FRENCH STRUCTURALIST MOVEMENT

 

 

ANTHROPOLOGY: CLAUDE LEVI-STRAUSS

 

LINGUISTICS: ROMAN JACOBSON

 

GENETIC EPISTEMOLOGY: JEAN PIAGET

 

 

JEAN PIAGET

A YOUNGER JEAN PIAGET

A STILL YOUNGER JEAN

FRENCH STRUCTURALISM

FRENCH STRUCTURALIST MOVEMENT WAS AGAINST

EMPIRICIST/BEHAVIORIST APPROACH

 

WORLD COMES ATOMISTICALLY

WE RECEIVE THE WORLD AS IT IS THROUGH OUR SENSES

WE COMBINE THE ATOMS MENTALLY

THE ENVIRONMENT “IMPRESSES ITSELF” ON THE MIND

 

BASIC TENETS OF STRUCTURALIST APPROACH A.    THROUGH RESEARCH, ONE CAN ARRIVE AT FORMAL PROPERTIES OF THOUGHT B.    THESE PROPERTIES ARE UNDERLYING STRUCTURES, THAT ORGANIZE THE WORLD AND ONE’S THOUGHTS C.    FORMAL PROPERTIES OF THOUGHT ARE STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATOR DEVISES A FORMAL MODEL (LOGICAL OR MATHEMATICAL) TO DESCRIBE BEHAVIOR D.    FORMAL MODEL IS INDEPENDENT OF CONCRETE REALITY DESCRIBES MANY CONTENTS E.    STRUCTURES ARE CLAIMED TO BE 1.     INDEPENDENT OF TRANSITORY PHENOMENA A.     MOTIVATIONB.     PSYCHOLOGICAL STATE (EMOTIONS)C.     FORMAL SCHOOLING 2.     UNIVERSAL 3.     INVARIANT SEQUENCE 4.     QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN STAGES INABILITY TO RECONSTRUCT FORMER THINKING  

  

PIAGET’S QUESTIONS 

  

WHERE DOES NOVELTY COME FROM?

WHERE CAN ONE SEARCH FOR ANSWERS TO THAT QUESTION?

ONTOGENESIS (WORK WITH DEVELOPING CHILDREN)

PHYLOGENESIS (WORK WITH SNAILS)

HISTORY OF DOMAINS (WORK WITH GARCIA ON PARALLELS AND THEIR LACK IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF PHYSICS CONCEPTS IN THE DOMAIN OF PHYSICS – PRE – NEWTONIAN AND NEWTONIAN CONCEPTS OF FORCE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SAME CONCEPTS IN ONTOGENESIS)

IN ONTOGENESIS, THE ANSWER TO THE NOVELTY QUESTION IS STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT

1 .SENSORIMOTOR (BIRTH - ~1 ½)

2 .INTUITIVE/PREOPERATIONAL (~1/12 - ~4,5)

3 .CONCRETE OPERATIONS (~4,5 - ~11,12)

4 .FORMAL OPERATION (FROM ~11-12 ONWARDS

THESE STRUCTURES/STAGES ARE AGE-RELATED BUT NOT AGE-DEPENDENT

FASTER OR SLOWER DEVELOPMENT IRRELEVANT TO PIAGET

WHAT IS RELEVANT IS THE STRUCTURE/STAGE SEQUENCE

Structures/stage characterization

SENSORIMOTOR

CONNECTS BIOLOGICAL TO PSYCHOLOGICAL

INFANT BEGINS WITH REFLEXES

REPRESENTATION BEGINS AT THE END OF THE S-M PERIOD

DEFERRED IMITATION

INTUITIVE/PREOPERATIONAL

END STATES BUT NOT REVERSE DIRECTIONS BETWEEN THEM

IMAGERY TASKS

EGOCENTRIC REASONING

WITHOUT OPERATIONS

CONCRETE OPERATIONS

ABLE TO MENTALLY PERFORM OPERATIONS

HAS REVERSIBILITY

CONNECTED TO HERE AND NOW REASONING

FORMAL OPERATIONS

REASONS HYPOTHETICALLY AND DEDUCTIVELY

THINKS ABOUT POSSIBLE WORLDS

THINKS ABOUT ALL POSSIBLE COMBINATIONS

PROPORTIONAL REASONING

WITH WHAT IS THE INFANT BORN?

