Loading...
Publication
Teoria de Piaget : Não tão formal como muitos críticos defendem
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 726.65 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
É sabido que Piaget utilizou a lógica para caracterizar
a actividade cognitiva do sujeito. Este recurso à
lógica levou muitos críticos a defenderem que a teoria
Piagetiana é demasiada abstracta e formal. Neste estudo
apresenta-se uma pesquisa empírica baseada na 1ógica
das significações que mostra que a teoria de
Piaget não reduz os problemas de significado a questões
de verdade formal e que, portanto, não é tão formal
e abstracta quanto se diz. De modo mais preciso,
esta pesquisa examina o papel da implicação
significativa (ou «entailment») e da familiaridade na
solução de problemas de raciocínio condicional envolvendo
os quatro clássicos argumentos lógicos (Modus
Ponens, Modus Tollens, Negação do Antecedente e
Afirmação do Consequente). Cem estudantes universitários,
tendo à volta de 19 anos, eram solicitados a
resolver diversos problemas de raciocínio condicional
que cruzavam itens de implicação material ou implicação
significativa com itens de conteúdo familiar ou
não familiar. Os resultados mostraram ( I ) que, independentemente
de conteúdos familiares ou não familiares,
a implicação significativa é um determinante
poderoso do raciocínio condicional; (2) que a familiaridade
só levava a melhor desempenho quando estava
associada a itens com implicação significativa; e (3)
que nos itens onde não existia implicação significativa,
os sujeitos tinham melhor desempenho face a conteúdos
não familiares do que familiares. Estes resultados
são consistentes com lógica das significações de
Piaget, e mostram que a sua teoria não é tão formal e
abstracta quanto alguns sustentam.
Palavras chave: raciocínio condicional, lógica das
significações, teoria de Piaget.
ABSTRACT------ It is well known that Piaget used logic to characterize subjects’ cognitive activities. This recourse to logic has led many of Piaget’s critics to claim that his theory is too formal, abstract and devoid of acts of meaning. This paper challenges this claim by presenting an empirical study based on Piaget’s recent proposal of a logic of meanings.This logic does not reduce issues of meaning to issues of (formal) truth, and suggests replacing truth functional logic by an intensional or entailment 1ogic. More precisely, this study examines the role of entailment and familiarity in the solution of conditional reasoning problems involving the four classical logical argurnents (ie. Modus Ponens, Modus Tollens, Denial of Antecedent, and Affirmation of Consequent). One hundred college students (M = 19.4 years) were first presented with severa1 conditional reasoning problems crossing entailment vs. non entailment by familiar vs. unfamiliar items, and then they were asked to choose the correct conclusion among a set of three (ie., «affiirmative», «negative» and «can’t teli»). Results showed that entailment, regardless of whether the content was familiar or unfamiliar, led always to substantial improvement. Contrary to entailment, familiarity improved subjects’ performance only when an entailment relation existed. Surprisingiy, when a entailment relation did not exist, subjects performed better on unfamiliar items than on the corresponding familiar ones! Ali these results are consistent with Piaget’s recent proposal of a logic of meanings and show that his theory is not so formal, abstract, and devoid of acts of meaning as many critics have claimed.
ABSTRACT------ It is well known that Piaget used logic to characterize subjects’ cognitive activities. This recourse to logic has led many of Piaget’s critics to claim that his theory is too formal, abstract and devoid of acts of meaning. This paper challenges this claim by presenting an empirical study based on Piaget’s recent proposal of a logic of meanings.This logic does not reduce issues of meaning to issues of (formal) truth, and suggests replacing truth functional logic by an intensional or entailment 1ogic. More precisely, this study examines the role of entailment and familiarity in the solution of conditional reasoning problems involving the four classical logical argurnents (ie. Modus Ponens, Modus Tollens, Denial of Antecedent, and Affirmation of Consequent). One hundred college students (M = 19.4 years) were first presented with severa1 conditional reasoning problems crossing entailment vs. non entailment by familiar vs. unfamiliar items, and then they were asked to choose the correct conclusion among a set of three (ie., «affiirmative», «negative» and «can’t teli»). Results showed that entailment, regardless of whether the content was familiar or unfamiliar, led always to substantial improvement. Contrary to entailment, familiarity improved subjects’ performance only when an entailment relation existed. Surprisingiy, when a entailment relation did not exist, subjects performed better on unfamiliar items than on the corresponding familiar ones! Ali these results are consistent with Piaget’s recent proposal of a logic of meanings and show that his theory is not so formal, abstract, and devoid of acts of meaning as many critics have claimed.
Description
Keywords
raciocínio condicional lógica das significações teoria de Piaget conditional reasoning logic of meanings Piaget’s theory
Citation
Análise Psicológica, 13(3), 295-303
Publisher
ISPA - Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada