination and selectivity arising from a practiced type of self-centeredness that goes unnoticed? Why isn't diversity permitted? Whereas it is noted that people can be ethno-centric, geo-centric, helio-centric, ego-centric and multiple other forms of centricty, why is it that we do not also use this accepted designation of centeredness involving the behavior coincident with differences in the recognition of patterns in one or more subject areas? Whereas people are permitted to have multiple interests, these interests are somehow confined to stringent orientations which do not transgress established barriers of consideration, unless a person's expressions in this regard occur within an environment of acceptability.
Why is it generally acceptable to recognize and catalogue patterns within a given subject area, but it is somehow incoherent and distributively in bad judgment to make inter-subject comparisons? Why are some people prejudiced about making comparative correlations between the patterns found in the writings of Marx, Engles, and Hegel, but it is a transgression of mental stability to apply the same tool of referencing between their ideas and those found in biology, anatomy, and multiple other genres? Is it that continuity of human cognition somehow stops at the boundary lines of each subject, and any attempt to mix and match... results in the anguished denunciations of having committed some measure of miscegenation? How dare we Cenocrats violate the standards of scholarship and sociological investigation. Shame on us for violating established a revered taboo about transgressing into the territorial domains of subject defining experts. Surely it is madness for trying to invent that which is internally viewed as perfected school of thought. Once again we find ourselves back in the land of the Lilliputians having to fend off established rationalities of presumed appropriate thinking. No one should be allowed to present a theory resulting in a Unified Theory of Sociological Explanation.
No one is supposed to upset the apple cart of an established revisionist orthodoxy by counting in threes when all others are counting in twos, or counting on both hands whilst others conform to a one-handed counting method. It is surely disgraceful for us to promote a sociological equation with decidedly more variables to bring greater coherence to a former algorithm... which as been noted by many as having been, and remains wholly inadequate to the task of developing an idea for a better social self-governance and complementary economics's practice. Similarly, whereas some claim that chess requires more sophistication of thought than checkers the underlying consistency of moving playing pieces in one of three different (horizontal, vertical, diagonal) directions is lost in the oblivion of focusing on the duality of winning or losing. They are activities which permit the adopted pretense of an underlying trichotomy to be over-shadowed by a primitive excursion into a dichotomy. We do not see the development of three-way chess games because the board games, like established governing systems with accompanying economic models; have been institutionalized by those whose underlying mindset is preferentially two-patterned organized like that seen in criminality (for example: my gang/your gang, rich/poor, weak/strong, good/bad, right/wrong...etc.,) and is of interest to note that the names of gangs center around the usage of two or three-patterned word groups like the frequently used three-lettered references used by government agencies: Criminal 2s page 3
As can be seen in the following image, both Hegel and the "ME" duo have engaged in a triple-valuation of two-patterned ideas that can be mistaken for an overall achieved trichotomy, when a true trichotomy (three-patterned) state is not actually reached, just the pretense there of. Their ideas are examples of a cognitive trend along a 1,2,3 developmental trek, but are themselves characteristics of a dynamic which is forestalled because their brains had not "matured" to such a degree, due perhaps to the unavailability of informational-knowledge (applicable) to the development of their ideas.
Unlike Hegel and the "M-E" duo, the assumed "struggle" (individualized or socialized with differently labeled dichotomies) as a part of a deciphered assessment referencing developmental historical transitions, is a misinterpretation of what is actually taking place. Whereas there are "struggles", per sey, in light of the occurrences of developmental change which may at moments introduce a regressive inclination to an earlier form and function as a type of retreat to the more familiar and secure (as a sort of retracing or reflecting on an earlier step in order to make a forward gain as many researchers due in the reanalysis of former data); the transitioning is an expression of a re-adjustment of equilibrium(s) to developmental changes involved in variously interactive processes of decay. Terms such as "maturation", "growth", "enlightenment", "self-transcendence", etc., are part of a cognitive rationalization used in the overall re-alignment with both internal and external occurrences of the decay trend... which is on-going whether or not we as individuals, a society or a species consciously attend to the awareness with a commensurate type of government, social structure and accompanying economic policy. For example, present government philosophies, social structures and economic polices do not incorporate a long-visioned approach to present decay influences and how we may best preserve the species over the very long distance which will involve leaving the Earth, the solar system and the galaxy.
The overall process of decay and its affects on biological life is easily understood. One method is to simply view the Sun as a giver of life like some ancient cultures did, though we need not resort to the establishment of believing in a solar God or the egotistical assumptions of those who came to claim they were an Earth-born representation, mediator, or familiarly related so as to refer to themselves as the "Son" (Sun) of "a" or "the" great God. Notwithstanding the many accurate, interesting and false connections to the Sun's influence on ideas which were at one time referred to as solar mythology, a reinterpretation of the Sun's influence on life's processes and cognitive realms is of value, simply by noting that if the Sun were removed from its position in the planetary model, life may well cease to exist. As far as can presently be ascertained, it was and is the Sun which provides us with the energy for sustaining life. If the patterns associated with the Sun were to change, we would have to either consciously or physiologically alter our state of equilibrium accordingly. Such a process is readily available for an easy appreciation by noting an alteration in behavior with a passage of the seasons which occur due to Earth's cyclical (hourly, daily, weekly, yearly, etc...) alignment positioning to the Sun.
