Every word is of the highest importance; regardless of whether it is written, spoken or thought. Language is one of the most powerful elements of our being, arguably even the most powerful of all. Language shapes our world as it is just as much the structure as the vehicle of our thoughts. Language is beautiful, complex, emotional and rational. Therefore, many of our works focus on language and how it shapes politics (for more, click here). But we also pay attention to linguistic details; the attentive reader should have already spotted them. In this work, we want to expand our cognitive framework, again – as we did by introducing many innovations in the space of political science. In August 2024, we introduced the Hierarchy of Happiness, a framework that showed us that happiness is not subjective – it is earned! This framework helps us to emotionally reflect on our emotional development level, as well as locate our place in the development curve on the path to reach the highest form of living experience: genuine knowledge production. We have added to this concept to make conscious reflection more effective. In this work, we introduce the Hierarchy of Language.
The Hierarchy of Language is a framework that also builds on Abraham Harold Maslow’s hierarchy (or pyramid) of needs. Over the years, our studies have found that his framework presents an excellent foundation for categorisation and assessment of many different sociological and, hence, political phenomena. All of our behaviour can be assessed in light of where we are located within this pyramid in terms of needs. Surely, we move between these steps, and different areas of our lives might be spread across some of those steps. However, where we stand in this pyramid with the majority of our persona during a specific period, defines our behaviour, emotions (as we have seen in the Hierarchy of Happiness) and, as examined here, our speech. The Hierarchy of Language categorises what people talk about, how they talk about it and what they are receptive to. From here, we can derive what we need to talk about with people for them to understand us. However, this framework also shows us when people do not understand us, namely when our counterpart is located too far away from us on this pyramid of communication. In the political context, this framework is very powerful to uncover how political actors communicate with each other effectively. Especially in the constellation of political professionals with citizens, we can utilise this framework to understand why manipulation works.
Language As A Structural Vehicle
We express our thoughts through language. However, the language repertoire that is available to us also sets the boundaries of our thoughts. Speaking multiple languages is impressive at the surface level because it represents the ability to successfully complete a complex task, stretched over an extended period. However, subconsciously, it also signals expansive cognitive abilities, as such a person has the potential to think in many more ways. Linguistic capabilities within a specific language signal the same thing. If we have many ways to express ourselves, our brains can complete cognitive tasks more holistically. Therefore, language is more than just a tool; it is the framework for thinking itself.
Moreover, there is the use of language. Just because we have the ability to express ourselves in a variety of ways, it does not follow that we do so. Even less does this ability imply that we use language consciously. As stated at the beginning, every word is important. Whenever we speak, write or think (acts of expression), we either consolidate a reality, challenge it or expand it. The reason for this is twofold.
First, our acts of expression function as a memory exercise or training. Just like an athlete who becomes better at what he does as he practises a movement many times, every word has an effect on reality. The more we repeat something, the more it becomes our reality. Our speech’s content and the context of existing knowledge then define the effects on reality. If we constantly express existing knowledge or perceived knowledge, this reality is consolidated. Interestingly, the content does not even need to be true. If we constantly say, write or think about statement A, we believe that statement A is true. If everyone does the same thing, everyone believes it is true. It does not have to be true, but it is perceived to be true. Perceived, constructed and real knowledge is consolidated with every word. On the other hand, if our words constantly challenge existing (perceived) knowledge, this consolidation is weakened within our reality. This is powerful to counteract bad habits and false beliefs. Finally, when we produce novel content, new knowledge is created, and we expand our knowledge boundaries.
Second, our language affects others. As we will see later, whether our counterpart can perceive what we say depends on the match between the sent content and the context of the receiver. Before we move on to that, however, let us assume that there is a match and the counterpart receives our message in the form of speech or writing. Every word directed towards others has the same effects that language has on us. Either we consolidate their reality with our words, challenge it or expand it. In the complex web of society, this happens all the time. This is also why media (news, music, television programmes, etc.) are so important for non-devletist political systems: the more dominant their language is in quantity and receiver optimisation, the more their reality is adopted by the receiver. Imagine someone who has not spoken, written or thought about a specific political topic – his language “quota” is very low. He then receives words from the media on this political topic, often repeatedly. His reality is shaped in accordance with the externally received word count on this topic. We could view language’s effect on our belief systems in mathematical terms by stating that our belief systems are based on the words most perceived and expressed.
Moreover, the nature of our thoughts is shaped by the quantitative word count as well because of the structural power of language. If all the knowledge we have on a topic comes from the external sources we consume, our own thoughts are also limited to the words that we received from those sources. Again, the word count, implying the word diversity we can utilise, also defines how we think about a specific topic, whether it is positive/negative, emotional/rational or structural/superficial.
