Conceptualizations of Knowledge in Structuring Approaches to Moral Development: A Process-Relational Approach

Like other aspects of child development, views of the nature and development of morality depend on philosophical assumptions or worldviews presupposed by researchers. We analyze assumptions regarding knowledge linked to two contrasting worldviews: Cartesian-split-mechanistic and process-relational. We examine the implications of these worldviews for approaches to moral development, including relations between morality and social outcomes, and the concepts of information, meaning, interaction and computation. It is crucial to understand how researchers view these interrelated concepts in order to understand approaches to moral development. Within the Cartesian-split-mechanistic worldview, knowledge is viewed as representation and meaning is mechanistic and fixed. Both nativism and empiricism are based in this worldview, differing in whether the source of representations is assumed to be primarily internal or external. Morality is assumed to pre-exist, either in the genome or the culture. We discuss problems with these conceptions and endorse the process-relational paradigm, according to which knowledge is constructed through interaction, and morality begins in activity as a process of coordinating perspectives, rather than the application of fixed rules. The contrast is between beginning with the mind or beginning with social activity in explaining the mind.

THE ONTOLOGICAL TRIANGLE OF THE RELATIONAL PARADIGM

The philosophical analysis of three main paradigms in the basis of physical knowledge is carried out. It is permissible to conclude that in the case of electromagnetic interaction between the emitter and the absorber: 1) the process of interaction of the photon with the medium in space and time can occur; 2) in the case when the photon “teleports” - there is only a relation outside of space and time. The following classification of fundamental concepts, with which the relational paradigm deals, is revealed. The ideal: space and time, field, information, a set of movements of quantum particles. The material: interactions, environment. Nothing more than countable: time, electromagnetic interactions. Uncountable: space, environment, interactions with the environment, a set of movements of quantum particles. Substantial: environment, interactions, information, a set of movements of quantum particles. Relational: space, time, field - as a means of description.

THE INEVITABILITY OF THE UNITY OF FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICS AND METAPHYSICS AT THE TRANSITIONAL STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT OF PHYSICS

The article shows that at the present time in physics the conditions are ripe for a decisive revision of the prevailing ideas about physical reality. To solve this problem, metaphysical principles must be considered. Their manifestations in modern physics are shown in the presence of three paradigms. It has been demonstrated that this is most fully implemented within the framework of the relational paradigm, which has long been in the shadows. The results already obtained within its framework are shown and it is noted that the development of this direction most closely corresponds to materialist philosophy.

Intersubjectivity And Analytic Field Theory

Intersubjectivity is the central concept of the relational paradigm, the most widely employed in contemporary psychoanalysis. Yet we do not have a clear definition of it. Usually it is synonymous with “the interpersonal” and thus indicates the interaction that takes place between two already constituted subjects. In this sense it has little to do with the radical social theory of subjectivation suggested by the term, at least originally, in Husserl’s philosophy. In the original meaning of intersubjectivity, as handed down by Husserl and later developed by Merleau-Ponty, the binary opposition between subjectivity and intersubjectivity is dissolved and transformed into a dialectic relationship. To formulate a clear and distinct, but above all specific, definition of intersubjectivity, we need to reclaim this intuition and translate it into coherent principles of technique. It is also essential to verify whether the models of psychoanalysis proffered as intersubjective actually satisfy this parameter. On the basis of these two simple principles, the variants of psychoanalysis that are labeled intersubjective can be placed along a continuum. Examples are given of “weak” and “strong” intersubjectivity. Paradigmatic of the latter pole is the post-Bionian theory of the analytic field.

Embracing variability and complexity and the explanatory reductionism of scientific realism

We agree with Arocha’s criticism of psychological science’s reliance on statistical procedures that factor out intraindividual variability and the complex dynamics inherent to behavior, as well as with his call for the adoption of a metatheoretical framework that embraces such variability. However, we disagree that scientific realism provides such a framework, given its reductive privileging of certain forms of explanation over others. We advocate, instead, a process-relational paradigm and the explanatory pluralism that it supports, allowing psychological science to more dynamically, and realistically, model individual human behavior.

Exploring the Conceptual Frameworks Guiding Developmental Research and Practice in Higher Education: Some Challenges for Transdisciplinary Work

This article examines questions initially raised at a meeting that took place 50 years ago on the topic of the development of knowledge in higher education where Jean Piaget coined the term “transdisciplinarity” and distinguished it from interdisciplinarity. We consider the question of why transdisciplinary scholarship has been so challenging for the field of developmental science. We argue that shifts in the guiding metatheoretical framework of theory and research, away from split-mechanistic paradigms and towards process-relational ones, do not always align with the conceptual frameworks used in educational practice. Using the example considered by Piaget and others at the original conference on higher education and the development of knowledge and also examining the domain of identity development, we find support for ways developmental scholarship has embraced the shift to a relational-developmental metatheory. In contrast, we argue that the relational-developmental paradigm has not been fully adopted by practitioners, with evidence of some using the Cartesian-split-mechanistic paradigm and others using some aspects of the relational-developmental paradigm. We highlight the importance of examining the conceptual frameworks guiding developmental scholarship and practice, suggesting that alignment of conceptual frameworks is an essential ingredient for progress in transdisciplinary scholarship and practice to take place. Conceptualizations at the metatheoretical level condition each and every aspect of theory, research, and practice, giving meaning to both theoretical and empirical activities and guiding practice-based work. Debates often occur at the metatheoretical level, and thus are not open to empirical adjudication. We conclude that metatheoretical alignment between scholars and practitioners is critically important to transdisciplinary efforts in developmental science and therefore more attention to the metatheoretical assumptions of the process-relational paradigm is critical for work with practitioners to succeed.

PRE-PHYSICAL REALITY AND RELATIONAL PHYSICS

The concept of substantive-relational “paradigm relativity-complementarity” is being developed. «Pre-physical reality» is introduced as monistic Supercategory. It is justified that it is reasonable to consider discrete complex relations and p -adic complex relations in relational physics. It is pointed out that it is important to find a way to control gravity through electromagnetic interaction. The features of quantum theory in the relational paradigm have been considered.

RELATIONAL PARADIGM IN ASKS AND ANSWERS

What is the reason for a minor success of relational ideas in scientific and public society? Are they actually that weird as they seem at the first glance? Here we try to give a fresh-eye look to the relational cornerstones (secondary nature of space-time, action at a distance, and Mach’s principle). We consider some typical questions usually asked by the opponents, both physicists and wide audience, to find some new arguments in favor of this concept.

ONE-PARTICLE WAVE FUNCTIONS IN THE RELATIONAL PARADIGM

We discuss a quantum description of free particles in pseudo-Finslerian momentum spaces appearing in one of relational approaches to physics and geometry of space-time. It is shown that, for wave functions of such particles, we can define an invariant unitary scalar product which ensures the standard quantum mechanical probabilistic interpretation. As the simplest example, the description of a spinless particle is considered.