Piaget was also a philosopher and once taught philosophy at the University of Neuchâtel without a degree: "it was no longer possible to submit a thesis in philosophy, since I held the chair." 2
Piaget's natural focus in philosophy was epistemology (philosophy of knowledge) and his work was highly innovative. He was obviously referring also to himself when he wrote that "the most important philosophical systems of the past have as their starting point their authors' reflections on science or on projects that made new sciences possible." 3 His "genetic epistemology" was integrated with his psychological researches, each part supporting and growing with the other.
Piaget teaches that intelligence develops continuously from the sucking reflex of the newborn, in a series of stages, universally applicable to all children.
The "mechanisms" of development are "assimilation" and "accommodation."
For example, the hand learns to hold a spoon (accommodation) and the tool becomes an extension of the hand (assimilation). When learning the latest software application, we assimilate it to one previously learned and accommodate by changing keystrokes where necessary or appropriate. Eventually a structure built piecewise by assimilation and accommodation
can no longer handle the increasing demands put upon it and re-organization
is required in which new techniques are incorporated.5
Accordingly, intelligence changes as the child matures. Early ideas include beliefs that the moon follows the child around and that when water is poured from a wide container into a narrow one, the amount increases because the top of the fluid is higher. Such concepts are discarded as the child grows older, like a snake shedding its skin.
"Piaget has sometimes labeled his position constructivism, to capture the sense in which the child must make and remake the basic concepts and logical thought-forms that constitute his intelligence. Piaget prefers to say that the child is inventing rather than discovering his ideas. This distinction separates him both from empiricism and from apriorism. The ideas in question do not preexist out there in the world, only awaiting their discovery by the child; each child must invent them for himself. By the same token, since the ideas have no a priori external existence, they cannot be discovered by simple exposure; rather, they must be constructed or invented by the child. Thus, Piaget's book dealing with growth of concepts of object, space, time and causality in the first year of life is not called The Discovery of Reality, but The Construction of Reality in the Child." 6
In The Construction of Reality in the Child,7 Piaget commences with an intelligence entirely "egocentric," where no boundary has been established between the self and the world. The child is "self-centered ... [with] the absence of both self-perception and objectivity." 8
"Through an apparently paradoxical mechanism ... it is precisely when the subject is most self-centered that he knows himself the least, and it is to the extent that he discovers himself that he places himself in the universe and constructs it by virtue of that fact. ... This organization of reality occurs, as we shall see, to the extent that the self is freed from itself by finding itself and so assigns itself a place as a thing among things, an event among events." 9
"[T]he first knowledge of the universe or of himself that the subject can acquire is knowledge relating to the most immediate appearance of things or to the most external and material aspect of his being. From the point of view of consciousness, this primitive relation between subject and object is a relation of undifferentiation ... when no distinction is made between the self and the non-self. ... But from this point of view of junction and undifferentiation, knowledge proceeds along two complementary roads. By virtue of the very fact that all knowledge is simultaneously accommodation to the object and assimilation to the subject, the progress of intelligence works in the dual direction of externalization and internalization... In the last analysis, it is this process of forming relationships between a universe constantly becoming more external to the self and an intellectual activity progressing internally which explains the evolution of the real categories, that is, of the concepts of object, space, causality and time." 10
In Biology and Knowledge, Piaget wrote: "There are no innate ideas, in the Cartesian sense. One can, of course, consider a priori categories, such as Kant talks about... In psychology, the Kantian interpretation has been sustained by certain Gestalt psychologists such as ... Konrad Lorenz, who judges notions of cause, space, etc. to be previous to any experience... From the psychogenetic point of view, such interpretations will not stand up to examination.11
Piaget meant by "examination" his own researches into the development of children's "notions of cause, space, etc." For example,The Child's Conception of Space12 begins with sensori-motor activity (e.g., eye-hand co-ordination in grasping a rattle) and then follows the addition of shape-recognition, pictorial space, linear and circular order, "surroundings," continuity, projective lines and perspectives, sectioning and rotation, conservation through displacements and, ultimately, a culminating integration in the concept of Euclidean space. Continuous revision of cognitive forms that begins with rudimentary reflexes is totally incompatible with a priori conceptualization.
Athough Piaget rejected the a priori as a basis for a child's knowledge, he adhered to a priori concepts in his own work. He referred thoughout to "mechanisms" of development and sought, in assimilation and accommodation, an a priori minimalist set of psychological processes. He assumed that cognitive structures converge to reality and that the final structures are exactly representational, an assumption known to be false. 13 "The model is entirely rationalistic and typical of Enlightenment philosophy."14
Piaget's model was effective in the cognitive domains he studied, especially representations of commonsense physical reality and logico-mathematical operations. He avoided areas where it was not effective, such as myth, family, social and sexual matters and the work and emotional life of an adult. Significantly, these are areas of principal focus for other important psychologists, e.g. Freud and Jung.
Piaget's model represents, therefore, a paradoxical approach to a priori conceptualization. Although he continually re-shaped his theories, he never made his own a priori concepts the subject of self-critical analysis.
The paradox is especially acute because Piaget sought to explain by his theories not only the development of intelligence in children, but also the development of scientific theories. "Genetic epistemology attempts to explain knowledge, and in particular scientific knowledge, on the basis of its history, its sociogenesis, and especially the psychological origins of the notions and operations upon which it is based." 15
I believe that this paradox lies at the root of Piaget's failure to provide a satisfactory account of growth of knowledge. He wrote: "I consider the main problem of genetic epistemology to be the explanation of novelties in the development of knowledge. ... The central problem of genetic epistemology concerns the mechanism of this construction of novelties which creates the need for explanatory factors... However, these factors have furnished only global explanations. A great deal of work remains to be done..." 16
The paradox can be resolved, in an epistemological sense, by the hypothesis that a priori concepts are both erroneous and indispensable. Every accomplishment requires some notions that appear solid independent of any experience. However, the validity of such notions is always illusory. What is needed is a set of such notions on which a beginning is made and which are revised as development proceeds and errors are discovered. Errors are minimized by restricting the domain in which the a priori concepts are applied and revisions are specific to the restricted domain. The hypothesis therefore accounts for the fragmentation of knowledge into specialties.
This is, perhaps, a resolution that Jean Piaget might have approved.
Return to Opening Page of Embodiment of Freedom.
Return to text referencing note 1.
Return to text referencing note 2.
Return to text referencing note 3.
Return to text referencing note 4.
Return to text referencing note 5.
Return to text referencing note 6.
Return to text referencing note 7.
Return to text referencing note 8.
Return to text referencing note 9.
Return to text referencing note 10.
Return to text referencing note 11.
Return to text referencing note 12.
Return to text referencing note 13.
Return to text referencing note 14.
Return to text referencing note 15.
Return to text referencing note 16.
Return to Opening Page of Embodiment of Freedom.
Since this page was written in 1998, Piaget's principles have become incorporated into new technologies that I am developing. The ( ... ) Quad Net Site Map has a complete listing of pages.
( ... ) A Procrustean Group of Harmonies (2010). The page opens with a discussion based on Piaget's writings and then shows a series of technical designs that embody principles with resemblances to group theory in mathematics.