Cenocracy: A Declaration for Greater Independence
Sourcing Social Problems


A problem with social economics is that in theory, it is a science... but in practice it is used as a political philosophy. As a science, economics represents relative absolutes, but as an applied political philosophy, it is absolutely relative to the where, when, by whom and for whom. Economics, as an applied political philosophy, can create just as many problems as it solves... though the tally sheet under examination may itemize valuations differently, either singularly or collectively. Nonetheless, economics is another social problem. Or is it? While some may prefer Economics in the same frame of reference that one might describe a medical practice, in that there is an art, science and spirit of medicine to take into consideration... we should thus enable ourselves with a like-minded fluidity of thought to interpret the character of Economics in a similar manner.

As a science, because of its reliance on numbers and equation, one would think the formula of social economics would have been solved by now. Agreeably, it should have been, but the problem is that the formula is deficient in its variables. And this situation is made more complex because the variables to be used in the formula are being represented in the languages of power, greed, and the sometimes deliberate attempts to thwart the economic plans of one or more others like an adjunct weapon in one's political arsenal. Whereas Economics can be used as a viable social tool, that tool is also at times used as a weapon or stick with which to stir up trouble, poke holes in social expansions, or as an experimental probe for some potential morsel like a chimpanzee seeking out some insect.

Let us take as an example the situation in Europe where there exists a problem of "Austerity Measures" being experienced by the people of Greece. It has been said that the source of their protracted problem is the industrial abilities of Germany which creates a monopolization because they are at the top of the manufacturing game in so many areas of marketable production. And yet, such a position would be a welcomed advantage by any government. They want their people both employed and prosperous. It is the desire of all governments, unless they are neurotically driven to produce conditions which make the people suffer as if to effect some presumed needed penance. If the situation were reversed, in that the people of Germany were having to indulge in Austerity Measures because of Greece having a command of a highly desired manufacturing ability, would the people of Greece readily adopt a provision of exporting a portion of its ability to Germany because it belongs to a family of nations called a Union?

Herein is exposed a failure of the initial attempts to introduce equalized trade agreements by which various peoples might profit by through cooperation... The European Union is being run like a dysfunctional family which create instances of sibling rivalry and jealousy. Government representatives of individualized business interests are playing a game of variegated favoritism that the other family members are sensitive to. Like a couple joined in matrimony who has brought kids from a previous marriage, and are now trying to make a new family that comes complete with all the toys, pets, furniture, baggage, personalities, maturity, educational levels, eating peculiarities, personal traumas, tools, sporting equipment, age-related interests, appliances, assets and bills. Whereas the situation is less complex with one or a few children placed into a situational context for learning how to live with one another in the reality of a different social setting; the problems one encounters with a very large house-hold can be tantamount to experiencing a multi-ring circus. A circus in which those in authority who have proffered what was thought to be a good business deal, find themselves being viewed as a clown when a deal goes bad.

Very often, the new parental figures find themselves having to do an about-face with one or another policy because they started off on the wrong foot. Specifically, the peoples of the entire European Union need to begin an entry into a new environment of cooperation by a re-introduction based on set house-rules. These house rules must contain a contractual agreement amongst all the peoples to cooperate with one another as if they were members of a single family. There can be no reward or punishment, such as that witnessed by the usage of "Austerity Measures", which will cause to intentionally provoke jealousy, anger and suspiciousness. Those in elected Authoritative positions can not be permitted to assume and be responsible for the actions of those in their family who take it upon themselves to be irresponsible adults unconcerned for the welfare and well being of those in their family, as well as treating any and all outside their family with due respect. The public must be expected to assume an equal measure of responsibility by being given the respect it deserves to voice its own opinion, have that opinion legislated amongst themselves, and then have their concerted opinion, denoted by a referendum, become the rule, the law, by which they will abide.

Cooperations in business work just as well as cooperations in a family. When parenting roles of elected authority contribute to unequalized reward and punishment, it is they who should be asked to leave the household. Greece now has a new parental figure. While it is easy for a parent to point a finger at a presumed instigator of social problems, an attempted resolution involving some form punishment will only delay an eventual, compensatory expression in some other fashion at some later date. It is a cycle of behavior that can not be permitted to recur. A new set of family rules for the European Union must be put into place. The usage of punishment for a job well done in industrialization... by way of one or another economic sanction, is like depriving a winning horse of water or food because the odds during a future race will decrease one's ability to make a larger profit than the race they just won. Both the horse and its empathetic observers will be searching for some measure of restitution, if not retributive retaliation. Neither victors nor loosers must be punished, and the definition of winning, in terms of profit, can be equalized and not be used to enhance an exhibition of adolescent egotism.

When the name of the game is based solely on profit, all can work together for the benefit of all. But when one member's abilities are being used as an exercise of some undisclosed ulterior motive, problems will necessarily ensue. In the case of Germany's industrialization prowess, one might think that it is being used to intentionally flex some underlying germanic muscle as if the European Union were engaged in some underlying secretly acknowledged Olympic's games and Germany is out to secure for itself all the Gold Medals. And yet, it has had a head start in the marketable events within the context of an Economic's meet that the other players in the game didn't realize the starting pistol had been shot. Whereas one might ask who had invited whom to the European Union arena, and note that sibling rivalries are a typical given in many families; they should also note that it is a dysfunctional family whose members do not attempt to honestly cooperate.

From the German perspective it is easily to argue that they are not engaged in a post World War II combativeness in the form of exercising an enhanced model of Industrialization as a compensatory activity for being denied, due to an American Military Occupation, the ability to re-establish a leasing military force... even though others may interpret Germany's Industrialization superiorities to be akin to a new type of Supremacist Ideal. Philosophically, what are we to make of such a realization? When at one time the German people exhibited a superior military force, no matter how some may deny them this distinction based on references to the atrocities committed by those Germans who viewed themselves as a Nazi... and now they are exhibiting a superior force in industrialization? Most of the people working today were not Nazis. Yet there clearly exists a superior indomitable spirit to arise from dire conditions into becoming a formidable force. Do the German people have some sort of inferiority "complex" which causes them to over-compensate by striving for an excellence which seems absent from other cultures? Or is there some unrecognized, and therefore some undocumented genetic-based substrate which one might conjecture represents an advanced trait?

Let us say that such a consideration sends shock waves of fears through the European community and elsewhere, creating fearful visions of a forthcoming monstrous economic machine that breaks no international laws. Instead of a Military Occupation, are we then to encourage the United Nations to fabricate some legislated Right to engage in an Economic Occupation? And what if the Germans then engage in some compensatory activity which produces yet another exercise of superiority? Will the International Community then decide to engage in some Occupation of sexual activity to control procreation or try to adapt this purported "Germanic Genetic Trait" to some other, more distant culture? And let us then couple this with an exercise by the Germans to exclude any reference to some "Aryan" origin in order to remove itself from being associated with those would-be Supremacist orientations who actually have nothing in common with them. What if the usage of the old "Aryan" distinction becomes sublimated into some other characterization that is culturally internalized and not projected into some visible social icon that others might want to target for denigration because they want to target all germans as natural born Nazis at heart? Yet they never once exam the source of their own vilification of the German people?

