2020-3637-AJHA 1 Jean Piaget’s Genetic Epistemology as a Theory of 1 Knowledge Based on Epigenesis 2 3 4 This article aims to highlight Jean Piaget’s theory of knowledge and insert it in 5 this universe from Ancient Greece where, in Plato, we already find his seminal 6 idea: knowledge is acquired in successive and ascensional moments 7 (dialektikê), starting from an opinion about the sensible world (doxa) towards 8 the épistêmê of the intelligible world, that of Ideas or concepts. Piaget’s Theory 9 of Knowledge, we believe, was determined by four moments: 1) his research 10 as a malacologist under the guidance of Godet and Raymond. 2) the 11 acquaintance with Kant’s philosophy at age 21. 3) his internship at the 12 Binet/Simon laboratory. 4) his studies on the Lymnaea Stagnalis. His core idea: 13 it is possible for human beings to attain the necessary and universal 14 knowledge due to the exchange processes of their organisms with the 15 environment, which give rise to the epigenetic ontogenesis of their specific 16 organic mental structures for the act of knowing. It starts with actions in the 17 world from birth, around two years of age will be represented and organized 18 in sets linked to empirical experience until the brain may perform the 19 operations of the Abelian Group. The physiological construction ends here, and 20 the logico-mathematical knowledge becomes possible. 21 22 Keywords: Theory of Knowledge-Genetic Epistemology-Epigenesis. 23 24 25 Introduction 26 27 The title of this article may be surprising to many, since Jean Piaget 28 has always been considered a genius in psychology. In reality, however, 29 Piaget was a biologist/zoologist who dedicated himself to epistemology. 30 Apart from his interest in biology/zoology, Piaget was always 31 interested in the education of human beings, in parallel with the 32 construction of Genetic Epistemology. Piaget expressed his interest in 33 education at the beginning of his career and subsequently dedicated to 34 it about 400 out of the 20.000 pages he wrote on epigenetic ontogenetic 35 evolution of rationality, which allowed for scientific knowledge, and 36 whose objective was to create a tertium between Darwin and Lamarck. 37 (Ramozzi-Chiarottino, Z et allii, 2017). 38 In this work we aim to demonstrate that Jean Piaget achieved his 39 youth dream (1918) by creating a Theory of Knowledge based on 40 Biology and, in addition, show that it is inserted in the History of 41
27
Embed
Jean Piaget’s Genetic Epistemology as a Theory of ... · 23 Keywords: Theory of Knowledge-Genetic Epistemology-Epigenesis. 24 25 26 Introduction 27 28 The title of this article
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
2020-3637-AJHA
1
Jean Piaget’s Genetic Epistemology as a Theory of 1
Knowledge Based on Epigenesis 2
3
4
This article aims to highlight Jean Piaget’s theory of knowledge and insert it in 5
this universe from Ancient Greece where, in Plato, we already find his seminal 6
idea: knowledge is acquired in successive and ascensional moments 7
(dialektikê), starting from an opinion about the sensible world (doxa) towards 8
the épistêmê of the intelligible world, that of Ideas or concepts. Piaget’s Theory 9
of Knowledge, we believe, was determined by four moments: 1) his research 10
as a malacologist under the guidance of Godet and Raymond. 2) the 11
acquaintance with Kant’s philosophy at age 21. 3) his internship at the 12
Binet/Simon laboratory. 4) his studies on the Lymnaea Stagnalis. His core idea: 13
it is possible for human beings to attain the necessary and universal 14
knowledge due to the exchange processes of their organisms with the 15
environment, which give rise to the epigenetic ontogenesis of their specific 16
organic mental structures for the act of knowing. It starts with actions in the 17
world from birth, around two years of age will be represented and organized 18
in sets linked to empirical experience until the brain may perform the 19
operations of the Abelian Group. The physiological construction ends here, and 20
the logico-mathematical knowledge becomes possible. 21
22
Keywords: Theory of Knowledge-Genetic Epistemology-Epigenesis. 23
24
25
Introduction 26
27
The title of this article may be surprising to many, since Jean Piaget 28
has always been considered a genius in psychology. In reality, however, 29
Piaget was a biologist/zoologist who dedicated himself to epistemology. 30
Apart from his interest in biology/zoology, Piaget was always 31
interested in the education of human beings, in parallel with the 32
construction of Genetic Epistemology. Piaget expressed his interest in 33
education at the beginning of his career and subsequently dedicated to 34
it about 400 out of the 20.000 pages he wrote on epigenetic ontogenetic 35
evolution of rationality, which allowed for scientific knowledge, and 36
whose objective was to create a tertium between Darwin and Lamarck. 37
(Ramozzi-Chiarottino, Z et allii, 2017). 38
In this work we aim to demonstrate that Jean Piaget achieved his 39
youth dream (1918) by creating a Theory of Knowledge based on 40
Biology and, in addition, show that it is inserted in the History of 41
2020-3637-AJHA
2
Philosophy which arose in Ancient Greece and has reached our days. A 1
