David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 65 (1):65 - 86 (1985)
The purpose of this article is to show that Piaget's use of the equilibrium principle cannot explain the possibility of correct understanding. That is, it cannot explain the possibility of knowledge, as opposed to simple change in belief. To make the argument, I begin by describing Piaget's explanatory model, which is known as the equilibrium principle. I then argue that correct understanding, or knowledge of any x as a case of y, requires a concept of correctness, i.e., the recognition that words and concepts apply under some conditions but not others. I try to show that because he uses the equilibrium principle as a basis for his explanation, Piaget cannot explain how a concept of correctness is acquired. Finally, I argue that to explain the possibility of knowledge, one must show how the conditions for word and concept application are determined by a community of language users. Again, I claim that Piaget's use of the equilibrium model precludes such an account.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Saul A. Kripke (1982). Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language. Harvard University Press.
Aristotle (1941/2001). The Basic Works of Aristotle. Modern Library.
Erik H. Erikson & George C. Homans (1951). Childhood and Society. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 12 (2):301-302.
Citations of this work BETA
Sophie Haroutunian-Gordon (1988). Explaining Change in Psychology: The Road Not Taken. [REVIEW] Human Studies 11 (4):389 - 418.
Similar books and articles
Quassim Cassam (2009). Knowing and Seeing: Responding to Stroud's Dilemma. European Journal of Philosophy 17 (4):571-589.
Jessica Brown (2005). Adapt or Die: The Death of Invariantism? Philosophical Quarterly 55 (219):263–285.
Victor Kestenbaum (1974). On a Certain Blindness in Jean Piaget: Sensing and Knowing in Piaget and Dewey. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 5 (1):81-94.
B. Inhelder, D. de Caprona & A. Cornu-Wells (eds.) (1987). Piaget Today. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Malcolm Budd (2003). The Acquaintance Principle. British Journal of Aesthetics 43 (4):386-392.
Richard F. Kitchener (1981). The Nature and Scope of Genetic Epistemology. Philosophy of Science 48 (3):400-415.
Horst Pfeiffle (2008). On the Psychogenesis of the a Priori: Jean Piaget's Critique of Kant. Philosophy and Social Criticism 34 (5):487-498.
Jonathan Y. Tsou (2006). Genetic Epistemology and Piaget's Philosophy of Science: Piaget Vs. Kuhn on Scientific Progress. Theory and Psychology 16 (2):203-224.
R. A. Withers (1982). Piaget, Moral Development and the Curriculum. Journal of Moral Education 11 (3):159-166.
Sherrilyn Roush (2010). The Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Survival. Metaphilosophy 41 (3):255-278.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #262,187 of 1,792,844 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #464,764 of 1,792,844 )
How can I increase my downloads?