THE SENSORIMOTOR STRUCTURE

IF PIAGET HAD CLAIMED THAT INFANTS WERE BORN WITHOUT STRUCTURES, HE WOULD HAVE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT HOW INFANTS GOT STRUCTURES IF THEY WEREN’T BORN WITH THEM.

WHAT IS THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ENTITY THAT DEVELOPS?

MENTAL STRUCTURES

WHAT CONCEPTS DID PIAGET SEEK OUT TO EMPIRICALLY TEST HIS IDEAS?

BECAUSE OF HIS PHILOSOPHICAL BENT, HE CHOSE KANT’S CATEGORIES (AND OTHERS’)

SPACE

PERSPECTIVE-TAKING

3-MOUNTAIN TASK

MENTAL ROTATIONS OF SELF

YAEL AND HADAS DANCING

PENCIL ROTATING

MENTAL ROTATION OF OBJECTS

PUZZLE: MIRROR EXTEND RIGHT ARM; WHAT GOES OUT IN THE MIRROR. THERE IS AN UP-DOWN MIRROR IMAGE. HOW CAN YOU PROVE IT?

TIME

IMPORTANCE OF TIME IN PHILOSOPHY AND PSYCHOLOGY

AGAINST EMPIRICIST/BEHAVIORIST POSITION THAT ALL KNOWLEDGE ORIGINATES IN OUR EXPERIENCES WITH THE WORLD

TIME IS NOT IN THE WORLD IN THE WAYS THAT OBJECTS ARE HOW DO WE MEASURE TIME?

WATCHES MEASURE SPACE COVERED AND WE INFER TIME

IF TIME IS NOT EXPERIENCE YET WE CONSTRUCT UNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT IT, THEN IT IS A CASE IN POINT AGAINST THE EMPIRICISTS/BEHAVIORISTS

PIAGET DISCUSSION WITH EINSTEIN

TIME’S COMPONENTS

SIMULTANEITY

SUCCESSION

DURATION

TASK TO MEASURE CHILDREN’S UNDERSTANDING OF TIME:

A---------------------

B----------------------------------------

CARS A AND B BEGIN MOVING AT THE SAME TIME (SIMULTANEITY) AND GET TO THE END OF THE TRACK AT THE SAME TIME (SIMULTANEITY). DID THEY TRAVEL THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME (DURATION)?

PREOPERATIONAL CHILDREN: NO

CONCRETE OPERATIONS CHILDREN: YES

CAUSALITY

CLASSIFICATION/SERIATION

DREAMS

OBJECTS (CONSERVATION)

NUMBER (AGE 4,5)

LENGTH (AGE 6,7)

LIQUID QUANTITY (AGE 6,7)

SOLID QUANTITY (AGE 7,8)

WEIGHT (AGE 9,10)

DECALAGE

HOW DO STRUCTURE FUNCTION?

PIAGET SAW 2 FACES TO THE STRUCTURE AND ITS FUNCTIONING

ADAPTATION – FACE THAT TURNS OUTWARDS TOWARDS THE WORLD

ORGANIZATION – FACE THAT TURNS INWARDS TOWARDS ITSELF

ADAPTATION

THE STRUCTURE ADAPTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT

INVARIANT FUNCTIONS

ASSIMILATION – FITTING THE WORLD TO THE STRUCTURE

ANALOGY: DIGESTION – WE BREAK THE FOOD INTO PARTS AND FIT THEM TO OUR BODY; THE REST GETS ELIMINATED

ANALOGY: WE CAN HEAR WHAT OUR MENTAL STRUCTURE ALLOWS US TO HEAR; THE REST GETS IGNORED

ACCOMMODATION – FITTING THE STRUCTURE TO THE WORLD

ANALOGY: GRASPING IN INFANCY – THE WORLD COMES IN DIFFERENT SHAPES AND FORMS; THE INFANT CHANGES HIS HAND TO FIT THOSE SHAPES AND FORMS.