classical Theory of Knowledge and at the same time an absolutely 2
contemporary one insofar as Biology is par excellence the theme of 3
Knowledge in our century. 4
5
6
Methodology 7
8
The Method of this article consisted in: a) identifying a gnosiology 9
that seeks the origin and nature of the human faculty of knowing in 10
Jean Piaget’s work; and b) positioning it in its due place in Western 11
Philosophy's history. 12
13
14
Prolegomena 15
16
Let us begin this article by returning to a classic question posed at 17
the dawn of Philosophy: “Is it possible for humans to attain Knowledge 18
(épistêmê)? If so, does Knowledge come to us through the senses in 19
contact with experience, or is it the prerogative of pure Reason?” 20
The philosophies of Parmenides of Elea and Heraclitus of Ephesus 21
are the icons of the answer to that question in the History of Ideas. The 22
former asserted: “Being Is, no-Being does not exist”, therefore “Being” has 23
always existed; it will be eternal and not subject to transformation, for if 24
it had started on a day or should come to end on day or should undergo 25
changes, it could only be transformed into “Non-Being”, but “Non-26
Being” does not exist. Heraclitus, for believing only in the information 27
coming from the senses, stated: “Nothing ever is, but everything is 28
becoming.” The opposition between knowledge that is pure reason, or 29
pure logic (before the science of logic was first created by Aristotle), and 30
the knowledge that comes to us through the senses is very clear, as 31
Heraclitus put it: No man ever steps in the same river twice. The opposition 32
between reflection and pure evidences of the senses is clear, a dilemma 33
that persists even today, albeit with different wording (Granger, 1992). 34
Parmenides and Heraclitus have survived only, as is known, in 35
their Fragments, with all the difficulties of their reconstruction. We only 36
have the fragments of Parmenides, and it was precisely the interest in 37
his logic which led me to the Philosophy course at the age of 16; 38
decades later I was given a great present - his Fragments, (1997). Here 39
2020-3637-AJHA
3
are some examples of the reflections by the genious of the philosopher: 1
B3 – (…) “For thinking and being are the same.” (Descartes reached the 2
same conclusion 2000 years later, as the unquestionable knowledge of 3
Reason: “Je pense, je suis”). Let us continue with Parmenides in fragment 4
B4 – “Look as the things afar that by the thinking become present” (words 5
that will be repeated by Immanuel Kant when explaining imagination 6
as a priori form of sensibility) – (…) B6 –It is absolutely necessary that the 7
Being, speaking and thinking exist, nothingness does’not existe this is what I 8
bid you to ponder. Keep a distance from this way of inquiry and also from the 9
one upon which mortals, who know nothing, wander (…) and in whose eyes 10
being and non-being are the same (…) 11
12
Plato overcame this dichotomy by showing us that knowledge is 13
achieved through Dialogue, whose ascensional dialectic movement 14
derives from the sensitive multiplicity from our empirical 15
experience toward the intelligible world, of the Ideas or concepts as 16
intelligible unities. 17
18
Curiously and unexpectedly, in Plato’s Dialogues we can find 19
Piaget’s seminal idea: knowledge is acquired in successive and 20
ascensional moments (dialektikê), starting from an opinion about the 21
sensible world (doxa) towards the épistêmê of the Ideas World. The 22
visible world is a matter of opinion and it is nothing more than an 23
image (éïkôn) of the intelligible world, an imitation of eternal essences. 24
Plato in his mythical and poetic language described a reality 25
demonstrated two thousand or so years later by Jean Piaget. He states 26
that the human capacity to knowledge evolves in a dialectical process, 27
passing from the simple ability to act in the sensitive multiplicity of the 28
empirical world to achieve scientific knowledge made up of concepts as 29
intelligible unities. That accomplishement will be possible only after 30
dialectical evolution of Reason itself as Plato describes. For Piaget 31
knowledge and Reason evolve undefinitely. Some will say that Plato’s 32
Eternal Truths, Essences or Ideas, as indicated by the expression itself, 33
are immutable. Nevertheless, Plato’s Dialogues allow the understanding 34
of dialectical inquire will never completely attain the essences. The 35
dream of attaining absolute knowledge always eludes us as Ideas will 36
never show their real splendor to anyone... Thus, in mythical language, 37
Plato discloses to us his conception of knowledge: for him, knowledge 38
will always evolve… 39
2020-3637-AJHA
4
On the other hand, Dialectics overcomes the dichotomy between 1
the senses and Reason in spite of all knowledge begins with experience, 2
an starter of reminiscences of the World of Ideas; the place and time 3
where the souls lived before their reincarnation. Socrates states in 4
Menon: “ah! How I miss the world of Ideas!” For he had contemplated 5
them better than anyone else, and precisely for that reason his soul once 6
incarnated chose to be a philosopher. Thus, only through Reason can 7