The Hierarchy of Language Explained
In order for someone to understand something, he needs to be addressed with the words in his repertoire. The more he receives words he knows well, the more likely he is to understand us. But how can we know or even categorise what words others know and how well they know them? Simply put, we need to look at what they are interacting with mostly. Maslow’s pyramid of needs helps us here because when there is a need for something, people naturally interact with the need and things that help them to fulfil it. The Hierarchy of Language helps us to understand what types of content people are most receptive to based on their available vocabulary, which, in turn, is shaped by their needs.
Physical Goods
At the lowest level, people talk about physical goods. Arising from their physiological needs of food, water, warmth and shelter, people within this category linguistically interact with these topics the most. Their expressed count of words that relate to these things is very high, which also means that their understanding of communication based on materialism is good. They talk about food, things to buy, money to spend and consumption in general. But just because communication arises from needs, it is false to assume that there is an existential need for these things. In the end, we all talk about consumption to a certain extent. People in this category, however, nearly only talk about these things – even when all exchangeable information on a dinner, bag or piece of technology is already exchanged. The reason for that is that their need is not completely fulfilled. In extreme cases, they do not have anything to eat. In most cases, especially in non-devletist capitalist democracies, there is an omnipresent consumption pressure (click here to learn about Truth and Consumption; and here to learn about the Death of Consumption). People who own the least within such a society exist at the lowest levels of needs and language in relative terms. As others have more, the average consumption level is above what these people can afford, creating the physiological needs in abstracted terms. Their communication is then limited to consumption.
When talking to such people, everything material can be discussed and linguistically exchanged. A dinner is a big event that is spoken about longer than the dinner itself lasted. Clothing, cars, bags, accessories, home appliances, jewellery and every other consumption good can be identified, assessed and discussed. Electorate in this category is receptive to political promises, such as building roads, airports, bridges and lowering taxes and prices, as these measures are tangible, known and have a direct impact on these people’s need for consumption.
Negative Events & Risks
Once a person has reached a level of consumption that puts him somewhere in the middle of, or at least a bit below, the societal consumption average, his needs change; he needs safety. The memory of being at the bottom is still fresh; moving back to that lower stage is undesirable, and the thought of this possibility triggers fear. Of course, in archaic societies, the situation was more dramatic. When a water hole was found, it needed to be defended. In non-devletist, capitalist societies, when a certain living standard is achieved, it needs to be defended. People at this level live with a near omnipresent fear, and this shapes their language. They talk about what could go wrong, news of car accidents, burglaries and kidnappings, about the dangers of the world and about the best insurance offers. In more affluent contexts, these people talk about investments in secure assets, such as exchange-traded funds and home safety technologies. When they watch the news, stories about car crashes, terror attacks and extreme weather forecasts trigger fears instantly, hindering them from sound assessments of a situation due to increased emotionality. Because they deal with the need for safety, their vocabulary is structured around security-related topics, but also very emotionally laden.
Accordingly, they are receptive to media coverage on terrorism and other fearmongering. Such reports address their linguistic experience and knowledge base. There is a half-misconception that humans can be manipulated through fear. This is only true for people who are located primarily at the level of need for safety in the hierarchy of needs. In the Hierarchy of Language, they are located at the level of negative events & risks because that is what they think and talk about. Additionally, the mechanism is, on the one hand, the receptiveness to fear of such people, but also their lack of ability to decide and act rationally in the event of triggered fears, due to emerging emotionality.
People
When somebody overcomes the safety stage, much of the fundamental material needs are covered. This is a personal success because the person still remembers how hard it was to overcome consumption and then secure it. He then starts to develop the need to share this success with others – it is now time to share the beauties of life. Accordingly, at the stage of need for love/belonging, people value togetherness more. Family, friends, sports clubs, civil society groups and political organisations become important venues for such people. Interaction with others creates joy. Therefore, people at this stage of linguistic development talk about other people. Whether one compares oneself to others or is simply interested in why the neighbour’s car has not been parked at the same spot it is usually parked, the main concern of people at this level of the Hierarchy of Language is people and their lives. This is a very reactive form of communication because it is dependent on the actions and inactions of others for someone to have a communicative drive. Among the main topics of people who are primarily receptive to this type of communication are celebrities, social developments and activities, as well as the lives of directly known people. Their vocabulary is very verb-laden as they need these words to describe the actions and inactions of others.
In terms of political communication, fascist and communist ideologies appeal to such people because of their strong community-binding element. Nationalist and liberal movements are very concentrated on the factor of people belonging to a certain group, enabling them to gather many people who pursue their need for love/belonging. Furthermore, the presentation of certain leader figures appeals to such people. It is no coincidence that certain political figures are nearly omnipresent in the media, even though many of their actions are not necessarily meaningful. People who seek love and belonging are receptive to dialogue on those leaders because their linguistic experience, their vocabulary, is structured to better understand these topics, in comparison to others.
