Numbers – Why Ken’s Wrong – Ken Wheeler is Wrong

Numbers enthral Ken Wheeler in various ways. Find out how the Angry Photographer has misconstrued symbolic, cultural numerology, and why his pronouncements on the topic amount to nothing more than a numbers racket.

There’s nothing more human than numbers. We’ve always used numbers to keep tallies of things, like time, seasons or how many animals there are in a herd.

Numbers and symbols go together. Numbers seem to trigger deeper meanings and a sense of connection to the world around us.

The meanings we apply to numbers, like seven being lucky or thirteen being unlucky, vary significantly between cultures. Even so, a number’s properties can trigger societies to interpret it similarly.

Ken Wheeler has concocted his own peculiar number system. He bases it on his devotion to so-called “perennial philosophy” and to an obscure pattern that mathematicians call the Fibonacci sequence.

Traditional Interpretations of Numbers From One to Nine

Ancient civilizations had symbolism for numbers from one to nine. Let’s compare Egyptian, Hebrew, Greek and Hindu cultural numerology.

One

Predictably, one stands for unity across cultures. It’s the number of the beginning for Egyptians, Yahweh for Hebrews, the Absolute for Greeks, and Brahman for Hindus .

Two

Two represents duality or division throughout the Ancient World. It reminded Egyptians of Upper and Lower Egypt, the Hebrews of one person testifying to another, the Greeks of the Dyad and the Hindus of nature blended with consciousness.

Three

Three related to multiplicity and harmony. The Egyptians and the Hindus connected it to trinities of their gods, while the Hebrews called it completion, and the Greeks thought of the musical harmony of three notes forming a chord.

Four

Four was an essential number in all ancient cultures, signifying completion and stability. The Egyptians saw it in the four directions, the Hebrews linked it to creation, the Greeks saw it in their four elements, and the Hindus tied it to their four scriptures, the Vedas. The New Testament has four gospels for similar reasons.

Five

Five represented the human body with its trunk and four limbs, and the hand’s five fingers. The Egyptians used a sacred hand gesture for it, the Hebrews related it to redemption, the Greeks thought of it as the human microcosm and the Hindus saw it in their five elements.

Six

Six meant creation and perfection. The Egyptians saw it as balance and harmony, the Hebrews tied it to the sixth day of creation, when God made humans, the Greeks called it the Hexad and the Hindus believed in six realms.

Seven

Seven meant spiritual perfection in the West, while in Asia it stood for the body’s seven chakras. The Hebrews thought of God creating the Universe in seven days and the Greeks called it the spiritually perfect Heptad, and nearly all westerners consider it lucky.

Eight

Eight meant rebirth or regeneration in the Ancient World. The Hindus believed in eight forms of wealth.

Nine

Nine stood for the end, or finality, because it’s the last single digit number. The Hindus connected it with the planets.

Ken’s Eccentric Numerical System

The Angry Photographer offers his own eccentric numerical system. He claims it comes from the Fibonacci sequence, along with his distorted reading of Iamblichus’s Theology of Arithmetic.

As we explain under Golden Ratio – Why Ken’s Wrong, Fibonacci published his sequence in 1202 CE. There’s no evidence that anyone in the Ancient World had ever heard of it.

The Fibonacci sequence works like this:

0 + 1 = 1

1 + 1 = 2

1 + 2 = 3

2 + 3 = 5

3 + 5 = 8

And so on..

Fibonacci Sequence

So the single digit numbers that start the sequence are 1, 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8.

According to Ken Wheeler, one isn’t a number. Apparently, ten and zero don’t count as numbers either.

The Angry Photographer calls the first one in the sequence “the principle.” He claims the second one represents “the attribute.” Then he tries to equate this second one with the ratio phi, even though phi’s value is 1.618 etc., not one.

Ken’s So-Called “Original Trinity”

Ken Wheeler goes on to assert that the Fibonacci sequence reveals “the original trinity.” He comes up with three groups for the first five numbers: (1,1), (2,3) and 5, without explaining why he pairs some numbers but not others.

The Angry Photographer says two and three mean magnitude and matter and five means spiritual being. The ancients associated the number five with the our physical body, not spirituality.

The Angry Photographer fixates on the missing number four. Supposedly, four meant time and death.

Four Wasn’t Tied to Death

The number four meant completion and stability, as in the four directions and the four seasons. It wasn’t tied to death, certainly not in the west.

In some Chinese dialects, the words for four and death sound similar. Some Chinese cultures consider four unlucky, but this isn’t a widespread superstition or interpretation.

The Theoria Apophasis host claims he’s made an earth-shaking discovery about six. He conflates it with excess and evil.

Ken Thinks Counting to Six Is Going Too Far

Apparently, counting to six goes too far. Kentucky Ken also insists that the number 666 represents the word “excess.”

The Ancient Greek word for excess is hybris, from which we get the English word hubris, and it has nothing to do with the number six. Excess comes from the Latin word excedere, which means “to go too far,” and it’s unrelated to the Latin word for “six” – “sex.”

The number 666 comes from the biblical book Revelation. It does have a hidden meaning. It spells out the name of Emperor Nero, whom Christians despised. Six and excess are unrelated terms.

Just Another Numbers Racket

Moving on to seven, Kentucky Ken says it represents the wisdom gained through the debunked magic of theurgy. Its standard connection is to God creating the world in seven days, luckily for us.

All of this quirky numerology seems to stem from the Angry Photographer’s aversion to mathematics, combined with his resentment of his regrettable academic experiences. Of course, none of that justifies appropriating traditional cultures’ symbolism around numbers, or recasting it in his own image.

In the end, Ken Wheeler’s approach to numerical symbolism is just another numbers racket.