BY DOING THAT HE GENERALIZES THE GRASP, I.E., GENERALIZES THE STRUCTURE. MAKES IT MORE FLEXIBLE

ORGANIZATION

THE STRUCTURES DEVELOPED DURING DECALAGE REMAIN IN EQUILIBRIUM WITH THEMSELVES

EXAMPLE: THE CHILD BELIEVES THAT THERE IS CONSERVATION (NUMBER CONSERVATION WITH SMALL NUMBERS OF OBJECTS) AND NON CONSERVATION (NUMBER C OBSERVATION WITH LARGE NUMBERS) AT THE SAME TIME. HE IS BOTH CONCRETE OPERATIONAL AND PREOPERATIONAL AT THE SAME TIME.

WHAT IS THE MAIN MECHANISM OF DEVELOPMENT?

DISEQUILIBRIUM OF TWO TYPES:

ADAPTATIONAL DISEQUILIBRIUM

LACK OF A FIT BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND THE ENVIRONMENT

LEADS TO DISEQUILIBRIUM

TENDENCY OF THE STRUCTURE IS TO BE IN EQUILIBRIUM

DONE IN 2 PRINCIPAL WAYS

1. STRUCTURE “IGNORES” THE DATA THAT DON’T FIT (COHERENCE MECHANISM)

2. STRUCTURE CHANGES TO BE IN EQUILIBRIUM (LEARNING OF DEVELOPMENT)

EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE BY TURIEL (1969) PH.D. THESIS AT YALE

HEARING MORAL REASONING AT LEVELS DIFFERENT THAN YOUR OWN ABOUT MORAL DILEMMAS

+1: CHANGED

+2: DIDN’T CHANGE MUCH BUT WHEN THEY DID, THE CHANGED TO +1

-1: LITTLE CHANGE

BY PROVIDING REASONING DIFFERENT THAN THE REASONING PREDOMINANTLY USED BY THE CHILDREN, THERE IS A MISMATCH BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL INPUT (MORAL REASONING) AND THE CHILDREN’S STRUCTURE. THEREFORE THIS IS ADAPTATIONAL DISEQUILIBRIUM.

EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE OF ADAPTATIONAL DISEQUILIBRIUM THAT WAS MOSTLY GOVERNED BY THE COHERENCE MECHANISM BY STRAUSS, STAVY, & ORPAZ (1982).

10 C + 10 C = 20 C.

TEST IT WITH A THERMOMETER.

CHILDREN THINK THE THERMOMETER IS BROKEN

THERE IS A MISMATCH BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION 10 C + 10 C = 10 C AND WHAT KIDS THINK: 10 C + 10 C = 20 C

ORGANIZATIONAL DISEQUILIBRIUM

LACK OF FIT BETWEEN CHILDREN’S DIFFERENT STRUCTURES IN DECALAGE

CHILD CONTRADICTS HIMSELF

STATE OF DISEQUILIBRIUM INCREASES THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE STRUCTURE WILL BE CHANGED

COLD WATER + COLD WATER -SHAPED GROWTH10 C + 10 C = 20 C

POTENTIAL ORGANIZATIONAL DISEQUILIBRIUM BETWEEN 2 CONTRADICTORY THOUGHTS THE CHILD HOLDS SIMULTANEOUSLY

WHAT ARE THE RELATIONS BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT

AND LEARNING?

DEFINITION OF DEVELOPMENT: THE CONSTRUCTION OF A STRUCTURE FOR THE FIRST TIME

DEFINITION OF LEARNING: THE APPLICATION OF AN ALREADY-EXISTING STRUCTURE TO NEW CONTENT FOR THE FIRST TIME.

EXAMPLE: A CHILD HAS THE CONCRETE OPERATIONS STRUCTURE FOR NUMBER CONSERVATION ONLY. HE THEN HAS THE SAME STRUCTURE FOR NUMBER AND LENGTH CONSERVATION. THIS IS LEARNING BECAUSE AN ALREADY-EXISTING STRUCTURE (CONCRETE OPERATIONS) HAS BEEN APPLIED TO NEW CONTENT (LENGTH CONSERVATION)

RELATIONS BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING?

DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTS LEARNING.

LEARNING FOSTERS DEVELOPMENT. YOU CANNOT LEARN (APPLY AN ALREADY-EXISTING STRUCTURE) TO NEW CONTENT IF THAT STRUCTURE HAS NOT YET BEEN CONSTRUCTED (DEVELOPED).