Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):84-89 (2010)
|Abstract||Context: Radical Constructivism is an issue that deeply divides the cognitive science community: most researchers reject it, but an increasing number do not. Problem: Constructivists stress that our knowledge starts from experience. Some (“ontic” constructivists) deny the existence of a mind-independent world, while others (“radical” constructivists) claim merely that, if such a world exists, we can know nothing about it. Both positions conflict with scientific realism. It is not clear that the conflict can be resolved. Method: This paper uses philosophical argument to ask whether constructivism can be rationally preferred over realism in science. Results: Ontic constructivism cannot be disproved by any knock-down argument. Nevertheless, it is irrational to accept it, because it ignores the strategy of “inference to the best explanation”: realism is the best explanation of the successes of science. Radical constructivism, too, fails to explain these successes. Some radical constructivists have tried to offer theories more sympathetic to realism. For instance, Ernst von Glasersfeld sees science as a coherent ordering of experience, and appeals to Piagetian psychology as support. There are close similarities. But Piaget was also caught in a constructivist anti-realism, despite his attempt to evade it. Implications: The constructivist’s claim that scientific concepts and theories are generated by human minds is correct. But this important insight should not be used to deny realism, which is the best explanation of the many undeniable successes of science and engineering|
|Keywords||cognitive science mind-independent world genetic fallacy intentionality epigenesis Jean Piaget Ernst von Glasersfeld|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
A. Scholl (2010). Radical Constructivism in Communication Science. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):51-57.
A. Scholl (2012). Between Realism and Constructivism? Luhmann's Ambivalent Epistemological Standpoint. Constructivist Foundations 8 (1):5-12.
P. Slezak (2010). Radical Constructivism: Epistemology, Education and Dynamite. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):102-111.
D. K. Johnson (2010). Footprints in the Sand: Radical Constructivism and the Mystery of the Other. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):90-99.
A. Nassehi (2012). What Exists Between Realism and Constructivism? Constructivist Foundations 8 (1):14-15.
Mark Olssen (1996). Radical Constructivism and Its Failings: Anti-Realism and Individualism. British Journal of Educational Studies 44 (3):275 - 295.
D. I. Dykstra (2010). Radical Constructivism Has an Answer – But This Answer Is Not an Easy One. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):22-30.
Alexander Riegler & Andreas Quale (2010). Editorial: Can Radical Constructivism Become a Mainstream Endeavor? Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):1-5.
Hans Jürgen Wendel (1992). Radikaler Konstruktivismus Und Konstruktionismus. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 23 (2):323 - 352.
Henk van den Belt (2003). How to Engage with Experimental Practices? Moderate Versus Radical Constructivism. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 34 (2):201-219.
H. Gash (2010). Realities in Radical Constructivism. Commentary on Johnson's “Footprints in the Sand”. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):100-101.
S. J. Kemp (2012). Constructivist Criteria for Organising and Designing Educational Research: How Might an Educational Research Inquiry Be Judged From a Constructivist Perspective? Constructivist Foundations 8 (1):118-125.
Henk Van Den Belt (2003). How to Engage with Experimental Practices? Moderate Versus Radical Constructivism. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 34 (2):201 - 219.
Derek Louis Meyer (2009). The Poverty of Constructivism. Educational Philosophy and Theory 41 (3):332-341.
Added to index2010-11-20
Total downloads68 ( #15,727 of 722,699 )
Recent downloads (6 months)19 ( #6,902 of 722,699 )
How can I increase my downloads?