How far does one go back to look for the source of a social problem? Neither Germany nor Greece are the bad guys. Neither are the source of the particular problem being addressed here. And the problem of economic dysfunctionality amongst different countries is very ancient. It is, without need to say, difficult for us to go back into deep history and deal with what might be referred to as the "Original Sin" of Economics... without trying to evoke a recitation of one or another religious pronouncement. The problem begins, within the human scope of ability to address the issue, when the European Union was organized. Though the initial intent was to increase the viability of differing economies by increasing free trade, reducing implied or actual governing, societal and cultural barriers; there has been a recurrence of perceived inequalities. Hence, the rules and regulation under which the European Union was formulated on, must be readdressed and rewritten in order to increase the assurances of mutual cooperation and respect. If the European is going to persist in the allowance of one or another favoritisms due to nothing other than some authoritative personal preference, the European Union will never become cooperatively integrated. The European Union needs a new governing system based on realistic values of cooperation which involves every single citizen as a fully pledged, and Constitutionally mandated, partner. No more vicarious nonsense as is exhibited by prevailing "Representative" governing models which is an authority- centered irresponsible form of Democracy.

Whereas some may consider the people are at an impasse in their intentions and sincere desires to both promote and indulge in peaceful relations on all (political, economic, cultural) social levels, because the dichotomies of history (i.e. rich versus poor, strong versus weak, right versus wrong, good versus bad, East versus West, Right versus Left, Capitalism versus Socialism or Capitalism versus Communism, etc...) appear to repeat themselves again and again in various demeanors; some see a light of reason to breech the darkness of these constraints by adopting themselves to a trichotomy.

The people strive for a European "Community" without trying to create a commune or their own variation of Communism. They want a full-fledged partnership in all inter-community dealings but they do not want ownership in terms of a Socialist doctrine. The people welcome free trade, free enterprise, entrepreneurialship, and a free spirit of potentiating both individual growth, but they don't want to indulge in the standards of selfishness and self-indulgence that so often rears its head, thumps its chest and butts its head in a Democracy which advances Capitalistic adventurism. In short, they want to meld all the good characteristics of Communism, Socialism and Democracy into a singularity of purpose attendant with wisdom, compassion, altruism, intelligence and all that the genius of humanity can provide for the improvement of the species.

It is because the European Economy had unwittingly, at its inception, integrated a philosophical base of dichotomization that we see such examples of extremism as Austerity and Superiority gain a hefty proportion of realization. They are not the source of the problem, and nor do they represent some inclined definition of fate or fatalism as an age-old theme portrayed in some modern garment. All the people, from all walks of life, want the best for themselves and their families. Yet, this is an old statement that is being supplanted by the transition of including that everyone wants the best for everyone. Only those clinging to some old dichotomy prefer to engage in a world-view of self-regard as being paramount. It is they, and their philosophy, however it may be contoured to their self-oriented rationalism, that the public must set into place the necessary mechanisms which will protect the whole from such ego-centricisms.

In sourcing the problems which crop up with our attempts to devise a comprehensive cohesiveness in our socialization, well noting that we want to extract the best ideological premises from the aforementioned trichotomy of Communism, Democracy and Socialism, let us momentarily step back and give definition to these terms as they are being used here in order to frame the canvas upon which the present view is being landscaped:

  • Communism = collective cooperation via forced authoritative control of ownership.
  • Democracy = private ownership, free trade, private cooperation via forced authoritative injunction.
  • Socialism = collective public cooperation via forced state ownership.

Those in authority remain in authority and use a limited set of criteria to convince the public that the government belongs to the people for their sole benefit (as dictated by those in authority who legislate and interpret laws in accord with the collective political mindset of those in authoritative positions). Such views are ruses. They are practiced illusions supplied to the public. They are stupid Urban Legends and Myths. For example, in various instances:

  • The people are told that officials are elected by their say so (though the usage of an electoral college for the election of a President says otherwise, coupled with the ludicrous practice of permitting Supreme Court Judges be selected by the President and confirmation is by way of a Congress and not the people). So much for an Of, By, For the "Peoples" government.
  • Everything is for the people on an equal basis (even though those in authoritative positions have a greater share and can increase their share without the say so of the public).
  • The people have direct access to "their" government via some Representative whose actual power can show itself to be an exercise in impotence.
  • The people are directly in charge, albeit via some Representative that dictates definitions of public policy and what a "peoples government" means, as well as how it is "supposed" to be managed.
  • A government serves the people best when the people serve their leadership unquestionably... so as not to be confronted by situations for which traditionalized practices of policy are wholly inadequate at addressing.

Mix or Match, relabel or refine, dissect or enlarge as you will, the above three governing systems nonetheless can be used as generalizations which highlight the presence of a conceptual trichotomization. Instead of an individualized syllogism (Major premise - Minor premise, Conclusion), what we see is the attempt at the construction of a Collective (consolidated) model as if to denote a transitional phase of evolution taking place with the mentality of humanity. For example, before there were triads of gods worshiped in developing civilizations, there was a practiced worship of multiple gods... as varied as were the personalities of the people. Later on, attempts are made to fuse, to consolidate, to amalgamate the three into some singular inter-activity such as the Christian concept of three persons in one god. Get past all the cultural embellishments aligned with emotive content, and we see the underlying 3 -to- 1 ratio as a representative alteration in human cognition whose source is more fundamental than any and all cultural nonsense. We are forced to look below the surface of all cultural embellishments of this cognitive pattern to the surface of the environment... the planet itself as a substratum of affect.

In the transition to formulate a useful trichotomous collective model... such as attempting to create a workable governing model which takes the best criteria from Communism, "Democratism" and Socialism to produce a "fusible linkage", we find that such an exercise conflicts with the usage of old individualized dichotomies. For example, there are those who readily recognize that the European Union must develop a coherent political union of all its members or forever remain at odds. The individual countries must become like states of a single country... but there are those whose mentality remains focused on some old dichotomy of separatism such as is described by and "us/them" formula. However, in developing a more comprehensive coalition of differing cultures, the desire for such a political unification has not been generally recognized nor collectively named in order to precipitate a further blossoming. Providing a name to an idea permits the further development of a transitional phase along a concerted focus. It provides a needed level of practicality. It is difficult to communicate without a name being associated with a singular idea, much less trying to describe and define a mental construct involving three ideas being fused into a singularity. And though I have designated it as a "Cenocratic" (New Rule- New Governance) model, I must momentarily abort a selective explication, though it has already been submitted on other pages at this Cenocracy.org site, in order that I may proceed into the indulgence of a more deliberate mood of sourcing.

Some will easily recognize the existence of old dichotomous themes being played out— and may as well have labeled them as a product of nature... as a commonality of that which makes us human. Be this as it may, however one may use their own inclined vocabulary for description, they may or may not have come to apprehend the presence of a collectively displayed trichotomous orientation being played out, being sorted out, being played with, practiced, set aside, taken up again, fumbled about with, and all the other formulaic intermittancies humans engage in when learning by way of trial and error. While some may say that the usage of trichotomies is an old theme as well, it is true on an individual basis, though having occurred collectively in the realm of religion such as with the trinitarian perspective; but not so widely and not so often on the economic level. And though we have seen an inkling of a trichotomous "exercise" in the fashion of the "Big Three" complementarity during World War II (Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin), this occurrence was not correlated with other trichotomous expressions cropping up in other, disparate areas of human endeavor... when, all totaled, represent a change taking place in human mentation.

