What this concept makes visible is, on one hand, how thought is built inside our mind, and above all how it allows us to enter into relation with others. It distinguishes five levels of complexity, and the whole point is to recognise roughly which level the person we meet is at — so as to adjust our communication accordingly.

Five levels, from the idea to discourse

1. The idea

The simplest, most elementary unit. Ideas are, etymologically, images. They invite themselves in, they emerge out of nowhere and are the manifestation of psychic activity: they are in fact the product of processing the information reaching us through the senses. Sight: look, the sun is setting. Smell: that smells lovely, cinnamon. Hearing: that is festive music. Touch: the snow is cold and damp. Taste: this cake is wonderfully good.

These images may also arise as memories — how pretty that Christmas market in Strasbourg was — or as internal sensations: my stomach aches a bit, perhaps I ate too many pretzels. We produce ideas all the time, automatically and effortlessly. They pass, they are replaced by others, they overlap, they overlay one another.

2. Thought

When we catch some of them and group them under a common denominator, we move up to the next stage: that of thought. It is an assemblage of several ideas forming a coherent whole; it requires construction, and it is personal. And here is a major difference: whereas we cannot stop ourselves from having ideas, since they are automatic, we can stop ourselves from thinking. I see the snow, I smell the cinnamon, and I tell myself that the end-of-year holidays are coming and that I will have to think about presents.

3. Reflection

When I connect several related thoughts and assemble them into an intelligible whole, I obtain a reflection. Reflection is a position that allows one to take a step back: it is what gives me a vision, an autonomous thinking of my own. It is also what allows me to develop a critical opinion and, possibly, to solve what appears to be a problem.

For instance: I understand that the current situation is becoming problematic; I see that my son is growing more and more aggressive, that he insults and shows disrespect; he is probably not doing well and we must find a solution together; I think it would not be a bad idea to see a family therapist, since family problems may well be solved as a family.

4. Argumentation

The next level involves a genuine relational dynamic: I will seek to organise my arguments so as to support a single conclusion. Beyond reflection, which exists and was built within me, argumentation seeks to extract it from me in order to offer it to the other. This requires being able to decentre from oneself in order to argue towards the other, incisively, and to be able to offer counter-arguments if my propositions are refuted.

This stage implies a cognitive development, with hypothetico-deductive thinking, which appears roughly at pre-adolescence. But one can clearly see that the thinking of a twelve or thirteen-year-old, though based on argumentation, can appear somewhat rigid: they will tend to deliver their argument in the same way, without specifying it or adapting it to the audience they are addressing.

5. Discourse

The ultimate stage. Not only do we arrange thoughts into reflections and reflections into arguments, but we also think about how to arrange those arguments so as to convince, to hit home. We adapt our discourse to the other person so as to increase their permeability, that is, their receptivity to the information we are going to give them: the choice of words, of lexical field, of the metaphors used, of the non-verbal. Everything is put at the service of effectiveness. And one must, of course, have a certain form of mature empathy to be capable of it.

Two fundamental pillars

Two elements condition the development of relational thinking — and their absence blocks any progression along that continuum.

The power of words

The richness of my vocabulary is of supreme importance. If I start speaking in another language, I may perhaps manage to operate at the level of reflection, but certainly not at that of argumentation, and even less at that of discourse — quite simply because I do not have the words to do so. So, in an interview with people who do not speak the same language as we do, or with children, we adapt: we do not place ourselves in argumentation or discourse if they are at the stage of reflection.

The immense power of words must not be underestimated, nor their potential therapeutic impact. As much as they can be weapons and cause monstrous damage, they can be extremely precious instruments and bring about immediate relief. In therapy, what we sometimes do is lend our words to the other person so that they may feel understood and see their situation from a different angle.

Child development shows this clearly: aggressiveness drops sharply from the moment children develop oral language, from the moment they can communicate what they feel more effectively. And as adults we may find ourselves in a state of considerable agitation when we cannot find the words to express our situation, what we feel or what we are living through.

The weight of emotions

The stronger the emotional state, the more emotions inhibit the development of relational thinking. If I am afraid, if I have stage fright, if I am stressed or angry, it will be far harder for me to construct my thinking. Faced with a strong emotion such as fear, the brain sticks to the first level, and the response becomes impulsive and reactive.

It may already have happened to you during a job interview or an oral exam: realising that your thinking seems asleep, inhibited. It is an extremely frustrating situation. So when we are in relation with someone and strong emotions are present, we first work at absorbing them, and we ask questions that stimulate reflection: that is what will then allow us to go further along the continuum.

Working just one stage ahead

It is important to keep in mind that, depending on the context, we may find ourselves stuck at a certain level of relational thinking. This does not mean we are incapable of going further in other circumstances: it means that at that very moment, this is where I am. What counts, therefore, is always adapting to where the other person is, and working just one stage ahead.