Primitiivinen ajattelu

Kommunistista ja ateistista hapatusta. *kissamainen hymy*

Noin. Ehdimmepäs ennen uskiksia. Tosiasiassa erittäin kiinnostavaa luettavaa.

Mitähän tieteenharrastaja saisi tuosta sivustosta irti?

NOOOOOO älä julkaise enää mielenkiintoista luettavaa näin myöhään, kiitos. Olisi pitänyt mennä nukkumaan jo ajat sitten.

Muutamia poimintoja:

>>> The main feature of this conversation is the virtual absence of what we have grown accustomed to viewing as the basic component in a conversation among several people: a mutual discourse involving questions, answers and opinions. This element is almost entirely lacking in the above passage. Each child is talking principally about or to himself, without addressing anybody or expecting any replies from anybody. > Lastly, the influence of that same egocentricity may be discerned in the child’s characteristic attitude to the conversation of others and the phenomena of the external world: he sincerely believes that nothing is beyond his understanding, and we hardly ever hear the words “I don’t know” from the mouth of a 4-5 year old. As we shall see, the child finds it difficult to hold back the first decision that comes into his head, and finds it easier to make an absurd reply than to admit ignorance. > He takes the world as he perceives it, not bothering about the links between individual perceived pictures, or the construction of that systematic picture of the world and its phenomena that a civilized adult, whose thinking must govern his relationship with the world, finds necessary and indispensable. > It is precisely this “strung togetherness”, in the absence of strict governing patterns and orderly relationships, that Piaget considers characteristic of the thinking and logic of the child. Being virtually unaware of any categories of causality, the child links effects, causes and consequences, as well as discrete phenomena unrelated to them, one after another in random sequence. > The primitive precultural thinking of the child has a far simpler structure: it is a direct reflection of the naively perceived world. All the child needs is one detail or one incomplete observation to draw the corresponding (though entirely wrong) conclusion. Whereas adult thinking is governed by the laws of a complex combination of accumulated experience and conclusions drawn from general premises, and is subordinate to the laws of inductive-deductive logic, the thinking of the small child, on the other hand, is what the German psychologist Stern has described as “transductive”. It does not proceed from the particular to the general, nor from the general to the particular; it merely concludes from case to case, each time on the basis of new, readily evident features. In the mind of the child each phenomenon receives a corresponding explanation which is supplied immediately, bypassing any logical stages or generalizations.