Click the aspect heading to bring up the page for that aspect. Click the name of the suite of aspects in Column 1 to take you to notes and discussion below, or to another page where the suite is discussed.
hierarchy of needs
Note: order differs
|Dimensions of power||Conceptual||Technical||Structural||'Symbolic'|
|Smuts' Wholes||Material||Living bodies||Unconsc. control||Consc. control||Ditto||Groups||Spirituality|
|Kierkegaard's Stages||Aesthetic||Ethical (duty)||Ethical (giving)||Religious|
|Roget's Thesaurus Sections||Abstract relations (most)||Space||Space: Motion||Matter||Affection: personal||Intellect|| Intellect: formation of ideas;
|Intellect: communicating ideas|| Volition: intersocial;
|Affections: moral||Affections: religious|
|Encyclopaedia Britannica Outline||10. Branches of knowledge: maths||1. Matter, energy
2. The Earth
|3. Life on earth
4. Human life
|10. Branches of knowledge:
logic, science, philosophy
|7. Technology||Religion as symbolism||5. Human society
|5. Society: wealth||6. Art||5. Society: law, politics||8. Religion But ...|
Habermas' action types, delineated as part of his theory of communicative action, are meant by him as different types of human, usually social, activity, with different main purposes.
In Dooyeweerdian terms these are not modes of action as the aspects are, but are distinct types of action which are led and qualified by various aspects. Most necessarily involve language and hence may be seen as qualified by the lingual aspect. But they are differentiated by their leading aspect as in the table above and the more nuanced table below, which allows more than one leading aspect.
Latterly Habermas has suggested that most might be reduced to communicative action since most involve communcation. In this Habermas is confusing reducibility with dependency. Dooyeweerd distinguishes these: dependency is when functioning in one aspect requires functioning in another but they are still irrreducible in that the two aspectual functionings are actually one single human functioning, a unity. To Dooyeweerd, aspects are different modes of the one unity, different ways in which we might look at it.
We can see immediately that (a) these dimensions fit four aspects very well (b) there are many important aspects missing (e.g. aesthetic - pressure to conform to fashion, ethical - appealing to people's better nature, lingual - eloquence, sensitive - playing on people's feelings, juridical - appealing to sense of due). It may be that Dooyeweerd's aspects could enrich Markus and Bjørn-Andersen's, and also Lukes' frameworks.
Notice how Smuts' order matches Dooyeweerd's. For discussion of Smuts' ideas, see Jan Smuts' Holism: A Dooyeweerdian View.
Why is Religion No. 8, after Technology, No. 7? In the Propedia, each section is introduced by an essay by a well-known thinker of the time. It is interesting that the essay introducing Religion is Religion as symbolism - which, in Dooyeweerdian terms, rather reduces religion to the lingual aspect! The lingual aspect follows the formative, which is the qualifying one for technology, and followed by the social, which is key in 'History of Mankind'.
Copyright (c) 2005, 2010 Andrew Basden. But you may use this material subject to conditions.
Written on the Amiga with Protext.
Created: 1 April 2005. Last updated: 23 August 2005 Wilenius. 3 February 2006 links; rid counter; Boulding. 20 March 2006 mended links. 23 October 2006 Dimensions of Power. 25 March 2008 Kierkegaard, Roget (thanks to Richard Gunton), Britannica. 17 June 2010 Giddens. 18 June 2010 more on Habermas. 24 August 2016 Smuts' holism gradings; intro to notes; intro. 1 February 2018 corrected link to sst.