The European Union runs into various problems because it is trying to practice the development of a trichotomous (Communistic, Democratic, Socialistic) inter-meshing of the best qualities, while having to confront a governing frame-work which utilizes some inherent dichotomies. The European Union has got to be reformulated. Every member has to step back and re-think the "collective ideal". In doing so, let it be introduced that the people themselves, and in a larger sense, all of humanity, must be the operative "State". The people can not be used as collateral or bargaining chip as if they were a resource to be added to or detracted from in terms of some selectively defined punishment or profit. There should never again be the occasion of a situation advancing any form of "Austerity Measures" as a viable proposition or provision, regardless of how it is named such as recession, depression, contraction, etc... With the people, with humanity so named as the collective "State", everyone is involved and everyone will likewise share in a collective responsibility. Hence, the public is its own Supremacy, a "Public Supremacy".

But the occasion of a collectively developing trichotomous orientation must be sourced since examples of its basic impression have arisen in multiple subject areas. Yet, we must couple the realization of a presented "three" with the acknowledgment of an amalgamation. An inter-meshing, a mixing, a fusion. To say that the human proclivity for using dichotomies and as well, trichotomies, is a natural occurrence, whether or not a user is conscious of such; should be attendant with an attempted explication of how such a "natural" exercise of consciousness may have been implanted, or imprinted upon the human psyche. As such, let us look to nature for the establishment of such a precedent.

Let us thus indulge ourselves in the imaginative trek of sojourning back into those very early years prior to the ascendency of humanity, of even life forms in order to gain some perspective of events which entailed the development of such dichotomous and trichotomous patterns as we have herein mentioned as examples. Where as, both "dichotomy" and "trichotomy" are patterns with more basic formulations that we might label as two and three. And by rote extension, one might be so inclined to argumentatively include a larger scale of enumeration involving zero, one, two, three, etc... but let us leave such inferences at the by-the-way depot and take in the vista of that very ancient time.

Aside from the lack of an oxygen atmosphere and a decidedly different terrain at our feet, we observe that the Earth is rotating much faster. And even though basic calculators are known for producing errors involving very large numbers such as the billions of years in the past to which we have ventured in our sourcing interlude, we make some ad hoc calculation that the Earth's rate of rotation is 3+ times faster than what we of today are experiencing. For example, instead of a 100 miles per hour rate of revolution being measured at the equator, the rate of rotation would have been 3000 miles per hour. Let us visualize that we are standing at the presumed time and place of biological creation and find that the building blocks of life are subjected to an increased rotation rate as if being spun in a scientist's centrifuge. And the sun, because of the increased rotation rate, is acting as a source of stroboscopic irradiation. And the pattern of the irradiation is known today by the three-labeled markers as Dawn, Noon, and Dusk. Such three "moments" as they may be called, are undeniable distinctions for which one might provide examples:

  • Dawn- primitives saw the rising Sun (sometimes called "Son") as a "Saviour", as a God, as the Light, as the Way to joy, comfort, security... etc... Even today we find those who pray towards the East, the rising Sun. And let us also mention, without example, more simple life forms with activities aligned with the presence or absence of the Sun.

  • Noon- though this is often numerically delineated as twelve o'clock, on a more basic biological level, the increased sensitivity of the Sun may be felt, depending on where one is in the world, at a different and/or longer interval than what this singular numerical reference might suggest to some. For example, some say that the Sun is most intense during the period of ten o'clock to two o'clock, at which time one should limit their exposure via clothing, or use some sun blocking (sun tan lotion) protective.

  • Dusk- some primitives might well have thought the Sun got "eaten" by some monster who left them in the dark, the cold, and made them seek sanctuary from the undefined sights and sounds they were subjected to during the nocturnal escapades of predatory creatures. Paranoia no doubt required the usage of hypervigilance.

The tri-partite pattern of these three "moments" on the earliest development of our biological substrate encouraged the adaptation of a triplet coding system in both RNA and DNA. It is not that there can not be examples of other patterns, but that the "three" is prominent. But so is the "two" in terms of the night/day, hot/cold, darkness/light variations. Supportively, it should be mentioned that while humanity had entertained a practice of solar worship whose heights were reached in the expressions of skyward reaching pyramids, it is remarkable that there is an absence of a night/day worship and accompanying structural representations from which large scale economic systems evolved. Indeed, the construction of the pyramids was a vast, socio-economic enterprise that is, in some respects, being attempted in the sought for cooperation called a European Union.

With so prominent an appearance as the night/day sequence, it is a wonder as to why humanity did not develop a corresponding social system to reflect this as a "god". While there are numerous ideas of duality, dichotomization, and Janus-faced representations in different formulations, there was no easily discernible equivalent to the "Sun = Son = (+) Spirit = (+) Father" development. Granted we have the good versus evil and the many other examples of opposing companions, and the Bicameral varieties in governing structures, an observed three-patterned structure is more prominent such as the Executive - Judicial - Legislative tripartition seen in the American governing formula. And yet, the underlying patterns of "Two and Three" are easily overlooked as basic cognitive patterns. It matters not how we culturally embellish and elaborate them, combined with or without ceremony and specific labels of reverence... the "2-pattern and 3-pattern" persist. Whereas we can cite references to an attendant observation of singularity or the "1" value, it too becomes a part of the foregoing ensemble to present us with a "1- 2- 3" model. An example of a singularity, for those unaccustomed to think in such a fashion, is the usage of a single President, Governor, Mayor, etc., though a committee, a city, a nation and even the whole of the Earth itself might, in some context of examination, be seen as a "1", a "one", a singularity that is not necessarily representative of a first... as someone might cite the concept of God; a concept having been derived as an amalgamation of many gods through a process of civil one-upmanship used by those asserting their view as being superior to the collective of everyone's singular ideas about a personal god. In effect, the concept of a single God was a fusion of multiple ideas into a singularity. The source of that which influence the human mind to participate in an activity of "fusion", is being addressed herein.

However, whether it be a singular God, a tripartite governing structure, or an inherently used bicameral legislative apportionment; what we are expressed examples of cognitive limitations. Using words, garments, traditions, laws, policies, procedures or ceremony to give ourselves the impression that we have somehow exceeded past expressions of cognitive limits, is a ruse. We, like our forebearers are very much engaged in a repetition of thought the likes of which, even when acknowledged, are not fully appreciated... like a carrot held out in front of a farm animal who sees the edible morsel, but does not appreciate that although it may be consumed, it is a memorized image. Humanity does the same thing. Look into the eyes of an "ordinary" person and you can see the same blankness one sees when looking into a farm filled with a variety of animal life. This is not a disparagement, it is a means of helping others to identify a life-form tied to the vagaries of its environment and thinks that the wearing of a harness to pull a wagon or plow is the expression of an enhanced intelligence. But let us look closer at this phenomena of cognitive limitation that some might want to conclude is surpassed on a frequent basis as is suggested by technologies referred to as "advances".

Our alphabets are expressed forms of adhered-to limitations. And though number sequence suggests a line projected into a limitless infinity, we must make note of the fact that at every third number, we repeat the usage of a comma. As if to be reminded that there is or at least once was, a cognitive limit having been reached. In fact, in the history of using words to represent quantity, historians of this genre have noted that there is a frequent representation of three number words. In a given peoples' own language equivalent way, they had a word "one" for the quantity "1", a word "two" for the quantity "2", and anything beyond this value was called "Many", though one might entertain to use such words as "Much" or "More". Hence, there were three number words that we can interchangeably note with three zeroes to indicate the ones, tens, and hundreds placements, followed by a comma as a point of demarcation, a point from which we can attempt some cognitive embarkation to exceed our ability to mentally conceive. In other words, to mark our place at a given time in the history of our mental development, so as to proceed further. However, what we are finding is that we are customarily repeating ourselves. Like the event of a day following a night or one season following another season. Our brain has adapted to the environment with a configuration that is tailored to the reflection of reproduction, to repetition.

