On the horns of a trilemma
Apr. 19th, 2005 07:44 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shewhomustNot so long ago, I was asserting to a friend (don't remember who, but they clearly hadn't been reading enough SF!) that our tendency to see choices as binary oppositions, either / or, is related to the fact that we are symmetrical(ish) bipeds. If we were tripods, we might see our options as tending towards one or two of the points of a triangle. And if the triangles had a god, he would have three sides...
It's a pretty idea; and it's a pleasure to see it being kicked about all over the pitch, over on Kottke.org. Jason Kottke starts here:
and goes on to quote a whole list of "pick two" triads:
Elegant, documented, on time.
Privacy, accuracy, security.
Have fun, do good, stay out of trouble.
Study, socialize, sleep.
Diverse, free, equal.
Fast, efficient, useful.
Cheap, healthy, tasty.
Secure, usable, affordable.
Short, memorable, unique.
Cheap, light, strong.
before asking, effectively, does the popularity of the "perm any two of three" formula have any significance?
The eighty-odd comments cover a lot of territory, from the Wikipedia article on Trilemma via Heidegger and Vitruvius, to the old joke that, according to Einstein, you must be two out of:
1. Intelligent
2. Honest
3. Member of the National-Socialist Party
but not all three. Which reminds me of a joke we used to tell about Franco's Spain:
Why do the police always go around in threes?
One who can read, one who can write, and one to keep an eye on these two dangerous intellectuals.
Which is only apparently a diversion from the topic; because my answer would be that yes, there is a reason for the popularity of this formula, but it's an aesthetic one, rather than a philosophical or technical one. The choice of two items from a list of three is not the only formula of choice - those range from a straightforward "either / or", "yes or no", all the way up to the "as many of these extra toppings on your pizza as you want, 50p each." But the lists of three stick in the mind, there is something pleasing about them:
Liberté, égalité, fraternité
Truth, justice and the American way
Kinder, Kirche, Kuche
Métro, boulot, dodo
Cicero decorated his oratory by stacking his adjectives up in threes, the Welsh bards catalogued their material in triads. Three is the magic number.
The designer who offers the client their pick of two from good, fast or cheap is offering a genuine three way choice. Elsewhere, the apparent trilemma is nothing of the sort; no-one who tells Einstein's joke (if it is Einstein's) actually thinks that intelligence, honesty and National Socialism are equally desirable - the joke is the discrepancy between this pretense and the reality of what is being said, that fascists are all fools or crooks, a two-way choice.
JimFl at Everything Burns, to whom I am indebted for the pointer to Kottke.org, tags the link with the words "Love with your mouth shut, help without breaking your ass or publicizing it; keep cool but care" (and so say we all): which looks as if it's going to be a "pick two of three" formulation, but isn't. If anything, it's a "pick three of three", but two of the three are straight binary oppositions (do this / don't do this) and the third is doubly binary (do this / don't do this OR this); but it's trying to be threefold, because three is just so irresistible.
It's a pretty idea; and it's a pleasure to see it being kicked about all over the pitch, over on Kottke.org. Jason Kottke starts here:
"I've always liked the old designer's adage of 'good, fast, or cheap, pick two'. That is, a project can be completed quickly, it can be done cheap, and it can be done well, but you need to choose which two of those you want. If you want a good project done quickly, it's gonna be expensive. Fast and cheap? It's gonna suck."
and goes on to quote a whole list of "pick two" triads:
Elegant, documented, on time.
Privacy, accuracy, security.
Have fun, do good, stay out of trouble.
Study, socialize, sleep.
Diverse, free, equal.
Fast, efficient, useful.
Cheap, healthy, tasty.
Secure, usable, affordable.
Short, memorable, unique.
Cheap, light, strong.
before asking, effectively, does the popularity of the "perm any two of three" formula have any significance?
The eighty-odd comments cover a lot of territory, from the Wikipedia article on Trilemma via Heidegger and Vitruvius, to the old joke that, according to Einstein, you must be two out of:
1. Intelligent
2. Honest
3. Member of the National-Socialist Party
but not all three. Which reminds me of a joke we used to tell about Franco's Spain:
Why do the police always go around in threes?
One who can read, one who can write, and one to keep an eye on these two dangerous intellectuals.
Which is only apparently a diversion from the topic; because my answer would be that yes, there is a reason for the popularity of this formula, but it's an aesthetic one, rather than a philosophical or technical one. The choice of two items from a list of three is not the only formula of choice - those range from a straightforward "either / or", "yes or no", all the way up to the "as many of these extra toppings on your pizza as you want, 50p each." But the lists of three stick in the mind, there is something pleasing about them:
Liberté, égalité, fraternité
Truth, justice and the American way
Kinder, Kirche, Kuche
Métro, boulot, dodo
Cicero decorated his oratory by stacking his adjectives up in threes, the Welsh bards catalogued their material in triads. Three is the magic number.
The designer who offers the client their pick of two from good, fast or cheap is offering a genuine three way choice. Elsewhere, the apparent trilemma is nothing of the sort; no-one who tells Einstein's joke (if it is Einstein's) actually thinks that intelligence, honesty and National Socialism are equally desirable - the joke is the discrepancy between this pretense and the reality of what is being said, that fascists are all fools or crooks, a two-way choice.
JimFl at Everything Burns, to whom I am indebted for the pointer to Kottke.org, tags the link with the words "Love with your mouth shut, help without breaking your ass or publicizing it; keep cool but care" (and so say we all): which looks as if it's going to be a "pick two of three" formulation, but isn't. If anything, it's a "pick three of three", but two of the three are straight binary oppositions (do this / don't do this) and the third is doubly binary (do this / don't do this OR this); but it's trying to be threefold, because three is just so irresistible.