one reach the intelligible world and the episteme, as already mentioned. 8
Or, this ascensional movement will emerge in the epigenetic Piagetian 9
ontogenesis of mental structures towards the acquisition of logical - 10
mathematical knowledge, which can always evolve without ever 11
reaching an end. 12
13
Many centuries later… 14
15
For Descartes, the founder of modern Rationalism, Je pense, je suis is 16
the foundation of his entire philosophy, as the first unquestionable 17
knowledge of Reason, which never passed through the senses. (Ad. & 18
Tan., v. VII, p. 30/32). [It is well known that he removed the word 19
“therefore”, “donc”, so that his statement would not be confused with 20
the conclusion of a medieval syllogism.] This statement stems from “the 21
inspection of the spirit” through which he arrives at a truth without 22
relying on metaphysics or religion. In his view, the senses perceives the 23
sensible world, but this information only becomes Knowledge after 24
“being metabolized” by esprits animaux in the brain (in his original texts 25
that is exactly the word he uses: cerebro, brain). Thought and res extensa 26
or body, are for him “two modes of the same substance”, (cogitatio & 27
extension sumi etiam possunt pro modis substantiae; (Ad & Tan., V. VIII, p. 28
31): however, they had been settled in the philosophical debate since 29
the 18th century such as body and soul, a dualism that contradicts his 30
own claims. On page 41 of the same volume VIII, one can read in a 31
Descartes’ text, translated by us: “everything we perceive through our 32
senses concerns the strict union the soul keeps with the body”. A careful 33
reading of Descartes’ original texts in Latin and Old French displays the 34
farce of a Cartesian dualism. Jean Piaget (1965, p. 72) thus writes: Some 35
think that it was precisely the creation of Analytical Geometry that 36
determined in Descartes’ Philosophy the permanent theme of the 37
relations between understanding and the res extensa, “both inseparable 38
and fundamentally different concurrently”. Piaget demonstrates the 39
2020-3637-AJHA
5
concomitant evolution of the body and Reason, “both inseparable and 1
fundamentally different,” by explaining the epigenetic ontogenesis of 2
mathematical logical thinking in his Genetic Epistemology. 3
Descartes was contradicted by David Hume’s skepticism. The 4
dichotomy initiated by Parmenides and Heraclitus reappears. In 5
addition to placing sensitive experience as the only source of 6
knowledge, Hume, the father of Modern Empiricism, deconstructs the 7
logical link or the physical necessity of the causal relations accepted in 8
his time. 9
Let us remember that Hume’s statements are subsequent to the 10
discoveries and inventions of Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and Newton. 11
The scientists were interested in explaining the physical world, but their 12
metaphysical convictions loomed above everything and harmonized 13
with their discoveries. Kepler concludes his works with a prayer: “I give 14
Thee thanks, O Lord, for letting me know a small part of the Universe Thou 15
hast created” (apud Werner Heisenberg, 1962, p. 82/97). 16
Immanuel Kant, says Cassirer, came to disrupt this harmony by 17
denying Metaphysics the place it occupied until then asking himself: “Is 18
Metaphysics possible?” And within what limits? What was an 19
indisputable foundation of truth until then becomes a disputable one 20
and analyzed with critical arguments. According to Kant, this is about a 21
revolution in the realms of knowledge, as analogous to the Copernican 22
revolution in Astronomy. Kant does not address himself the question 23
whether knowledge is possible since Mathematics and Physics, for him, 24
are already necessary and universal knowledge; nevertheless, he 25
inquires how they are possible. 26
Cassirer states that with Kant, Logic and dialectics are no longer a 27
simple organon of the knowledge of reality, but also encompasses them 28
in all their fullness and wholeness… “Thus, the orbit of philosophical 29
thought seemed to be complete for the first time after having achieved its goal, 30
the identity between reality and Reason (Cassirer, 1948, p. 10/11). Cassirer 31
proceeds: “Such was the point he believed he had reached in “Hegel’s Science 32
of Logic” (Wissenchaft der Logik, 1812). What Hegel condemned in Kant’s 33
logic and the ones that preceded it was their inability to overcome the purely 34
“formal” point of view, which made them adhere to mere abstraction and 35
reflection. According to Hegel, paving this way does not enable us to leave the 36
circle of subjectivism. It is necessary for the spirit to breathe life into the 37
“skeleton” of logic, to give it nerves and “muscles”. This is precisely what the 38
dialectical method promises, and what only this method is able to deliver.” 39
2020-3637-AJHA
6
Jean Piaget’s Theory of Knowledge 1
2
Jean Piaget’s Genetic Epistemology fulfilled Hegel’s aspirations, as 3
Cassirer understood them, and through a dialectical method, for on 4
explaining the epigenetic ontogenesis of specific organic mental 5
structures for the act of knowing, for the first time in the history of 6
