Search Forum:

A concise description takes the form of an analogy: for Piaget, objects are to the subject as an environment is to the organism. The organism does not "know" its environment directly; rather the organism interacts with its environment, thereby coming to respond appropriately to the objects it finds therein.?The same goes for the relationship between subjects and objects. The object-to-be-known exists in the environment, and in this way affects the senses, but its "essential nature" is unknowable.?This is because of how knowledge is constructed: through interaction. Piaget says that we do not learn our environment by copying it.?Rather, we learn through interacting with objects and constructing "structures" which approximate their effects.?When we are surprised by something an object does, these structures are "disequilibrated."?Further exploration allows for new learning and re-equilibration. This is the sense in which the external object can be "active" and include aspects "beyond the observable" (p. 179).?As we act upon the environment, it acts upon us---sometimes in ways we previously did not expect. There are lots of references to help you understand this approach.?Although it has been criticized, it seems to me that Brian Rotman's "Jean Piaget: Psychologist of the Real" (1977) would provide the closest overall fit to the perspective you seek.