what is the point of a three point list?

Question

This is in relation to rhetoric. We all do it - for example: I want an apple. They are juicy, fresh and good for you.
Why does three words sound better than four, or two?
Politicians do this a lot.

Answer 1

i have no clue

Answer 2

In wrestling they teach you to keep 3 points (e.g. 2 knees and a hand) on the mat because that is much more stable than 1 or 2 points. And oddly enough a 3-legged tripod is more stable than a table with 4 legs.

Answer 3

Natural harmony, three is the first complete number. One item is uncorroborated, two is didactic. Three is a tiebreaker. It is best because there is a beginning, a middle, and an end. It is also the number of spatial dimensions, and the number of components of time (past, present, future). Three is the foundation of human experience. It is also the number of the Godhead in Christian doctrine.

In argument, when you give three examples, you establish the strength of your position. Fewer than three seems lazy and reveals incompetence. It also permits dischordant misinterpretations that destroy your position. Greater than three demonstrates your own lack of faith in your argument and raises suspicion about your honesty. Three is necessary for strength of persuasion and clarity.

Answer 4

1. It's easy to remember.
2. It simplifies the subject being itemized.
3. The brain can process 3 things quickly, whereas anything more than that or less than that is harder. Except in the case of George W Bush for whom everything is hard and who processes nothing, but thats another answer to a question you didnt ask. Sorry.

Answer 5

Its more concise than a longer list, yet more informative than a short list of two. The mind wanders less. Heck, even automatic weapons have the three shot setting! Captivates the audience, rivets their attention, earns the speech writer more money than a two point list? Gets the point across, I guess...

Answer 6

Vene, vidi, vici!

I think we just like threes (Hegel based and entire phiosophy on it). I think it must be really deeply ingrained: people even change quotes just to fit! Winston Churchill is usually quoted as promising "blood, sweat and tears" but he actually said "blood, toil, sweat and tears", The fourth term just doesn't seem to fit so people drop it.

You can do "twos" though: as long as you include a negative:

"Its not this (slight rise in pitch on "this") (pause) Its that (slight fall in pitch on "that"

So I suppose its just SMALL NUMBERS that we can keep in our brain until the effect has been made.

Of course, if you combine "twos" and "threes" the effects can really take off:

"Its not left. Its right."
"Its not up. Its down"
"Its not this (thump desk). Its THAT! (lift arms aloft, enjoy applause, invade Poland)

Answer 7

Linguistically three sounds correct. 2 is too little, & not justifying your point enough. 4 is too many, & over does your point.

Try it in conversation. You will find that three is more comfortable, & this is the reason behind it.

Answer 8

Experience tells us that what we did was effective and so we do it agian.

One - could be questioned
Two - still only partly effective
Three - it's a charm. Not too many for over-kill.

Answer 9

THE BRAIN TAKE'S IN THREE WORD'S BETTER

Answer 10

i like the second answer man the best... cheers lovie!

Answer 11

Politicians are idiots so please use another example and I might answer.