Volume 6 · Number 3 · Pages 363–369

< Previous Paper · Next Paper >

Maturana’s Theory and Interpersonal Ethics

Hugh Gash

Download the full text in
PDF (366 kB)

> Citation > Similar > References > Add Comment


Context: Maturana’s views on cognitive processes and explaining have ethical implications. The aim of this paper is to link ethics and epistemology to facilitate thinking about how to promote respect between different viewpoints through mutual understanding. Method: Maturana’s views on ethics are outlined in three domains: the personal, the interpersonal, and the societal. Results: The ethical implications that emerge around the notion of reality with or without parenthesis, the concept of the legitimate other, and Maturana’s conjectures about the origins of human social groups. Social groups in which cooperation is more important than competition are based on love in the sense that others are accepted as legitimate members of the community. An epistemology that responds to the biological origins of human cognition is one that is more open to cooperation, honesty, responsibility, and respect than an epistemology that takes reality as given and the task of human cognition to represent truth. Implications: This framework for thinking about cognitive processes provides a way of approaching disagreements so they become opportunities for discussion rather than for power assertion of one reality over another. In a world where strongly held viewpoints on ethics and reality lead to conflict, promoting viable models of cognitive process that link cognition and ethics may lead to insights that promote tolerance. Ideas from attribution theory in social psychology are presented as a means of facilitating the emergence of the concept of the legitimate other in discussion about disagreements.

Key words: ethics, constructivist epistemology, legitimate other, reality in parenthesis


Gash H. (2011) Maturana’s theory and interpersonal ethics. Constructivist Foundations 6(3): 363–369. http://constructivist.info/6/3/363

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

Similar articles

Quale A. (2014) Ethics: A Radical-constructivist Approach

Schmidt S. J. (2007) God Has Created Reality, We Create Worlds of Experience: A Speech in Honour of Ernst von Glasersfeld to Mark the Award of the Gregory Bateson Prize, Heidelberg, May

Vörös S. & Riegler A. (2017) A Plea for not Watering Down the Unseemly: Reconsidering Francisco Varela’s Contribution to Science

Vörös S. & Bitbol M. (2017) Enacting Enaction: A Dialectic Between Knowing and Being

Quale A. (2010) Objections to Radical Constructivism


Allport G. W. (1954) The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley, Reading MA. << Google Scholar

Ceccato S. (1961) The machine which observes and describes. Milan: University of Milan (Mimeo). << Google Scholar

Dewey J. (1960) The quest for certainty. Capricorn, New York. Originally published as Dewey J. (1929) The quest for certainty: A study of the relation of knowledge and action. Minton, Balch & Co, New York. << Google Scholar

Gash H. & Coffey D. (1995) Influences on attitudes towards children with mental handicap. European Journal of Special Needs Education 10: 1–16. << Google Scholar

Gash H. (1992) Reducing prejudice: Constructivist considerations for special education. European Journal of Special Needs Education 7: 146–155. << Google Scholar

Gash H. (1993) A constructivist attempt to promote positive attitudes towards children with special needs. European Journal of Special Needs Education 8: 106–125. << Google Scholar

Gash H. (1996) Changing attitudes towards children with special needs. European Journal of Special Needs Education 11: 286–297. << Google Scholar

Glasersfeld E. von (1979) Cybernetics, Experience and the concept of self. In: Ozer M. N. (ed.) A cybernetic approach to the assessment of children: Toward a more humane use of human beings. Westview Press, Boulder CO: 67–113. << Google Scholar

Glasersfeld E. von (1991) Distinguishing the observer: An attempt at interpreting Maturana. Methodologia V(8): 57–68. Originally published in German as: Glasersfeld E. von (1990) Die Unterscheidung des Beobachters: Versuch einer Auslegung. In: Riegas V. & Vetter C. (eds.) Zur Biologie der Kognition. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt: 281–295. Available at http://www.vonglasersfeld.com/125.2

Glasersfeld E. von (1995) Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. Falmer Press, London. << Google Scholar

Glasersfeld G. von. (1974) Piaget and the radical constructivist epistemology. In: Smock C. D. & Glasersfeld E. von (eds.) Epistemology and education. Follow Through Publications, Athens GA: 1–24. << Google Scholar

Hamlyn D. W. (1978) Experience and the growth of understanding. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London & Boston. << Google Scholar

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

Heider F. (1958) The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley, New York. << Google Scholar

Kelley H. H. (1973) The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist 28: 107–128. << Google Scholar

Kitchener R. (1987) Is genetic epistemology possible? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38: 283–299. << Google Scholar

Mareschal G. & Westermann G. (2010) Mixing the old with the new and the new with the old. In: Johnson S. (ed.) Neoconstructivism: The new science of cognitive development. Oxford, New York: 213–228. << Google Scholar

Maturana H. R. & Verden-Zöller G. (2008) The origin of humanness in the biology of love. Edited by Pille Bunnell. Imprint Academic, London. << Google Scholar

Maturana H. R. (1988) The search for objectivity, or the quest for a compelling argument. Irish Journal of Psychology 9: 25–82. << Google Scholar

Maturana H. R. (1990) Science and daily life: The ontology of scientific explanations. In: Krohn W., Küppers G. & Nowotny H. (eds.) Selforganization: Portrait of a scientific revolution. Kluwer, Dordrecht: 12–35. << Google Scholar

Maturana H. R. (1997) Metadesign. Instituto de Terapia Cognitiva. Available at http://www.inteco.cl/articulos/metadesign.htm

Nemeroff C. & Rozin P. (2000) The makings of the magical mind: The nature and function of sympathetic magical thinking. In: Rosengren K., Johnson C. & Harris P. (eds.) Imagining the impossible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1–34. << Google Scholar

Piaget J. (1970) Piaget’s theory. In: Mussen P. H. (ed.) Carmichael’s handbook of child psychology. Wiley, New York: 703–732. << Google Scholar

Putnam R. (2000) Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American Community. Simon and Schuster, New York. << Google Scholar

Russell B. (1950) Unpopular essays. George Allen and Unwin, London. << Google Scholar

Shweder R. A. (1977) Likeness and likelihood in everyday thought: Magical thinking in judgments about personality. Current Anthropology 18(4): 637–658. << Google Scholar

Tobias S. & Duffy T. D. (eds.) (2009) Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? Routledge, Taylor and Francis, New York. << Google Scholar

Comments: 0

To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.