Re: All the way with Piaget (fwd)

maria judith (costlins who-is-at ism.com.br)
Thu, 07 May 1998 22:38:33 -0200

Hi Martin and All,
I think you have explained what I wanted to say, but it is always
difficult to me because of the language. The distinction between
knowledge and being is essential to understand Piaget's theory. thanks,
maria judith lins
Martin Packer wrote:
>
> Dewey, I appreciate your messages addressing the nature of
> constructivism(s); but I want to say again that we need to keep
> epistemology and ontology distinct. Knowledge is not being; what exists is
> distinct from what is known. One can claim that knowledge is constructed
> by the individual, and at the same time that this knowledge is (in some
> sense) about entities existing "out there." One might argue that Piaget
> comes close to this: because knowledge is construced from action 'on' and
> 'in' a world of material entities, it is 'about' that world.
>
> I find von Glasersfeld confusing and, I think, confused on these
> distinctions. He has stated that constructivists "deliberately and
> consequentially avoid saying anything about ontology, let alone making any
> ontological commitments." But he also says that "Please note that
> constructivism does not deny an outside world; it merely agrees with
> skeptics and holds that the only world we can know is the world of our
> experience." But "not deny[ing] an outside world" is talking about
> ontology; arguably it is making an ontological commitment, albeit a weak
> one. If so, his ontological position is weaker than Kant's, despite the
> fact that von G contrasts it with idealism and claims it is aligned with
> Kant. Kant (to add to the complexity) was both an 'empirical realist' and
> a 'transcendental idealist,' who insisted that we must logically infer that
> a real world exists, even though we cannot experience it directly and so
> can make no positive assertions about its character.
>
> Can you take a shot at helping me get clearer on how you locate
> constructivism both epistemologically and ontologically?
>
> Martin
>
> p.s. Diane -- I appreciate the question you've posed me and am currently
> musing... will get back to you.
>
> ================
> Martin Packer
> Associate Professor
> Department of Psychology
> Duquesne University
> Pittsburgh PA 15282
>
> (412) 396-4852
> fax: (412) 396-5197
>
> packer who-is-at duq3.cc.duq.edu
> http://www.duq.edu/liberalarts/gradpsych/packer/packer.html