ideas, breathed life in the skeleton of Logic giving it nerves and muscles, thus 7
creating his Theory of Knowledge dreamed of since his adolescence 8
(Piaget, 1918). 9
Piaget’s Theory of Knowledge, in our view, can only be understood 10
if we bear in mind the four moments of his life which determined it: 11
12
1) Firstly, he started his career as a zoologist when he was still a 13
child under the guidance of malacologist Paul Godet and then 14
under the orientation of logician Arnold Reymond. Piaget states 15
that studying under A. Reymond made it possible for him to 16
understand the link of the biological forms to the logical 17
structures in such a perspective that there was no more conflict 18
between them, but instead a close union between organic forms 19
and those of intelligence, i.e., the logical and mathematical 20
thinking. Furthermore, upon studying biometrics Piaget arrives 21
at the conclusion that a qualitative biology remains verbal and 22
that the problem of forms and structures in biology need logical 23
and mathematical models for a true explanation. Afterwards he 24
will proceed to the University. 25
2) The acquaintance of Piaget with Immanuel Kant’s Philosophy at 26
age 21, and the idea of explaining it in the light of Biology as he 27
tells us in an autobiographical text (Piaget, 1960 p. 58/59). Piaget 28
states that he makes three discoveries that modify his naïve 29
biologism: “the first discovery is that if we start with Le Dantec, on 30
the duality of functions, named assimilation and imitation by him; 31
whereas I would say assimilation and accommodation. Knowledge is 32
not merely imitation as he believed in his empiricism, but, in fact, an 33
assimilation to the structures of the subject and the organism. It was 34
gently moving from Le Dantec on to an evolutionary Kantianism.” 35
36
In transposing Kant’s theory into Biology, Piaget will answer that 37
Mathematics and Physics are attainable for humans due to the 38
epigenetic ontogenesis of the logical mathematical thinking. This 39
2020-3637-AJHA
7
ontogenesis, we shall see, consists of a constant process of assimilation 1
and accommodation of the organism and is built in the event of 2
disturbances and requests from the environment, to which it adapts 3
and then becomes unbalanced again due to the capacity of the brain to 4
perceive new stimuli and so expand its world. Initially, these stimuli 5
are present in the environment only, but they are also within the scope 6
of abstract and formal representations of this empirical world. 7
The explanation of this ontogenesis will constitute his Theory of 8
Knowledge based on Biology, dreamed of since adolescence as 9
mentioned previously. 10
Kant tells us that “all knowledge begins with experience, but it does not 11
derive from it,” (1787/1950, p. 31) because, according to him, experience 12
is structured and explained by the categories of Understanding 13
(Verstand) that correspond to those a priori of Pure Reason (Vernunft) 14
and thanks to which, even it is made possible. Understanding connects 15
directly with experience, and Pure Reason is constituted by mental 16
units of the multiple parts, the concepts as formal possibilities of all 17
attainable knowledge. Thus, according to Kant, knowledge would not 18
exist without a priori categories of Reason and the imaginative capacity 19
of humans, (Einbildungskraft) responsible for the “necessary unity of a 20
phenomena-based synthesis” in consciousness. In his view, knowledge is 21
an elaboration of an active thought of the matter of intuition, according 22
to a priori principles, i. e., the application of these principles to sensitive 23
data, which results in their subordination to the forms of consciousness 24
“which knows”, that is, incorporating the result of all intuition and, let 25
us say, of perception, in a unified and systematic set – knowledge. “The 26
requirement that proves itself to be the proper principle of Reason in its logical 27
use is to find, for the conditioned knowledge of understanding, the 28
unconditioned that must lead to unity.” (apud Eisler, R. 1994/1930, p. 888). 29
That would be the condition of all attainable knowledge. 30
For Piaget, knowledge begins with an action which has already 31
been a consequence of an endogenous process, whose primary source is 32
the brain, and therefore it does not derive from it. For Kant, Reason is 33
abstract, whereas in Piaget’s view, it is organic. 34
Piaget also believes in a priori as a condition of all attainable 35
knowledge, but not previously chronologically given; in fact, fully 36
constructed. His conviction that every moment of epigenetic evolution 37
is necessary for the construction of the one that succeeds it, that is, 38
every moment is a priori condition of the next moment. Piaget 39
2020-3637-AJHA
8
understands that the construction of the epistemic subject, dialectically 1
constructed (organism and environment) is richer than Kant’s epistemic 2
subject, ready from the start. (1965, p. 82). 3
4
3) The third decisive moment in Piaget’s life for the construction of 5
his Theory of Knowledge was his internship at the Binet and 6
Simon Laboratory. Then and there he discovered a logic 7