Over time, either small or large cognitive leaps might become projected onto the surface of consideration. Such cognitive leaps might be described as an Eureka! event and might be portrayed with the phrase "chance favors the prepared mind". Yet other examples of cognitive leaps may occur by way of a fortuitous serendipitous event or due to something we might want to characterize as an accident. Revolution and revolt are the precursor elements of such projections. These "projections" are sometimes deliberately sought and artificialized by way of imposed limitations for defining a given criteria such as what is being meant by the social phenomena we call Revolution. Whereas the public's definition might be as varied as the personalities of the general public, a researcher imposes a given criteria, typically a limited "set" of references in the form of singular words or phrases. Such limitations are, in effect, imposed time constraints... or cognitive limitations. For example, a government agency such as the S.E.C., through its Representative agents, may use a time constraint imposed on one or more others as part of a criteria involving a given process and procedure... that then becomes the overall determining factor by which a person is determined to have done something correctly or incorrectly. The person or persons may nonetheless be right, but in terms of the imposed constraints, they are wrong. Such constraints are used because a person or organization can only opportune a circumstance within the parameters of their cognitive limitations. By creating territorial cognitive markers, truth/lie, guilt/innocence, justice/unfairness, right/wrong, smart/dumb, rich/poor... and all other dichotomies are easier to grasp.

But language itself is a limitation which is like a crude tool being used to probe for some tasty insect in a hole. Mathematics is another crude tool. So is art, music, science and our physical abilities to perceive the world as well as the mass of meat in our skull trying to define and divine some sense of it all. Let us take for instance, a very simple example used in analogy so as not to confuse a basic illustration with too many social embellishments that cultures are known for and can get in the way of examination. The American usage of clothing sizes indicating the generalizations of "small, medium, and large" are adequate, though we might also use "low, medium and high"; if not the universally noted "diagonal, horizontal and vertical" might be appropriate in order to involve a larger audience. Whereas one might add numbers and incremental variations, there remains an applied set of limitations. And even if one tries to excuse such an exercise by claiming that it is the limitation of the application and not human brain capacity, the situation nonetheless exhibits an expressed repetitive usage o cognitive limits. In other words, it repetitively indicates how we humans think. The influence of such a repetitively used pattern must have its influence somewhere, and that "somewhere" may well be identifiable to see whether or not it is stable or undergoing change.

All present governing systems are expressions of cognitive limits. These limits necessarily set the stage for imposing constraining conditions on the public that induce the need for protest. If the protest is continually dismissed as an irrelevance, there is a thickening of the social ambiance which promotes a consolidated mood for engaging in a Revolution or out-right Rebellion. A pre-revolutionary circumstance begins when those who are being elected and as well those who have been selected by those who have been elected; exhibit themselves as being little more than office managers with the retinue of a secondary array of officious and officiating others— as well as a tertiary order of paid-for military and law enforcement supportive routinizers acting as maintenance personnel. All of whom exhibit the auspices of those who are not true path finders but keepers of an established flame. Again and again and again the peoples of the world and hence, all of humanity, is subjected to a recurrence of something that has already been, and as now assumed the cloak of the cultural era to which it once again emerges to show itself as some raw instinct having arisen out of a hibernation every election to repeat itself. A different person with a different following using the language of the moment, but little more than a repetition of that which has already been. While the players are different, the stage scenery calling forth its own linguistic idioms, it nonetheless bespeaks a cognitive limit having been reached and so neatly defined in the subject area of mathematics involving the history of words -for- number concept derivations.

Again, let it be stated that such purveyors are not true path finders, they are keepers of an established flame. They stand within a framework of mentality that they are afraid to step out of because they think they will then be suspect for advancing a view counter-productive to an established system of incentives for unleashing prerogatives which adjudicate the acceptance of a formalized syllogistic enterprise. In short, and in simpler terms, they think they are right and to think otherwise is, for example, tantamount to a workplace sacrilege because they would then lose money that doesn't belong to them but becomes theirs through a sleight-of-hand business practice. They are unable to recognize it as a cognitive limit exhibiting an arrogance of character that those of us who readily see it for what it is, must disclose it as such. Like having to work with those who are cognitively challenged because of some disease, injury or genetic anomaly, this is what one encounters when attempting to address an issue with those of a governing body live within a culture that supports itself because it is part of their identity to use ad hoc time-constrained policies and procedures which will enable them to, for example, skim the surface of available monies taken under their control through a mechanism of legalized injunctions to proportionately serve themselves through increasing pecuniary holdings by taking a little from a lot, each time they take it upon themselves to assume a proprietary role.

It is a role that plays out in the mention of cognitive limits. Though we all have cognitive limits, this recognition is not meant as an excuse to deny the realization for the existence of events which transgress these limits. And it provides the incentive of constructing the realization into a formalized policy of observance which might better prepare and be accepting of the advent of such an arrival. Whereas 'going beyond oneself' in terms of talent or expressed progress can be realized and experienced with delight, the presence of such in a culture dependent on traditions and policies supporting traditions, makes the potential occurrence of social instability a real possibility. Not everyone will be adaptable to exceeding a collective expression of exceeding cognitive limits. Some people will find the presence of a social atmosphere representing a breech of a cognitive limitation, as a very frightful situation. It can be just as maddening for them as it is for those whose mindset better suited for the breech, are forced to submit to a limitation which acts as a abominable constraint. However, I am speaking about cognitive patterns which have nothing to do with physical morality. In other words, advocating the position of a perspective beyond a conventionalized cognitive limitation is not an advocation for engaging in promiscuousness, murder, robbery, incest, rape, prejudice, hatred, bigotry, etc... Speaking of broaching cognitive limitations is not to be used as a reason or excuse to engage in the breeching of any and all parameters of behavior. Having sexual intercourse with several partners under the provision of individual marriages, remains as an activity of having sexual intercourse with different partners like any promiscuous primate in the jungle. Social sanctification does not conceal its own artificiality.

The usage of the words "Communism, Democracy, Socialism" to denote systems of social governance, are symbolic representations of perceptual variations. If we include other social governance varieties such as theocracy, plutocracy, dictatorship, etc., we then begin to design a spectrum of variation... but it too remains as an indication of our cognitive limits. If we use the terms "life and death" as outermost polar extremities, despite all the accompanying social observances and ceremonies, everything between life and death remains between. They do not extend beyond these values of extremity, despite our insistence for partaking in ideas suggesting a "before" or "after" life. While they do express an attempt to conceptualize a place, if not exact time exceeding the limitations of life and death, they are in fact expressed limitations to an actuality thereof... at least let us conjecture in terms of practicality and not an unsupervised metaphysic. Hence, Communism, Democracy, and Socialism are socialized ceremonies of cognitive limitations. They exist within the delimitations of life and death. They are exercises expressing a given appreciation of these extremities. Different peoples, sharing an agreed upon, or at least some shared observance of a given perspective of life and death, had their own variety of social governing programs... however civil or brutal one may care to define in accordance with one's own preferences.

