David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):51-57 (2010)
Purpose: Describing how radical constructivism was introduced to communication science and analyzing why it has not yet become a mainstream endeavour. Situation: Before radical constructivism entered the relevant debates in communication sciences, moderate constructivist positions had already been developed. Problem: Radical constructivists’ argumentation has often been provocative and exaggerating in style, and extreme in its position. This has provoked harsh reactions within the mainstream scientific community. Several argumentative strategies have been used to degrade radical constructivist arguments and their relevance. Solution: Beyond such rhetorical devices, radical constructivism has become established within the field of communication science, although it has not become mainstream. One should probably not even wish to make radical constructivism a mainstream approach in case it loses its sceptical ability for second-order-observation
|Keywords||communication science argumentative strategies objections to radical constructivism metatheory|
|Categories||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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
K. H. Müller (2010). The Radical Constructivist Movement and Its Network Formations. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):31-39.
Alexander Riegler & Andreas Quale (2010). Editorial: Can Radical Constructivism Become a Mainstream Endeavor? Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):1-5.
A. Scholl (2012). Between Realism and Constructivism? Luhmann's Ambivalent Epistemological Standpoint. Constructivist Foundations 8 (1):5-12.
D. I. Dykstra (2010). Radical Constructivism Has an Answer – But This Answer Is Not an Easy One. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):22-30.
H. Gash (2010). Realities in Radical Constructivism. Commentary on Johnson's “Footprints in the Sand”. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):100-101.
V. Kenny (2010). Exile on Mainstream. Constructivism in Psychotherapy and Suggestions From a Kellian Perspective. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):65-76.
P. Slezak (2010). Radical Constructivism: Epistemology, Education and Dynamite. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):102-111.
A. Donk (2011). All Quiet on the Constructivism Front – Or is There a Substantial Contribution of Non-Dualistic Approaches for Communication Science? Constructivist Foundations 7 (1):27-29.
M. A. Boden (2010). Against Constructivism. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):84-89.
P. Cariani (2010). Onwards and Upwards, Radical Constructivism. A Guest Commentary. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):127-132.
D. K. Johnson (2010). Footprints in the Sand: Radical Constructivism and the Mystery of the Other. Constructivist Foundations 6 (1):90-99.
Helmut Schwegler (2001). Physics Develops Unaffected by Constructivism. Foundations of Science 6 (4):241-253.
A. Scholl (2011). How a Process-Oriented Approach in Radical Constructivism Affects Empirical Research. Constructivist Foundations 7 (1):29-31.
M. Bartesaghi (2011). On Making Process Practically Visible, or Moving Constructivism Beyond Philosophical Argumentation. Constructivist Foundations 7 (1):22-24.
Added to index2010-11-20
Total downloads15 ( #126,925 of 1,692,620 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #75,732 of 1,692,620 )
How can I increase my downloads?