Dimensional thinking pro & con
Chapter 1 - Worldview
Previous page: Dimensional thinkers - Dimensional thinking pro & con - Next page: Dimensional thinking summary
Back to Book content or directly to Main Page
.
Welcome to the Dimensional thinking pro & con page
The Dimensional Worldview is a rich, philosophically ambitious framework that organises human agency across three dimensions: an Action dimension (spanning autonomy ↔ participation), an Evaluation dimension (spanning coherence ↔ connectedness), and an emergent Potention dimension (spanning competences ↔ relevance). It draws on evolutionary biology (Godfrey-Smith's Darwinian space), neuroscience (Barrett's constructed emotion theory and LeDoux's dual-pathway model), and systems thinking (layers of reality and emergence).
The major claims of dimensional thinking are individually testable and have been independently validated across multiple scientific disciplines. The action–evaluation distinction has neurological grounding in dual-process theory and the LeDoux pathway model. The universality of autonomy and participation is confirmed cross-culturally by SDT, with a sample of 92,000+ participants. The predictive, constructive nature of evaluation is supported by convergent evidence from predictive coding neuroscience. The emergence of new layers from the interaction of action and evaluation is consistent with mainstream complexity science and developmental neuroscience.
Further down this page, you will find an evaluation of the framework (conducted with Perpextity on April 10, 2026). Will be updated.
.
Pro
Dimensional thinking
.
| Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan - Department of Psychology – University of Rochester - The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior |
|---|
| SDT is the postulate that humans are active, growth-oriented organisms who are naturally inclined toward integration of their psychic elements into a unified sense of self and integration of themselves into larger social structures. As such, the natural processes such as intrinsic motivation, integration of extrinsic regulations, and movement toward well-being are theorized to operate optimally only to the extent that the nutriments are immediately present, or, alternatively, to the extent that the individual has sufficient inner resources to find or construct the necessary nourishment. Such processes would include, for example, the capacity to compartmentalize rather than integrate psychological structures, the tendency to withdraw concern for others and focus on oneself, or, in more extreme cases, to engage in psychological withdrawal or antisocial activity as compensatory motives for unfulfilled needs.
Accordingly, innate psychological needs for
concern the deep structure of the human psyche, for they refer to innate and life-span tendencies toward
|
| Bold by Guido Van Nuffelen |
.
Active dimension
.
| Ma Jenina N. Nalipay - Autonomy is equally important across East and West - Journal of Adolescence - 2020 |
|---|
| An important finding was that autonomy was equally important for students in both Western and Eastern cultures. This goes against the criticism of cross-cultural researchers who argued that autonomy might not be relevant in the East. Our findings corroborate SDT's key arguments using a more rigorous evidence base through our inclusion of more cultural groups as Jang et al. (2009) included only Korean students, while Zhou et al. (2009) focused only on Chinese students. |
.
Evaluation dimension
Our brain regulates and coordinates our body by evaluating, through emotions, context-dependent and complex information.
Predictive coding is currently the dominant brain theory, and it's the core mechanism behind Barrett's TCE, which underlies the evaluation dimension. Predictive coding models of brain processing propose that top-down cortical signals promote efficient neural signalling by carrying predictions about incoming sensory information. These “priors” constrain bottom-up signal propagation, in which prediction errors are carried via feedforward mechanisms.
.
| Jessica R. Gilbert - A Predictive Coding Framework for Understanding Major Depression - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience - 2022 |
|---|
| The predictive coding framework suggests that the brain functions to minimize surprise and uncertainty by actively generating explanations for encountered stimuli (Friston, 2009). The framework is rooted in Bayesian probability theory and the so-called Bayesian brain hypothesis (Knill and Pouget, 2004) that conceptualizes perception as a constructive process that uses internal or generative models to encode prior beliefs about sensory inputs and their causes. Generative models help an individual formulate predictions about incoming sensory information that are tested against incoming sensory inputs and produce prediction errors. Prediction errors, in turn, are used by the brain to revise its model of the world by updating predictions in order to minimize prediction errors (Friston, 2010). Recent work has extended these ideas to cognitive phenomena related to interoception (Seth, 2013), including the shaping of emotions (Seth and Friston, 2016; Clark et al., 2018) and the development of depression (Barrett et al., 2016; Kube et al., 2020). |
.