Revolutions and Revolts often bring an observed governance to the limitation known as death. Through a redefinition of what life and death is thought to mean, new laws may be devised to suit the perspective of a given population fed up with social governing practices that are 'out-of-step' with a changed rationality. From this nearness to death, though "death" is a metaphor expressing the demise of a particular governing system in one or more respects; comes a rebirth... a presumed step beyond the limitations imposed by an old system. However, an actual leap in cognition may not have taken place... only an embellishment or relabeling. On the one hand we might define a limitation in terms of some "in the eye of the beholder" philosophy, we are nonetheless faced with the acknowledgment that a true cognitive boundary remains a possible and probable character realization that is not dependent on some personalized vantage point. For example, we of today, with a simple understanding of grade-school arithmetic might be perceived as having a distinctly advanced form of thinking to some BCE era person, that is if they could even begin to understand a simple process of enumeration. Likewise, while some today are inclined to think that an advanced alien species would have an appreciation of prime numbers; it would indeed be surprising to find that a type of cognition which requires the usage of a "prime number" perspective (1, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, etc... ) may be viewed as simplistic as a primitive counting notches on a stick. Indeed, our most advanced mathematics of today may be little more than a game of hopscotch to alien children. Just because we think we of today are intelligent, it is arrogance to think a species with an advanced or different set of cognitive limitations would think likewise. It might be very dangerous for us to be broadcast our presence into a Universe the likes of which may be more different than the Incans coming into contact with the Conquistadors... with diseases to be the least of "first encounter" problems to deal with.

In spite of all the elaborations applied to this or that perspective, we must attempt to identify basic patterns and correlate them with pristine environmental influences. Whereas simpler life forms do not engage in as varied a symbolism as do humans, there are species-specific variations. With respect to humans, yes, some expressions and ideas are influenced by other ideas and expressions, but taken as a whole, basic expressions arise from basic environmental circumstances. For example, the circumstances of Life and death developed from environmental conditions predating the emergence of the first hominid. With hominids arose perceptions to which we apply the label of "mythology". Social governing patterns exist in concert with observed myths, though the people observing such myths may well interpret and define them as reality. Protests against a given policy, set of laws or the structure of government, are in fact statements against an observed myth. For example, if everyone woke up one morning and accepted the idea that the dark matter of space represented a hole our known universe had fallen into and that we need to get out of with the greatest of speed; every governing system on the planet might well be changed accordingly. The practiced systems of governance in place today are labels giving reference to particular systems of myth, many of which are shared from one culture to the next.

It matters not if your observed system of myths is called a philosophy, a science, an art, a religion, a genre, or whatever, and no matter how elaborate one goes about trying to establish or reinforce an accepted truth; they are all myths. And it is of need to note that the usage of the word "myth", though frequently associated with the idea of a fanciful story or even fairy tale, is not to automatically define them as bad or wrong, because it in fact helps us to distinguish how differently perceptions can anthropomorphically be elaborated in a given realm of isolation. While we can distinguish parallels of orientation, this parallelization may not be as clear cut if a mythologist from a different galaxy were to attempt some semblance of correlating the assortment of myths of our isolated planet with those of another isolated planetary system— because the idea of myths being developed in ancient isolated civilizations on Earth may not be an applicable model for a microcosmic to macrocosmic comparison.

When a government can no longer assimilate the change in ideas, the alteration of observed mythological orientations through a mechanism such as Constitutional amendments... or that such a process becomes too cumbersome... protests and revolutions can ensue. And it is of need to comment that there is a distinction to be made with these processes and the usage of rioting and rebellion. Though rioting and rebellion may lead to a concerted protest and Revolution, they are irrational forms of the latter. A protest and Revolution need not be an expressed exercise in rioting and rebellion with which are accompanied violence. Violence need not be used to effect an alteration in a public's mythological base, though it may have to be used as a protective measure against a governing system run by those who do not want a system of governance to change because they are most familiar and comfortable with it. They do not want the story-line to change. But it is. More and more are questioning the ideas upon which the foundation of their nation's governing system was established. And the questioning deepens the more they are confronted with a governing system that reflects a governance that no longer exemplifies even a minimalist illustration of the former ideas.

Old ideas give way to new ones, and the new ones may include an examination of the old ones with a different model than that which was used previously. In fact, the old ones may incorrectly be viewed to fit within the new model. For example, those looking to the past may look upon the presence of three gods in a given culture and label it a triad of gods, but those in the past had no such perspective. Each god may have been viewed as independently as we view a stranger. Nonetheless, the applied label is then used to organize other cultures' gods, but the model is not then applied external to the organization of gods. The notion of a triad, a trio or even trinity of gods, becomes recognize as an item-specific tool. To use this tool for other than a reference to three gods, is viewed as being improper and indulging in a form of numerology, but using such a tool for a specific category such as "gods", is not. It is a prejudice, a bigotry that portrays an act of segregationism by the usage of a minimalist approach. It is so often used in so many areas to produce 'specialities' so as to reduce the event of increased competition. Like the development of different games that different groups of people can come to individually dominate, thereby making the source for all games appear to be more difficult to find; but actually leads us to examine the source for all people because people are the source of all games.

Yet, a single source may come to be more easily concealed through differentiation, like a multiplicity of life forms. While there are different life forms and some people may become quite knowledgable about a given form such as birds, they may not know from where or when all birds originated. If we use a retrograde approach to our search for a source of all people, we might decide to look at the source for all life forms. This then may lead to comparative anatomy and comparative biology on the cellular level. We may then return to our earlier mentioned comments about genetics in terms of DNA and RNA triplet structures, in an attempt to gain an understanding of life on a simpler and more basic, yet important level without all the "embellishments" of biological variety seen on more complex levels of organization such as are called vertebrate and invertebrate life forms. And yet, as mentioned previously, even these basic genetic structures must have an earlier environmental source that can still be recognized.

But let us, in the present stage of our sourcing examination, include a mention of Proteins as another biological substrate, giving us the trio of DNA, RNA, Proteins. Proteins, by the way, have a primary (1), secondary (2), tertiary (3) formation, with a COMPOSITE of these called a Quaternary. It must be understood that the usage of the word "quaternary" is the count of a recognized entity and not a description of internalized structuring since by simple addition, the 1 + 2 + 3 yields six. That which occurs after a third is referenced as a forth, but does not necessarily define a structural patterning of four. Hence, let us formalize this distinction by referring to it as a three -to- one formula, though some may prefer the language of three -and- one, three -plus- one, or similarly otherwise. Likewise, we see this same configuration in both DNA and RNA in that the three amino acids "Adenosine, Cytosine, and Guanine" are prevalent, with DNA specified by the amino acid Thymine and RNA specified by the amino acid Uracil. In other words, these represent additional examples of a three to one ratio, though again, one might prefer to use a reference as 'three and one'.

Let us put these three biological substrates into a box for those of you who can not readily visualize the 3 -to- 1 patterns:

Substrate123+ one

And thus it should be obvious to some that we redesign the present three-part Democratic structure of Executive, Judicial, Legislative into a three -to- one formula:

Ceno1 (1K) Executive + Judicial + Legislative

Adding a
Peoples Legislative Branch will be a new cognitive system.
Demo1 (1K) Executive + Judicial + Legislative

A cognitive limit has been reached with this old system.

Here are some pages which reference the 3 "2" 1 ratio:

Perhaps the following Irish expression might afford some with a common impression of the three -to- one ratio idea taken from From "Paddy's Lament, (1846 - 1847) by Thomas Gallager", pages 125 & 126 (the first is how it is found in the book and the second version is how I would rewrite it):

Three folds in my garment,
yet only one garment I bear,
Three joints in a finger,
yet only one finger is there,
Three leaves in a shamrock,
yet only one shamrock I wear,
Frost, ice and snow,
these are nothing but water,
Three persons in God,
yet only one God is there.
Three folds in my garment,
yet only one garment I bear,
Three joints in a finger,
yet only one finger is there,
Three leaves in a shamrock,
yet only one shamrock I wear,
Frost, ice and snow no wetter,
with water the only tare (measure),
And three persons in God,
yet only one God, Everywhere.

