In an age where branding often straddles the divide between design, psychology, and culture, it is worth asking what, exactly, constitutes the reality of a brand. Is a brand merely the physical product bearing a logo, the emotion it evokes in consumers, or something more enduring and abstract? The philosophical work of Karl Popper offers a compelling framework for addressing this question. In his 1978 Tanner Lecture “Three Worlds,” Popper proposes a pluralistic ontology of reality, which can be fruitfully applied to understanding the deeper nature of branding and its function in contemporary marketing.

Understanding three worlds

Popper outlines three distinct but interacting “worlds.” World 1 refers to the physical universe, including tangible objects such as stones, bodies, or, in the context of branding, the material manifestations of a brand—its packaging, retail spaces, and advertisements. World 2 encompasses subjective experiences: thoughts, emotions, sensations, and perceptions. This is the internal realm of consumers’ feelings, memories, and attitudes toward brands. Finally, World 3 consists of the objective products of the human mind. This includes not only scientific theories and mathematical constructions, but also myths, stories, works of art, languages, and by extension, brand identities and brand narratives.

Understanding branding through Popper’s framework reveals that successful brands operate across all three worlds. In World 1, a brand exists through its products, stores, or packaging. For instance, a Coca-Cola bottle is a material object, physically real and directly observable. However, this alone does not make Coca-Cola a globally recognized brand. Its influence and identity transcend its physical form.

World 2 plays a critical role in this transcendence. It is within this world that consumers develop associations, emotions, and preferences. These subjective responses—such as trust in Apple, admiration for Patagonia’s sustainability, or nostalgia for LEGO—form the emotional and psychological bedrock of brand loyalty. This level of brand reality is intensely personal and varied, but it is also fleeting and dependent on individual cognition.

World 3, according to Popper, is where the most significant form of brand reality resides. In this world, a brand becomes a shared cultural construct. It exists as a system of meanings, values, and identity markers that are not reducible to any single product or consumer experience. For example, Nike’s slogan “Just Do It” is not merely a phrase—it is a piece of cultural ideology embedded in advertising, sport, and personal motivation. Similarly, IKEA represents more than just affordable furniture. It stands for a worldview: Scandinavian simplicity, democratic design, and functional living. These are not physical properties, nor are they merely emotional responses. They are objective thought contents—shared narratives and design principles—capable of being communicated, taught, criticized, and refined.

Why this matters for branding?

Popper defends the reality of World 3 objects by emphasizing their causal influence. Though abstract, these objects have the power to affect subjective experience (World 2) and to transform the physical world (World 1). In branding, this means that ideas such as “luxury,” “sustainability,” or “freedom” embedded in a brand’s identity are not passive notions. They guide product development, shape consumer behavior, and influence social discourse. For instance, Tesla’s brand ideology—rooted in innovation and environmental futurism—has driven significant investment and public interest in electric vehicles. The idea of the brand is, in Popperian terms, a real force in the world.

This perspective challenges the common misconception that brand equity is merely an intangible marketing metric or an epiphenomenon of consumer sentiment. Instead, brand equity can be understood as a repository of World 3 objects—articulated values, design languages, strategic narratives—that exert influence across time and space. These are not static abstractions but evolving constructs that can be improved or weakened through critique, much like scientific theories.

Furthermore, Popper’s distinction between knowledge in the subjective and objective sense is highly relevant to brand management. While consumers may hold beliefs or impressions about a brand (subjective knowledge), the brand itself maintains a corpus of objective thought content: mission statements, visual identities, tone-of-voice guidelines, and strategic frameworks. These can be shared across teams, scaled across markets, and translated across cultures. In this way, the brand exists independently of any one consumer’s or marketer’s interpretation. It has coherence and continuity that outlasts individual interactions.

Conclusion

In conclusion, branding is not merely a commercial or communicative practice; it is a cultural and philosophical act. Popper’s Three Worlds framework underscores that great brands are more than their physical artifacts or emotional resonance. They are real in the most important sense: as objective cultural constructs that shape and are shaped by society. Recognizing this ontological depth not only enriches our understanding of branding but also elevates the strategic responsibility of marketers and brand custodians. When we engage in brand building, we are not just influencing perceptions—we are participating in the creation of enduring cultural meaning.

Reference

The Obert C. Tanner Lecture, delivered April 7, 1978, at The University of Michigan. @ K. R. Popper 1978.