Footprints in the Sand: Radical Constructivism and the Mystery of the Other
David Kenneth Johnson
Log in to download the full text for free
> Citation
> Similar
> References
> Add Comment
Abstract
Context: Few professional philosophers have addressed in any detail radical constructivism, but have focused instead on the related assumptions and limitations of postmodern epistemology, various anti-realisms, and subjective relativism. Problem: In an attempt to supply a philosophical answer to the guest editors’ question, “Why isn’t everyone a radical constructivist?” I address the realist (hence non-radical) implications of the theory’s invocation of “others” as an invariable, observer-independent, “external” constraint. Results: I argue that constructivists cannot consistently defend a radically subjectivist theory of knowing while remaining entirely agnostic about the nature and existence of the larger world (including independent others). That is, any non-solipsistic account of human experience must explicitly acknowledge its extra-subjective, ontological dimension. Implications: It follows that no pedagogical, social, philosophical, or commonsensical insight associated with so-called “trivial” or “social” constructivism survives or receives any support from the move to radical constructivism.
Key words: Ernst von Glasersfeld, solipsism, fictional posits, ontological agnosticism, others, subjects, observer-independence
Citation
Johnson D. K. (2010) Footprints in the sand: Radical constructivism and the mystery of the other. Constructivist Foundations 6(1): 90–99. http://constructivist.info/6/1/090
Export article citation data:
Plain Text ·
BibTex ·
EndNote ·
Reference Manager (RIS)
Similar articles
References
Glasersfeld E. von (1989) Knowing without metaphysics: Aspects of the radical constructivist position. Educational Resources Information Center ED304344. Reprinted as: Glasersfeld E. von (1991) Knowing without metaphysics: Aspects of the radical constructivist position. In: Steier F. (ed.) Research and reflexivity. Sage, London: 12–29.
http://www.vonglasersfeld.com/132
Glasersfeld E. von (1991) An exposition of radical constructivism: Why some like it radical. In: Davis R. B., Maher C. A. & Noddings N. (eds.) Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monographs, Reston VA: 19–29.
http://www.vonglasersfeld.com/127
Goldin G. (1989) Constructivist epistemology and discovery learning in mathematics. Proceedings of the Psychology of Mathematics Education 13(2): 15–22.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Johnson D. K. (1996) The view from somewhere: A philosophical critique of radical constructivism. Cybernetics and Human Knowing 3(4): 3–17.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Johnson D. K. (2004) Subject-object fusion and idealist metaphysics. Karl Jaspers Forum. Retrieved from: http://www.kjf.ca/75-R1MUL.htm on 27 October 2010.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Johnson D. K. (2005) Between MIR, HIR, and SIR: Constructivism’s pronoun problem. Karl Jaspers Forum. Retrieved from: http://www.kjf.ca/75-R4MUL.htm on 27 October 2010.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Johnson D. K. (2005) Constructivism de-radicalized. Karl Jaspers Forum. Retrieved from: http://www.kjf.ca/78-C31JO.htm on 27 October 2010.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kilpatrick J. (1987) What constructivism might be in mathematics education. Proceedings of the Psychology of Mathematics Education 11(1): 3–27.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
McCarty L. P. & Schwandt T. A. (2000) Seductive illusions: Von Glasersfeld and Gergen on epistemology and education. In: Phillips D. C. (ed.) Constructivism in education: opinions and second opinions on controversial issues. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 41–86.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Comments: 0
To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.
