Search Forum:

as you say in your message, counter-suggestions are required they are required in this sense. A judgment of necessity can be valid, even if nothing in the act is an explicit rebuttal of a contrary judgment, provided the judgment content is such as to be implicitly incompatible with a contrary judgment. For example, someone such as Descartes [in his rules for the Understanding] or Kant [his First Critique] would understand a necessity, even though a counter-argument had not been ruled out explicitly in the act itself, just because that act was linked to a superordinate principle that ruled this out. With children. it's the whole train of thought through the Q&A exchange that is at issue. Contrary judgments are brought out only as a check on the train of thought - as required. Piaget only confronted the child with a contrary response from a putative child of the same age if age is an indicator, not a criterion, of developmental level, then this is something of a red herring. At any event, confronting children with contrary judgments directed on both lower and higher levels of understanding was ubiquitous in Piaget's studies