Consciousness in Piaget: possibilities of understanding

Abstract

The objective of this article is to analyze the understanding of the concept of consciousness in Piaget. The theme of consciousness is a key concept in Piaget's theory and he is one of the few psychologists to offer a theoretical structure for the understanding of this theme. Notwithstanding, his proposal for understanding consciousness has been little approached or discussed. Grasp of consciousness, for Piaget, can be understood as the cognitive process of assimilating one's own functioning or that of the other when interacting with physical objects, people, and oneself. The process of constructing grasp of consciousness is explained by meaningful implication, reflecting abstraction, and equilibration. The dialectics between body and mind and between causality and implication pervade the discussions on consciousness in Piaget's work. Consensus is not found in the literature with regard to Piaget's conception of consciousness in virtue of this theme being dealt with at different times in his works with slightly distinct approaches. His works following the 1960s offer new possibilities of understanding the concept of consciousness. Although Piaget moved on in his formulations about consciousness, the essence of his ideas can already be found in his early works.

Analysing documents and interpreting textbooks: Students' historical thinking skills in learning about the battle of Surabaya

“…Equilibration is the core element in the constructive process of human thought (Beilin, 1992). In the process equilibration involves the role of conflict and contradiction so that disequilibrium and reequilibration often occur when adapting to the environment (Stoltz, 2018). In order to create a state of equilibrium, humans can assimilate or accommodate while being involved in the adaptation process.…”

“…In the experimental group students, it seemed they had the valuable lesson learned which they gained from their first experience in the first learning intervention process. They have equilibrated their existing schemata (Beilin, 1992;Mascolo, 2015;Piaget, 1950Piaget, , 1952Piaget, , 1954Stoltz, 2018). Prior to the intervention, they only assimilated one version of history.…”

“…Students had to accommodate new means of learning to equilibrate their existing schemata so that they could establish new schemata based on the current situation. This equilibration process confronted them with troublesome knowledge that required extra effort so that they could cross the threshold portal in studying history through analysing documents and interpreting textbooks (Beilin, 1992;Meyer & Land, 2003;Stoltz, 2018;Walker, 2013). This section presents the challenges and difficulties that students faced in learning history through analysing documents and interpreting textbooks.…”

“…Perkins, 2006) because they were more habituated to using sources that had a single version of Indonesian history from their textbooks and teacher lectures assimilated from primary school to senior secondary school. Thus, when they realised that apparently historical sources could contain different versions of the past, students had to accommodate this new knowledge to equilibrate their existing schemata (Beilin, 1992;Mascolo, 2015;Piaget, 1950Piaget, , 1952Piaget, , 1954Stoltz, 2018). Moreover, because students were accustomed to only being consumers of history and historical knowledge that was considered as "a gift bestowed by those who consider themselves knowledgeable upon those whom they consider to know nothing" (Freire, 2005b, p. 72), their inability to think critically was ultimately impacted.…”

“…The complaints they made were reasonable because previously they only consumed narrative types of textbooks and were not given any space to develop argumentative critical thinking (Henríquez & Ruiz, 2014). Especially if the single version of the narrative presented in the textbook is continuously assimilated by students and embedded strongly in their schemata, they would find it troublesome to accommodate new knowledge that the past can be reported differently in historical sources (Beilin, 1992;Mascolo, 2015;Piaget, 1952;Stoltz, 2018). This is reflected in the perspectives of the teacher participants, that students' difficulties were caused by not being accustomed to this learning model and still requires an extended habituation process.…”