Volume 6 · Number 1 · Pages 100–101

< Previous Paper · Next Paper >

Realities in Radical Constructivism. Commentary on Johnson’s “Footprints in the Sand”

Hugh Gash

Download the full text in
PDF (411 kB)

Abstract

Context: Johnson argues that because radical constructivism requires social constraints and therefore ontological assumptions, it is no different from constructive realism, which is comparatively mainstream. Results: While the distinction between these approaches appears slim, our concepts are not independent of us, and may need to change in spite of established traditions. Implications: Perhaps radical constructivism cannot be mainstream because it is essentially concerned with epistemological origins of concepts and consequently is not practical enough for the received consensus.

Key words: epiphany, reality, social, testimony

Citation

Gash H. (2010) Realities in Radical Constructivism. Commentary on Johnson’s “Footprints in the Sand”. Constructivist Foundations 6(1): 100–101. Available at http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/6/1/100.gash

Export article citation data: Plain Text · BibTex · EndNote · Reference Manager (RIS)

References

Foerster H. von (1991) Through the eyes of the other. In: Steier F. (ed.) Research and reflexivity. Sage, London: 63–75. << Google Scholar

Harris P. L. & Koenig M. (2006) Trust in testimony: How children learn about science and religion. Child Development 77(3): 505–524. << Google Scholar

Johnson D. K. (2010) Footprints in the sand: Radical constructivism and the mystery of the other. Constructivist Foundations 6(1): 90–99. Available at http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/6/1/090.johnson

Maturana H. R. (1988) Reality: The search for objectivity or the quest for a compelling argument. Special issue on “Radical constructivism, autopoiesis and psychotherapy” edited by Vincent Kenny. Irish Journal of Psychology 9: 25–82. << Google Scholar