(I wanted to keep the rhyme intact as well as not repeat the word "there".)

With respect to these biological substrates reflecting an adaptation to the environment they were subjected to during a very long interval of time on an accelerated rotating Earth, we can see the "three" in the three "moments" (Dawn - Noon - Dusk) of the Sun, but where is the "one" in the observable three -to- one ratio? Well, there are THREE "moments" in ONE Sun. Though it may seem that this is a reached-for correlation bordering on rationalization, it must be remembered that biological substrates are symbols, are expressions which cropped up during a malleable transformation. They are not mirror-image reflections of the exact environmental events to which they were subjected, they are representative inferences and not some photographic "selfie" reproduction. They are refractions and distortions created by what crude materials were available during the time. Like a Leonardo Da Vinci being asked to produce his greatest masterpiece, yet he must find and create his own materials as well as subject matter while being placed on a desert island. They are separate, but related renditions of the same impression. So are all the triple god-heads which have cropped up here and there during humanity's trek through the ages and is reflected in the idea of the Christian Trinity with its "three persons in one god" formulation. And in physics we find the idea of three families of fundamental particles not to mention the three large basic particles known as electrons, neutrons and protons as well as the myriad of List of Threes in human anatomy examples to be found in our physiology as denoted by Dr. McNulty.

A discussion concerning ideas to adopt an ideal inter-play of Communism, Democracy and Socialism into an amalgamated new identity, a new social philosophy from which can arise a new formula of governance; is a type of syllogism which must go beyond conventional and traditionalized forms of logic because of an intricate complexity which does not easily lend itself to simplified mathematical formulas; and requires an algorithm of calculus uniquely suited for unraveling the language of disparate characters that may algebraically be used as a tool of decipherment, analysis and problem solving... thus requiring a broader appreciation of three-patterned formulations from different subject areas and now frequently noted a the "threes phenomena". It is a phenomena that in former years was regarded primarily in terms of religion, such as used to support some trinitarian perspective, or viewed as some lingering remnant of a more ancient and superstitious past. However, by the usage of a cross-discipline approach to highlight its frequent occurrence in subject areas viewed as being non- religious in orientation, its recurrence has brought to the fore the necessity for a different measurement of interpretation. Though admittedly, one must included considerations of a numerological consideration, because it too is an example of explanations which might be promoted, the existence of such a pattern in human anatomy alone suffices to warrant an extended effort for re-examination... unless one would off-handedly conclude that the recurring presence of such a pattern's regularity in this domain is because God indulges in simplistic numerology and superstition that may well define the Universe since we seem to be able to find this same pattern in physics.

Here is a list of some "threes" sites:

Book of Threes
Triplicity: The Phenomenon of Threeness in Life
Threesology Research Journal

The European Union is being met with conflicts arising out of the presence of old dichotomies (us/them, yours/mine, me/you, etc.), because of an underlying alteration of consciousness into the adoption of a useful trichotomous orientation of blending Communism, Democracy and Socialism; that one might illustrate more basically as a "you, me and us" formula that is trying to meld its best characteristics into a workable philosophy so that everybody profits and no one is subjected unnecessarily to a loss, or if such an occasion does arise, it will merit the objective selfless interests of everyone to find a practical amelioration for. For some, such a trichotomy is afforded a mere hint of recognition because it is as yet vague and subtle, while others may have recognized it as a given, an obvious necessity, though it has yet to be practiced fully because dichotomous ideas have played a dominant role. And yet this too is another recital of superficiality. Let us return to the environmental model of pristine conditions to survey that which has not been mentioned...

As we go further into the future, the rotation of the Earth is slowing down. This occurrence is effecting life in that it has to adapt to this slowing rate. Additionally, as the Moon recedes from the Earth, tidal behavior changes which also affects life. And a third event is that of the enlarging Sun as it proceeds towards a burnout. Now visually return to the billions of years ago three-patterned strobe-light effect of the Sun while standing on a fast spinning Earth. Now move forward into time and watch the Sun increase in size along its development towards a burnout. Whereas the three-moment stroboscopic event has produced a myriad of triple patterns, both in an out of human physiology and consciousness; biological life remains attached to the Sun like an umbilical cord.

As the Earth's rotation slows, and the Sun expands, the three "moment's" of the Sun are, in effect, "fusing" together. Hence, we have a very influential environmental event that is creating replications of the event(s). In the coming years we will see a profusion of "three to one" ratio events, that may crop up again and again in intermittent fashion until distinctions of three separate elements will be obscured. The three to one ratio is signalling a trek towards the demise of life on Earth.

3in1 (15K)

Humanity, with its adoption of three to one ratio ideas, no matter what words, symbols, sounds aromas, etc., are used, mixed and matched, humanity's only salvation may lay in a greater cooperation than ever practiced. Humanity, the people, must become the "State" of a comprehensive community effecting the singularity of purpose to remove itself from this planet, this solar system, and perhaps even this galaxy. It must take it upon itself to cut the umbilical cord which tethers it to the decadent influences of the Sun. Humanity must develop an enterprise that will dwarf that once practiced by the pyramid builders who built due to being engaged in a philosophy for the Sun-god; by doing that which is against this Sun-god.

And one must be cognizant that humanity frequently engages in the usage of symbols, of metaphors, of analogies to provide a representation in a different voice that may stand as a hoped-for universal language. And that sometimes, such efforts are engaged in but are not consciously acknowledged. Like pyramids made of stone, dirt and animal hides (Native American teepees), one might also recognize the same basic triangular form in arrow heads, spear heads, the human coccyx (tail bone), Vee-flight formation of migrating birds, termite mounds, the wake of a ship, and numerous other observations. It is of some interest to provide an image of the Sun's (and Moon's) daily passage as if one were standing on the Earth, though we of today would have to use time-elapsed photography in order to make the same observation. The image of the path, as an formula on impressionable biological life, is quite startlingly to see when we come face to face with it. In short, the presence of a distinct "trio" may be concealed, still in some ancient "multiple gods" arrangement prior to the ascendancy of one supreme God, and any of a myriad moldings of a particular person's individuation with respect to experiences, education, abilities, interests, etc...

small (18K)

If you ask a person of today if they believe in one or multiple gods, depending on where you are in time and place, a person may give one or the other as their answer, unless the choose to say they don't believe in any version. And yet, the dominant perspective of all three examples is the acknowledgment of a "god" idea. Though different people may disagree about how many or if any a god exists, the "god idea" exists in all three. The same is true for those who will seek concrete (photographic) representations in any and all cases with respect to a three to one example, as a means of whether they should agree with the present theses or not. Nonetheless, the idea has still been planted.

Again, let it be said, the "State" must be the people and they must represent themselves as a full partner in the European Community. The rationale for which the European Community had originally been formulated must be re-written to provide for each country as a state and each state as as individual and each individual as a full partner represented by every single person with an equal vote. Free trade must advance the directive of share and share alike, without deny individuality or seeking some communal sense of equality represented in the sameness of mediocrity. The European Union must have a collective goal just as each country has an individual goal. The collective goal must be discussed, legislated and ratified by everyone. A guiding principle of the larger goal must be selflessness that is not set into place as a sanctity of purpose which must be effected no matter who gets hurt. Larger goals can not be selfish goals predicated on some Supremacist ideal which conceals an underlying orientation to separatist and exclusionary proclivities.