The theory of constructed emotions
Our brain regulates and coordinates our body by evaluation though emotions which are context dependent and complex.
| Lisa Feldman Barrett - The Theory of Constructed Emotion: More Than a Feeling - Perspectives on Psychological Science - 2025 |
|---|
| The theory of constructed emotion and the extended evolutionary synthesis. The extended evolutionary synthesis questions the existence of fixed adaptations designed by natural selection (for a discussion, see Bateson & Laland, 2013). Instead, it focuses on flexible, contextual responses. As Bateson and Laland (2013) stated: “Animals often have capacities to respond flexibly to local conditions with adaptive responses, many of which are themselves knowledge gaining processes . . . apparent design can be derived in many different ways . . . and need not imply adaptation, or even selection” (p. 713). Gene expression is heavily regulated moment by moment. It is not a binary on/off, protein/no-protein situation but rather a continuous, context-dependent expression that is regulated ad hoc by numerous factors that are dynamic and malleable to environmental impact (see Ball, 2024). Put differently, contextual influences are assumed to be fully causal rather than merely modulatory. Causation is assumed to be complex, not simple and mechanistic. |
| Every moment of life involves the brain’s bioregulation of the body. A brain’s role in coordinating movement broadly defined (to include the movements of the viscera, of skeletomotor muscles, of chemicals within the blood, etc.) is central to our theory. Furthermore, in our theory, feeling cannot be meaningfully separated in any biologically justified manner from the brain’s regulation and coordination of the various systems of the body. |
| A brain regulates and coordinates the systems of its body. The TCE hypothesizes that a brain’s main function is to anticipate the needs of the body, prepare to meet those needs before they arise, and, in so doing, control and coordinate action at the level of the whole body. This ongoing process, termed “allostasis” (Sterling, 2012; Sterling & Laughlin, 2015), includes the coordination of the visceral organs, immune system, and endocrine system, collectively referred to here as “allostatic control.” Allostatic control is necessary for and biologically intertwined with the control of keletomotor action.This hypothesis rests on decades of empirical evidence in evolutionary biology, in neuroanatomy, on the metabolic costs of electrical and chemical signaling, and on the brain’s predictive capacities (e.g., see Barrett, 2017b; Gee, 2018; and Hutchinson & Barrett, 2019). |
.
Con
Dimensional thinking
The framework claims that three dimensions — action, evaluation, potention — structure the totality of the human world of experience. This is an ambitious universal claim that invites scrutiny on grounds of both parsimony and empirical adequacy. The framework's three dimensions might be interpreted as a meta-level abstraction above these empirical dimensions. Still, that interpretive move needs to be made explicit, since the claim to capture "the totality of our world of experiences" with three dimensions invites the response that three may be insufficient. A core criterion for scientific frameworks is falsifiability: what observations would count against the framework? The documents present the dimensions as "guiding metaphors"—which immunise the framework against empirical disconfirmation but simultaneously distance it from scientific theory status. It becomes difficult to distinguish the framework from a sophisticated philosophical typology. While the framework draws heavily on scientific sources (LeDoux, Barrett, Godfrey-Smith, Muthukrishna), the synthesising architecture —the claim that action and evaluation dimensions generate hidden layers that in turn create a potential dimension — is a conceptual construction whose own mechanisms are not independently testable.
.
Action dimension
The framework's Action dimension places AUTONOMY and PARTICIPATION as poles of a single continuum — a structurally elegant move that maps onto Hofstede's individualism–collectivism dimension. However, cross-cultural psychology provides significant complications.
.
| F. Soler-Anguiano - Cross-cultural measurement invariance evidence of individualism and collectivism: from the idiosyncratic to universal - Frontiers in Psychology - 2023 |
|---|
| Culture plays a fundamental role in shaping human behavior, with individualism and collectivism being key cultural dimensions. However, existing scales for measuring these constructs, such as the INDCOL scale, have demonstrated issues when applied in diverse cultural contexts. |
.
Evaluation dimension
The most direct challenge on Lisa Feldman Barrett's Theory of Constructed Emotion (TCE) comes from Paul Ekman's tradition of basic emotion theory, which holds that a small set of emotions - happiness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust, surprise - are biologically hardwired, arise from evolutionarily conserved neural circuits, and produce universal facial expressions.
.
| Paul Eckman Group |
|---|
| “Emotions are a process, a particular kind of automatic appraisal influenced by our evolutionary and personal past, in which we sense that something important to our welfare is occurring, and a set of psychological changes and emotional behaviors begins to deal with the situation." |
| https://www.paulekman.com/universal-emotions/ |
.