Oneself
Moving up in the hierarchy, more and more needs are fulfilled. As needs are fulfilled, there is less to talk about because the relevance of those topics declines. With nearly all material and social needs fulfilled, we create time and focus for ourselves. As the hierarchy of needs posits, below the highest level, there is the need for self-esteem. Here, people aim for respect in society through whatever is respected within that society. In non-devletist, capitalist democracies, the main denominator of respect within society is financial power. Surely, there are also other elements that create respect, such as fame, power, physical looks and prestige. People at this stage, therefore, talk about themselves the most, about their money, body, career, lifestyle and every other aspect that is related to them. It seems like they are in love with themselves, but in reality, their needs define their topics in dialogue. Their vocabulary is laden with words that relate to their person and their interests, and their enthusiasm peaks when they can talk about themselves. It might seem like the content range of such people is broader, as there is the conception of high diversity among individuals. However, people at this level in the Hierarchy of Language are mostly concerned with the same topics, just with different weighting and viewed in their personal context.
Politicians can address these people with tax promises, improvement of living conditions and ideological statements that reflect lifestyles and political orientation. Especially the last part is very important here. Political communication with these people is based on their perception of whether they feel understood. Knowing this, the political systems of our time shifted towards less diversity and a strict division of political thought in terms of left and right (learn more about the Toxic Politics of Left and Right; learn more about Political Thought in General), in order to reduce complexity in communicating with this group of people.
Ideas
Some people achieve the highest form of being; they reach the stage of genuine knowledge production. Once reached, they are detached from material, social, societal and egoistic constraints. Their minds are free, flexible, capable and directed towards pushing the knowledge boundaries within a certain field of study or application. In Maslow’s pyramid, their need is self-realisation, and in the Hierarchy of Happiness, they feel fulfilment. In the Hierarchy of Language, they talk about ideas. They can, and will, explore different perspectives without adopting them – just out of curiosity and the willingness to understand. Therefore, it is difficult to strictly label their world of thoughts, as it is in constant motion to seek understanding. Moreover, people at this stage have a core field of expertise in which they pursue genuine knowledge production, but they are also receptive to other ideas, due to their cognitive and emotional flexibility. Ideas and discussing them are intriguing to them because they have become aligned with the purpose of their existence by pursuing genuine knowledge production. Material, people and even their own person are no longer of interest; these are temporary, superficial and vanishing parts of a holistic universe of which we know so little. Their vocabulary is vast, diverse and precise. They communicate at different examination levels, sometimes simultaneously. People who reached this stage can verbally exchange information about ideas at the structural level, but also at the micro-level, which is concerned with a particular event that serves as an abstraction point for them. In very specific cases, there are people in the realm of genuine knowledge who have a limited vocabulary or limited ways to express themselves when they are very specialised in the subject matter of their special trait. In these cases, however, the vocabulary is incredibly deep.
Political communication fails with these people. This is true for people in genuine knowledge production as receivers but also as senders. Because they experience fulfilment through the exercise of activities aligned with our purpose of being, they are solely concerned with these ideas and furthering those. Their flexible linguistic ability is completely directed towards that goal, while non-devletist political communication is always directed towards goals of a lower nature. While a non-devletist politician speaks with citizens to influence them for personal gain, a devletist politician speaks with them to further the boundaries of knowledge within society. Today, the number of people who share this vision is very low, which means that only a few people are receptive to the content of the devletist politician’s speech. Unfortunately, the devletist politician will have difficulties adapting his speech to the other levels because that would mean that he engages with topics of a lower nature just to further the cause of societal advancement by means of the current order, creating personal unhappiness.
When those who engage in genuine knowledge production are receivers of political communication, they are not easily moved by the words of the politician. They know the words very well, but their meaning is meaningless to them as they know the intentions behind them. While the person at the highest communicative stage deals with matters of depth and meaning for the sake of societal advancement, the non-devletist politician pursues his personal gain by trying to address people with the methods above – the fulfilled person will not react to that.
Final Remarks
With the Hierarchy of Language, we established a much-needed extension to the hierarchies of needs and happiness. The Hierarchy of Language is both indicative and proactive. It is indicative because it shows what people are most receptive to and at which development level they stand based on their speech. On the other hand, the hierarchy is proactive because it tells us how to adapt our speech to move upwards on the developmental pyramid. The ultimate goal in everything we do is to reach genuine knowledge production. While the hierarchy of happiness indicates how we feel at this stage, the Hierarchy of Language indicates how we talk at this stage. To reach this stage, we can expand our thought structures through language training and, more so, through the conscious use and practice of words and terms.
