David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):22-30 (2010)
Context: In spite of its advantages and its ability to make valid responses to objections, radical constructivism is not mainstream. Problem: Extolling the virtues of radical constructivism and responding logically to the objections does not work. We know this from the evidence of many attempts. Our theoretical stance, radical constructivism, also suggests this approach is not likely to have much influence on realists. We cannot transmit understanding in the signals with which we attempt to communicate. How can we in radical constructivism enable those outside of RC to understand our explanation of human knowing? Method: Examine our understanding of radical constructivism itself, because it is an explanation of how, why and under what circumstances people change their understandings of their experiential worlds. Results: We must find ways to direct the attention of others to situations that they cannot explain with their existing understanding of the world. Then we must create conditions conducive to their revising and testing new understandings for fit with the evidence of their experience. Implications: Since radical constructivism is a theory of human knowing, it tells us how humans develop knowledge, hence it is an answer to the questions central to this special issue. This answer is not one to be used to win in debates with realists. Radical constructivism gives us an answer to the problem of engaging realists in understanding our position, but strategies consistent with radical constructivism are not easily carried out. Developing and executing such strategies is the work at hand
|Keywords||history of science paradigm change physics education research realism folk theory of teaching cognitive equilibration|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
A. Scholl (2010). Radical Constructivism in Communication Science. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):51-57.
Alexander Riegler & Andreas Quale (2010). Editorial: Can Radical Constructivism Become a Mainstream Endeavor? Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):1-5.
K. H. Müller (2010). The Radical Constructivist Movement and Its Network Formations. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):31-39.
A. Scholl (2012). Between Realism and Constructivism? Luhmann's Ambivalent Epistemological Standpoint. Constructivist Foundations 8 (1):5-12.
D. K. Johnson (2010). Footprints in the Sand: Radical Constructivism and the Mystery of the Other. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):90-99.
H. Gash (2010). Realities in Radical Constructivism. Commentary on Johnson's “Footprints in the Sand”. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):100-101.
P. Cariani (2010). Onwards and Upwards, Radical Constructivism. A Guest Commentary. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):127-132.
Mark Olssen (1996). Radical Constructivism and Its Failings: Anti-Realism and Individualism. British Journal of Educational Studies 44 (3):275 - 295.
P. Slezak (2010). Radical Constructivism: Epistemology, Education and Dynamite. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):102-111.
Hans Jürgen Wendel (1992). Radikaler Konstruktivismus Und Konstruktionismus. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 23 (2):323 - 352.
A. Quale (2010). Objections to Radical Constructivism. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):12-18.
M. A. Boden (2010). Against Constructivism. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):84-89.
H. Gash (2011). Moving Forward From Radical or Social Constructivism to a Higher Level Synthesis. Constructivist Foundations 7 (1):20-21.
Ernst von Glasersfeld (2010). Why People Dislike Radical Constructivism. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):19-21.
Added to index2010-11-20
Total downloads10 ( #120,393 of 1,088,832 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,666 of 1,088,832 )
How can I increase my downloads?