The European Union must advance collective principles which far exceed the wisdom of their forebearers who had come out of an era dominated by dichotomous thinking. Let everyone be involved with the intention for striving to exceed the gains of former years by adopting an enhanced collective goal. And yes, let it be known that all such goals are exercises just as are economic theories. Let them be fully aware that even the best of intentions formulated by the most brilliant of minds, can be faulty. There is no shame in the trial and error event of exploration into an uncharted area. No doubt some mistakes will be made, but we can learn from them. Let us all learn together. All of humanity can functionally be inter-woven into a single community without loss of individuality. If a single person, a single culture, or a single country is marching ahead... let us follow them because we are all in the same race together.

Let us place an addendum to the foregoing comments regarding a solar source as an imprinting pattern which surfaces in different clothing, but the underlying scaffolding remains the same. For those having realized that the trek of the Sun from dawn, to noon, to dusk involves an increase in intensity, you know doubt have surmised that if one were to use simple numerical values set on a line, the direction would be either left to right or right to left... depending on what culture you are from, though some might prefer to entertain the view of a top to bottom or bottom to top orientation, if they are so inclined to read like this. But people forget that the usage of numbers is just a tool to assist us humans in emphasizing a distinction of difference. Numbers do not need to be used as the title of a description. Instead of numbers the researchers may have written the article to reference a direction along an alphabet, musical scale, height, weight, etc... They also could have used a reference to solar activity such as from dawn to dusk, but most people don't customarily think in such terms. If we were to place the daily route of the Sun on a number line, some would think to involve a scale that starts at zero, proceeds to a given large number such as ten, twelve or whatever, and then decrease... in an attempt to convey what they perceive to be a change in solar intensity:

... dawn ... 2 ... 3 ... 4 ... noon ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ... dusk ....

However, such a scale does not adequately describe what is taking and has taken place on a psychological and physiological level for a period of time which dwarfs the present usage of artificial lighting. There still remains wide-spread fear of darkness-associated impressions in both children and adults... not to mention how the darkness, the lack of sunlight and its "moon-lighting" substitute provoke numerous responses in plants and other animals... if not bacteria and viruses. The above scale does not describe the generations of emotional intensity felt by primitive humans before the advent of, though including, the adopted usage of fire to ward off all the imagined monsters, demons, and other would-be predators. Thus, a revision of the previous scale would be:

... dawn ... 2 ... 3 ... 4 ... noon ... 6 ... 7 ... 8 ... dusk ... +?

(It's no wonder it took humanity so long to discover the value of "0". There may be some occasional "lull" in the counting sequence impressed on our biological/ physiological "substrate/subscription" that emerges only periodically and those that are "prepared" for its arrival, can read it in terms of the "language" they are most familiar with, be it mathematics, music, physics, engineering, art, medicine, etc...)

...Not to mention the different forms of hyper-vigilance and out-right paranoia which have been formulated in the human psyche and are expressed in culturally differentiated behavioral models some of which are described in stories, fairy tales, Urban Legends, religious perspective, popular songs, political orientations, etc... All of which, if humanity was objective enough, would be placeable on an overall scale of human behavior like that of a number on a clock. The placement of ideas in relation to a particular number value would not only indicate when it arrived on the biological scene, but as a variable that we could control through an observable lens of detection like a developmental sequence we attribute to a single life-span. For example, we might place Religion at a four o'clock position because of its primivity of occurrence in humanity, but we do not know when it arrived on the biological scene in a more primitive variation prior to the development of human symbols, particular forms of ideation, etc... As such, one might ask if a microbe has some semblance, some indicator of a "religion" indicator, that should, in this present comment, be noted as a phenomena to be differentiated from both the idea of a "God" and "Morality", since they are separate topics, though religions the world over try to claim ownership of the God and morality topics.

The phenomena of politics as a primitive biological substrate, because of the Earth's peculiar environmental influences, might predate Religion and therefore be placed at a "two" o'clock position, with "politics" being, as well, primitively defined as, for example, the action one might see amongst pine trees where other life forms below it, on the ground, are kept from growing there... as a type of "Supremacist" orientation expressed in some variation of a "survival of the fittest" biological directive, by way of a separatist or exclusionary activity. And though some readers might be thrown for a loop by the present usage of analogy, correlation and metaphor, that such digressions are "Way Out There", other readers can readily identify the relatedness to the overall discussion.

And while the forthcoming article did not pursue the idea of a "clock" with respect to a circular design for describing behavioral direction related to the "intensity" of quantity, which one might venture into making an additional correlation with the idea of an increased population density; such an idea is of applicability because the Earth revolves like the impressions we derive through the usage of language coupled with the usage of a circular-shaped, and not linear nor triangularly-shaped clock. Because earlier sun-dials exhibited a circular pattern with respect to a cast shadow, a "circularity" of motion should be included in a discussion involving an environmental event whose effects on biology, though we might use the terms diurnal (daily), monthly, seasonal, yearly, etc., illustrate a recurrence for which a circular model can be utilized. If we were to plot changes in physiology which occur over a single day's span, such changes would indicate in increasing and decreasing values and that some recognize as Circadian rhythms.

Yet, in noting Circadian rhythms, we of the present day are not yet adept at measuring variations at the level of subtle changes occurring in response to the slowing of the Earth's rotation, the receding of the Moon, and the Expansion of the Sun... and how life is struggling to cope with such changes, and how such changes are being reflected in human behavior such as thoughts and thought processing... like a gosling having been imprinted on the behavior of the dominant moving presence long before it was even a gosling. The behavior of the Sun has imprinted itself on biology, but that behavior is, fore the most part, superficially understood with respect to basic patterns such as the presence of an influential triangular path, and the "fusion" of its three "moments" as the Sun expands and the Earth slows down. Human biology remains very primitive despite our "Supremacist" inclinations to define it as the most complex form, and hence, claim some superiority, some "dominion" over all other creatures. The primivity of human biology responds to the effects of the Sun in primitive ways. Human thought is a primitive activity. That which is being expressed by this creature's brain, called thought, also is extremely primitive. The sounds, called language, that it uses, is symbolic. Because the symbols are varied from one culture to the next, we need to identify underlying basic structures, all the while being cognizant of the fact that the assortment of descriptive tools used in our analysis are extremely primitive tools themselves. Humanity is an extremely primitive sentient being that is very vulnerable to environmental activity that can, simultaneously, affect all behavioral life forms at the same time if conditions present themselves.

As the following article illustrates a single example of a primitive organism exhibiting what appears to be a preferential expression of direction when confronted by an increasing quantity, so are humans... though humans may relate to an "increase" with a variety of identifiers. For example, while some prefer lots of money, others prefer lots of shoes, or lots of plants, or lots of electronic's equipment, or lots of friends, or lots of constituents, or lots of awards, or lots of food, or lots of muscle, or lots of beauty, or lots of hair, or lots of books, or lots of land, or lots of farm animals, or lots of tractors, or lots of water, or lots of shade trees, or lots of grass, or lots of blue sky, or lots of rain, or lots of work, or lots of pets, etc., etc., etc... It matters not how it is defined or concealed by some socially acceptable standard, there is direction taken with respect to an underlying "counting" ability taking place on a non-verbal, and quite possibly, non-acknowledged level of basic behavior. Simple life forms, at least by our present day means of devising some test for such, exhibit a similarity of orientation whose origin no doubt predates such life forms with respect to having been present in a more distant biological past. Hence, biological activity remains attached to the Sun via some unrecognized umbilical cord that humanity must grow beround, as a means of growing beyond a source of social problems.

