KARL JASPERS FORUM

TA31 (Feyerabend)

Commentary 10 (to C8 by Nielsen)

( SCIENCE, ABUNDANCE, AND ABSTRACTION )
by Ernst von Glasersfeld
28 December 2000, posted 9 January 2001

<1>
Even if you personally know a philosopher and can discuss ideas with him or her, it’s often difficult to be sure that you have interpreted what was said in the way it was intended. If you merely read what the philosopher wrote, any such certainty is out of the question. You inevitably interpret according to what you like and what you dislike. Hence I see no reason why M.Nielsen should not construct his own Paul Feyerabend. This construction tells me much about himself and little about Feyerabend.

<2>
There is however a reason why Nielsen is wrong when he writes at the end of his comment: "Piagets constructivism has been empirically refuted." - Constructivism is an epistemological model and can no more be empirically refuted than Leibniz’ Monadology, Nicholas of Cusa’s theory of "docta ignorantia", or any other theory of knowing. They are conceptual networks built on assumptions which one may or may not like; they have no truth value; what matters is their internal coherence and whether we find them useful.

----------------------

Ernst von Glasersfeld