Zone 1, Zone 2, and Zone 3 in Language and Science

How words can capture, regulate, or liberate critical thinking

When we talk about language, we usually think of communication. Words would simply transmit ideas from one person to another.

However, contemporary neuroscience suggests something deeper: words also organize states of the body and the brain.

They influence attention, posture, emotion, breathing, interpretation, and even how we perceive reality.

For this reason, in order to understand how language influences critical thinking — both in students and in researchers — it may be useful to think about three possible cognitive states.

Here we will call them Zone 1, Zone 2, and Zone 3.

This model is not intended as a rigid clinical classification. It is simply a didactic framework to help understand how the brain may respond to words, narratives, and theories.

Zone 1 — Fast response and linguistic automatism

In Zone 1, the brain reacts quickly to words.

This state is associated with what many researchers describe as automatic processing.

When we hear familiar words or well-known narratives, the brain may activate interpretations rapidly without requiring significant cognitive effort.

This occurs because the brain constantly seeks to save metabolic energy.

In many everyday situations this is extremely useful.

For example:

• understanding simple sentences

• recognizing familiar words

• answering known questions quickly

• interpreting direct messages

In Zone 1, the brain operates efficiently.

However, there is a limitation.

If linguistic processing remains entirely automatic, individuals may accept narratives without critically examining them.

Zone 3 — When language captures cognition

Zone 3 emerges when language stops functioning merely as a communication tool and begins to capture cognitive functioning.

In this state, certain words or narratives become rigid and dominant.

They begin to define:

• what can be thought

• what can be questioned

• what is considered true

When this occurs, the brain may drastically reduce its openness to alternative interpretations.

This phenomenon can occur in several contexts:

• rigid political ideologies

• dogmatic religious discourse

• scientific theories adopted without critical revision

• social narratives repeated continuously

In such situations, individuals may interpret new information only through a dominant narrative.

Language ceases to function as a tool for investigation and becomes a structure of cognitive control.

Zone 2 — The space of curiosity and critical thinking

Between these two extremes lies a particularly important cognitive state for science, education, and creativity.

We can call this state Zone 2.

In Zone 2, individuals still use language and conceptual frameworks, but they maintain openness to revising interpretations.

In this state the brain can:

• recognize when words trigger emotions or beliefs

• detect dominant narratives

• question automatic interpretations

• explore new possibilities of meaning

Zone 2 does not eliminate emotions or cultural experiences.

Instead, it preserves critical thinking while these experiences occur.

This state is particularly important for:

• scientific learning

• intellectual creativity

• dialogue across perspectives

• theoretical innovation

Language also organizes the body

The relationship between language and cognition does not occur only at an abstract level.

It also involves the body.

Recent studies suggest that words can activate sensory and motor systems, influence attentional processes, and modulate autonomic states.

This means that hearing or repeating certain words can affect:

• body posture

• breathing patterns

• muscular tension

• emotional state

In other words, language does not operate only in thought — it acts across the entire organism.

This phenomenon helps explain why narratives can sometimes be experienced as powerful bodily realities.

Science itself can enter Zone 3

This model does not apply only to politics or culture.

It can also apply to science.

Researchers often work within theoretical frameworks that guide how data are interpreted.

These frameworks are essential because they organize scientific investigation.

However, if adopted too rigidly, they may become cognitively closed zones.

When that happens, new observations may be interpreted only as confirmation of existing theories.

Scientific progress frequently occurs when researchers temporarily step outside such rigid frameworks.

This requires something rare: maintaining theoretical rigor without losing openness to revision.

Education as training for Zone 2

One of the most important roles of education may be helping individuals recognize these cognitive states.

Instead of simply transmitting information, education can help students learn to notice:

• when they are reacting automatically to words

• when they are trapped in rigid narratives

• when they are genuinely investigating ideas with openness

This type of training strengthens something fundamental for science and society:

critical thinking.

A path for future research

This framework also opens interesting experimental possibilities.

For example:

• Are Zone 2 states associated with greater activity in prefrontal networks involved in cognitive control?

• Do rigid narratives reduce neural markers of semantic surprise such as N400 or P600?

• Do collective states of belonging increase neural synchrony between participants?

• Do changes in linguistic interpretation alter autonomic markers such as HRV or breathing?

Investigating these questions may help clarify how language, physiology, and cognition interact in shaping human thought.

A simple idea

Perhaps everything can be summarized in a simple statement:

Words can open thinking — or they can close it.

When they organize inquiry, dialogue, and curiosity, we move toward Zone 2.

When they merely repeat narratives or trigger automatic responses, we may be trapped between Zone 1 and Zone 3.

Learning to recognize this difference may be one of the most important cognitive skills for the future of science.

References (post-2021)

Candia-Rivera, D. (2022). Brain–heart interactions in the neurobiology of consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
Contribution: demonstrates how bodily physiological signals interact with brain processes in shaping conscious experience.

Quadt, L., Critchley, H. D., & Garfinkel, S. N. (2022). Cognition, emotion, and the central autonomic network. Autonomic Neuroscience.
Contribution: shows how autonomic bodily states influence cognition, emotion, and interpretation.

Feldman, M. J., et al. (2024). The neurobiology of interoception and affect. Annual Review of Psychology.
Contribution: provides updated evidence on how internal bodily signals shape emotional and mental states.

Cheong, J. H., et al. (2023). Synchronized affect in shared experiences strengthens social connection. Communications Biology.
Contribution: demonstrates that shared experiences can generate emotional and neural synchrony between individuals.

Ni, J., et al. (2024). Social bonding in groups of humans selectively increases interbrain synchrony in group leaders and followers. PLOS Biology.
Contribution: shows how group dynamics and shared narratives can produce inter-brain synchrony.

Guimarães, D. S. (2023). Indigenous Psychology as a General Science for Escaping the Snares of Psychological Methodolatry.
Contribution: expands psychological science to include embodied, relational, and cultural processes of cognition.

Baniwa, G. (2023). Indigenous History in Independent Brazil.
Contribution: discusses how cultural narratives shape identity, belonging, and social interpretation of reality.