First, I wish to give credit to an elderly man who told me about the original observation in using ሱንሱመ as an optimal number for traditional cooking. Two would make an unstable set and a fourth would become redundant. So, they settled for three in ancient times for its optimality in traditional cooking.
That sounds like a simple and rudimentary idea. However, the moment you remember the word ሰዶ, which comes from the word ሰዲ, it becomes a little more sophisticated. ሰዲ means three. ሰዶ is sort of formulating an idea, presumably by a group of three people, in order to solve a problem. I am guessing that the words ሰዶ and ዘዴ are interrelated. I could be wrong and stand to be corrected if someone proves that they are coincidences.
I have no idea if the words ዘዴ and method are related in any way. But I know that the words method and methodical are in common use in the best of contemporary institutions.
Back to the words ሰዶ and ሱንሱመ. As much as ሱንሱመ became the pillars for traditional cooking, three branches of government of checks and balances have become a brand for contemporary democratic governance. Both traditional cooking and contemporary governance use three pillars for balance, so to speak.
These sound simple ideas. However, such simple, or seemingly simple, ideas are oftentimes discussed as complex and complicated.
The ideas of legitimacy, delegacy, and representation for democratic governance also sound simple. However, we are reading reports of disagreements between federal and local officials in the north in Ethiopia. Intuitively, one could imagine that if the constituency of any district elects and deems its representative a legitimate delegate, the party to which the delegate is sent ought to honor that delegate. This doesn't sound that complicated but I have been reading about it as such.