Social problems on a very basic level may be described as contrasts... as Dichotomies. Like the passage of the Sun from day to night, and the "grey" areas which occur as points demarking an acknowledgment of transitional periods between the larger contrasts which are offset by a larger transition of increasing intensity "in the light", that some may refer to as an implied awakening in consciousness, a "period" of enlightenment that has been referenced by label "Renaissance"... a rebirth, the opening of an unrealized vista. And with the notion of "contrasts" in mind, with respect to the following article, one can interpret differences in quantity either as described contrasts or variations of delineated intensity. And let us not overlook that the phenomena of men and women are viewed as contrasts that develop an ongoing "transitional" phase of harmonization which is needed to propagate the species. Like seasons of the year which transition from one to the next requiring that life forms adapt to the periodicity which is easily understood and recognized, but the "fusion" of the Sun's three "moments" are not readily seen nor identified, much less noted for the effect on biology and behavior.

No less, one must wonder if a different color scheme, or variations of different sensory modality such as sound (or silence), smell (foul or pleasant), temperature (hot or cold), magnetism (strong or weak), voltage (high or low), etc., aligned in a contrasting procedure, would have elicited the same type of responses— or if they are what is needed to test other life forms to determine whether a similar underlying behavioral characteristic would be found or something else uniquely undiscovered as yet. Indeed, at what point in quantity does a chick, or other species, begin to "recognize" (behaviorally), a quantity resembling "much, more, or many"? For example are two black dots contrasted to a white background "recognized" as a "higher number"? Or does the "recognition" begin at three, four, five, six, etc? How far can we space the dots apart, or must they appear to intersect with respect to the visual perception of chicks by being placed in close proximity? Is the overall, plus peripheral vision of a chick a small field requiring the usage of a small grouping of specific-sized dots, stars, squares, letters, etc.? Could linear "blotches" be used instead of circular ones like those in the experiment?

Whereas we humans might argue that the "the chosen one" orientation/direction/preference is culturally based, or biased, let me provide a study cited on the BBC website. And, contrary to the comment that it is "impossible to know exactly what drove the chicks' choices", it can be both readily and easily understood as a 'chick-specific' "expression" of solar influenced biological behavior that was established long before the chick was a chick in the present sense of its character. Whereas it is impossible to know what drove the chick's behavior under the present philosophical and psychological constraints on present behaviorist's research experiments, we need only to broaden, and look anew at "primivity" of behavior through an expansive appreciation of environmental and biological "expressions", to acquire an enriched insight to our past, present and future. The behavior is the "symbolic language" being used by the chick, just as humans use their own species- specific forms of "symbolic language". No doubt other life forms will use their own species-specific "symbolic language" in describing how they have been similarly effected by a long-standing, widely dispersed environmental event. And effect, this represents a new chapter in evolutionary discussion and research. (Friday, January 30, 2015 7:18 AM)

And as a final note before providing the article, it should be reviewed that the counting sequences of primitive have recurringly shown the usage of three increasing valuations with a group's own language medium, such that they had a word for the quantity "one", a word for the quantity "two", and a word such as "Many" describing three or larger quantities. While there may have no doubt been various mental "resting" or "take a breather" places which began before, during and after the onset of developing a concept of enumeration, the example of "one, two, many" is commonly referred to.

29 January 2015 Last updated at 14:03 ET
By Jonathan Webb
Science reporter, BBC News
Chicks place low numbers on the left

Scientists in Italy have found that baby chickens associate low and high numbers with left and right, respectively - just like humans.

In a series of experiments, 60 newborn chicks were shown patterns of shapes representing different numbers, before choosing a direction.

Humans are known to use a "mental number line" to think about quantities but this innate left-right association has not been seen in animals before.

The work appears in Science magazine.

Dr Rossa Rugani, who led the experiments at the University of Padova, said it was impossible to know exactly what drove the chicks' choices - but the results were clear.

"All we can judge is behavioural responses. Therefore, we don't actually know if it is a real 'number line' but it strongly resembles what is observed in the human number line," she told BBC News.

Humans show very consistent associations between spatial locations and numbers, but it is unclear how much of this develops automatically and how much we learn.

At seven months of age, babies prefer arrangements that increase from left to right. Adults show a bias whereby we respond to large numbers faster with our right hand, and smaller numbers faster with our left.

But that bias is reversed in adults who were educated in Arabic, which reads from right to left. So does education produce this bias, or just decide its direction?

Ancient bias

Because we can test their behaviour very soon after hatching, chicks are "a preferred model to study the foundation of cognitive abilities" Dr Rugani explained.

She and her colleagues designed their experiments to find out whether these young creatures, only distantly related to humans, also link smaller and bigger numbers with different spatial locations.

They trained each of the three-day-old animals to retrieve food from behind a sign, displaying a number of shapes.

Then the chick was offered two copies of a different number, and the researchers counted how many times each animal chose the left- or right-hand option.

If the new number was smaller than the training number, the fluffy subjects went left about 70% of the time; similarly, they went to the right 70% of the time if the new number was larger.

Just as has been shown in human studies, the effect was relative: chicks went to the right when shown "eight" if the initial "target" number was five - but when "eight" was preceded by a target of 20, they tended to go to the left.

In further experiments, the team tweaked the presentation of the numbers and found that the trend was the same even when the smaller number was presented using larger shapes, different colours, and so on.

Dr Rugani argues that her results, showing persistent left-right trends in baby birds, suggest an ancient evolutionary origin for our "mental number line".

Rather than picking up such biases as a product of our culture and education, we may have evolved these tendencies a very long time ago.

chick experiment

If it was higher than the previous number they had seen, chicks associated a new number with the right.

They may even have an origin in the physical arrangement of our brains, the team suggests.

Humans and animals do not have perfectly symmetrical brains and some functions are also biased to one side or the other - for example, a process called "pseudoneglect" means we pay slightly more attention to objects in the left side of space than the right. This has been proposed as an explanation for why we often start counting a series of objects with the one on the far the left.

Dora Biro, an associate professor of animal behaviour at the University of Oxford, told the BBC the new results were compelling.

"It certainly seems to push back the evolutionary origins of number-space mapping... to well beyond hominids," Dr Biro said.

She added that it will be interesting to see whether the left-right association can be re-trained in the same way that it can in people - or whether the animals' brains are more hard-wired to map numbers onto space in this particular orientation.

If it was higher than the previous number they had seen, chicks associated a new number with the right. They may even have an origin in the physical arrangement of our brains, the team suggests.

Humans and animals do not have perfectly symmetrical brains and some functions are also biased to one side or the other - for example, a process called "pseudoneglect" means we pay slightly more attention to objects in the left side of space than the right. This has been proposed as an explanation for why we often start counting a series of objects with the one on the far the left.

Dora Biro, an associate professor of animal behaviour at the University of Oxford, told the BBC the new results were compelling.

"It certainly seems to push back the evolutionary origins of number-space mapping... to well beyond hominids," Dr Biro said.

She added that it will be interesting to see whether the left-right association can be re-trained in the same way that it can in people - or whether the animals' brains are more hard-wired to map numbers onto space in this particular orientation.

Date of Origination: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 4:45 AM
Initial Post: Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Updated Post: Tuesday, February 3, 2015