Jacob's recent blog post commented on the misconception of the RCist having trouble in society. He gave an example of an RCist who is eating her bagel and riding her bike. Surely these activities, Jacob points out, would not be cause for, what he calls, a paranoia about metaphysical properties of her bike and bagel. Surely no one can argue that there is nothing to be gained from this type of metaphysical paranoia.
However I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of what aspects of life the RCist would run into issues with. The trouble would not come with the examination of mundane objects or daily routines. The issues would arise when the RCist is participating in social institutions which are based on notion of objectivity and truth. Take, for example, the legal system. Lets suppose the RCist gets called for jury duty. While she feels comfortable with the viability of the blueberry-ness of her bagel, she would certainly have trouble reconciling her own beliefs with those of the criminal. Perhaps the criminal finds viable that his acts are legal. Our legal system requires a guilty or not guilty verdict that is based on an idea of truth or fact. She would only feel comfortable proclaiming his guilt or innocence as viable based on her previous experience. The RCist would be in a difficult position if they wished to participate in this and other social institutions based on objectivity.
How would a Radical Constructivist deal with societal needs of a democracy (like criminal justice system)?
(And to defend this question to Ed Manak- creating the next generation of democrats is one of the purported aims of public education, so to endorse a system of education (RCism) that poses problems to that system is certainly worthy of discussion).
While I do not deny the importance of discussing systems that present problems about the very foundation of our government, Radical Constructivism does not, I think, present appropriate problems to address. An attack on the very basis of reality (and a linguistically-strained attempt to avoid "truth") is not an academically or pragmatically useful topic to discuss.
ReplyDeleteThe instruction of educators has become inundated with this RC'ist line of thinking. To ignore both a proper understanding of and, in some cases a sound refutation to, radical constructivism is to do a disservice to students attempting to become educators. While that may not be everyone in the class' current path, it does make up a considerable percentage.
ReplyDeleteI shall endeavor to respond...it is a good point you raise..
ReplyDelete