Thursday, February 17, 2011

Response to Stephen

"Were it to seem 'viable' to a student that 1+1 came out to some other figure, would a teacher be in a position to correct them under RC theory?"


You have to accept certain "truths" in order to do math. 1+1=2 means nothing unless you accept certain postulates as true. So, if a student refused to do math because he or she did not accept these postulates, then I think that would be supported by a radical constructivist. However, I am less sure about what a radical constructivist would think of a student who came to the conclusion that 1+1=3 after accepting the postulates. It seems hard to argue that that could be correct. I think there is value in the notion that "objective truths" that we take for granted (such as 1+1=2) should be challenged. However, in every area of life, we must accept certain "postulates" in order to function. I wouldn't even be writing this if I was a radical constructivist because, for all I know, nobody in this class actually exists and my blog will never be seen by anyone. For my own benefit, I have to just accept that there is a reality outside of my own perceptions.

Question: Is it valid to reject radical constructivism solely because it makes it very hard (or maybe even impossible) to function normally in society?

2 comments:

  1. I'm not certain that it would make functioning in society difficult. If you see my response to Shelby on my blog it somewhat addresses this your question by pointing out that RC might not make normal societal life impossible.

    ReplyDelete