By discerning observable patterns of the Sun, we can identify parallels occurring in biology, physiology, social behavior and cognitive constructs. We should not be afraid to look at the Sun and consider that a recurrence or change has an observable affect on human behavior; such as influencing the structural content of ideas which give the appearance of transitioning along a course of change we have referred to as progressive development... particularly when we can identify recurrences of patterns occurring in different cognitive formulas defined as subjects. As such, if we find a pattern-of-three being used to describe a genetic form such as in the triplet coding of both DNA and RNA, and then notice a similarity of pattern being used to define both macroscopic nuclear particles (protons- neutrons- electrons) and microscopic ones (such as three quarks and three anti-quarks), it is of value to consider that such ideas may well originate from one or more influential processes external to human biology which may be acting as type of filtering or translation service for the purposes of perpetuating the species under current trends of overall decay.
It is rather amusing to note that many are aware of comments referring to the Sun's daily passage as proceeding (linear-like) "across" the sky, or (circular-like) "over" the sky, and with the usage of time-lapsed photography denote a (triangular-like) up and down motion from dawn to noon to dusk; yet the underlying geometric forms are not recognized as basic patterns which humanity has used time and again for myriad purposes in arts and crafts, writing and thinking, and construction/manufacturing.
Here are a few examples of Linear, Circular, Triangular expressions:
| "3" Basics Formula | Linear | Circular | Triangular |
| 3 galaxy/universe items | Our galaxy through space | Motion of galaxy | Expansion/Contraction {<>,X} |
| 3 basic Earth motions | Earth+Moon+Sun | Rotation of Earth | Precession of Earth's axis |
| 3 forms of matter | Liquid | Solid | Gas |
| 3 fundamental forces | (N)electro-magnetism(S) | Gravity | Nuclear (+)(-)(+/-) |
| 3 conceptual models: A dual form of singularity A circular form of duality A plurality of threeness |
Primitive (Singularity) |
Native American (Duality)
|
Indo-European (Trianguality)
|
| 3 (hair) cross-sections | African: ribbon-like | Asian: circular | Caucasian: ellipsoid |
| 3 Earth shapes | Earth is flat | Earth is round | Earth is a triaxial ellipsoid |
| 3 Universe theories | Universe is flat | Spherical | Saddle (triangular)-shaped |
| 3 physics ideas | String theory | Particle theory | Multi-dimensional theory |
| 3 stone tool shapes | Mono-facial | Bi-facial | Tri-facial (arrow heads) |
| 3 counting objects | Lines (on bones, rocks, etc.) | Pebbles, stones, (clay,etc.) | Cones (wedges) |
| 3 engineering tools | Lever | Pulley/Wheel | Fulcrum |
| 3 engine shapes | In-line, Slanted, etc... | Radial, Rotary | V-shaped |
| 3 shapes game | Paper (flat-linear) | Rock (round-circular) | Scissors (X-shaped/triangular) |
| 3 human face items | Eyebrows | Eyes | Nose |
| When we look at the faces carved on pumpkins during the Halloween season, we see a repeated and interchangeable usage of linear, circular and triangular eyes, mouth, and nose. Not to mention that most pumpkins have a circular shape, most knives have a linear shape, and that some readers may use an argument suggesting a "triangular" opposition to explain this example way. (Thinking in terms of a triangular relationship that always results in conflict.) | |||
| 3 playground items | Monkey bars/See-saw | Merry-go-round | Slide/Swing-set support |
| 3 in-vehicle views | Road, Stick shift, etc... | Steering wheel | Perceptual view of distance |
| 3 early industry tools | Staff, Poker | Pottery wheel, Kiln | Fire (flame), Bellows |
| 3 pre-industry tools | Stick | Rock | Fire (flame) |
| 3 cyanobacteria shapes | Filamentous (string-like) | Coccoidal (ball-like) | Ellipsoidal (egg-shaped) |
| 3 stromatolite shapes | Flat-layered | Domical/Columnar | Conical |
| 3 building structures | Skyscrapers | Coliseums Stadiums,etc. |
Pyramids |
| 3 foot descriptions | Heal to Toe line | Balls of feet | Arch of foot |
| 3-in-1 necktie forms | Fronts-piece covers buttons | Encircles the neck | Triangle slip knot |
| 3-in-1 washing machine cycle status symbols Speed Queen Commercial washer Model # SWT91QN |
 In Use (vertical line) |
Spin (circular "curlicue") |
Rinse (triangular water shape) |
| 3 bird-flight formations | Diagonal, Horiz., Vertical | "Bunched up" | V-shaped (also J/L/7 variations) |
Note: I used the symbols {><} and {X} to portray expansion and contraction. Did the Universe expand like a bursting ball in all directions or a selected direction? It is not certain if the "Big Bang" occurred at a single point and then expanded in all directions. Unless we care to consider that our Universe is the result of an implosion, which is 1 idea, then there are 3 other theories we can consider, which brings our overall formula to a 3:1 ratio. The other three being a Linear- Circular- Triangular expansion after the Big Bang. Also, if the expansion is slowing down, is there to be an eventual "Big Crunch?"
Source: Introductory page 3c
In the following images depicting the position of the Sun during the Equinoxes and Solstices as seen from the Northern Hemisphere, it is necessary to note that biological nor physiological processes "view" the occurrences with the physics diagrams being used. Such processes are not affected by the imagery of circularity suggested by a domical pathway. Developmental genetics during the pristine events from the primordial soup event onwards, respond to the basic patterns of the Sun and do not necessarily reflect the influences with the adopted physics diagrams used by humans. Hence, patterns such as cyclicity, layering, 1,2,3 and fusion thereof, can be represented in a myriad of ways depending on the genetic, anatomical, physiological and psychological abilities of the organism in question.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 | |
Page Initially Created: Friday, 19-Aug-2016... 11:47 AM
Page First posted: Saturday, 20-Aug-2016... 08:55 AM Updated Page: Sunday, 18-June-2017... 7:00 AM