CONSTRUCTIVE HISTORY From the standard theory of stages to Piaget’s new theory JEREMY TREVELYAN BURMAN, HON.B.SC, MA A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GRADUATE PROGRAM IN PSYCHOLOGY YORK UNIVERSITY TORONTO, ONTARIO AUGUST 2016 © Jeremy T. Burman, 2016 ii Abstract This project demonstrates how Historians of Psychology can contribute to the future of Psychology from within the Department of Psychology (rather than from departments of History, the History and Philosophy of Science, or Science and Technology Studies). To do this, I focus on the claim that Jean Piaget’s last works constitute a “new theory,” while also showing how this labelling was appropriate. This is discussed briefly in the introduction. The first chapter is also quite simple: it follows the turn toward “locality,” and uses autobiography to show why a psychologist might want to pursue advanced training in history. This approach is then reflected in the second chapter, where Piaget’s autobiography is used to situate what followed in his own studies. The third chapter reflects this at an again-higher level, comparing an American history of Piaget’s biography with a Genevan history (but augmented with new archival research). In addition to revealing new details about his life, this also highlights a difference in historiographical sensibilities at work in shaping the discipline. The fourth chapter then shows that this generalizes. It reviews the most famous case of an instance where a series of texts were “indigenized” during their importation into American Psychology (viz. Titchener’s importation of Wundt). To confirm that the same thing occurred with Piaget, I introduce a new technique inspired by the Digital Humanities. In short: I show in quantitative terms acceptable to Psychologists what Historians would be more inclined accept from a study of primary sources. Two examples of this more-traditional kind of history are then presented. In chapter five, I consider a change in Piaget’s appeals to a formalism associated with Kurt Gödel. In chapter six, I look at how this change informed iii Piaget’s return to biology (and his subsequent updating of the Baldwin Effect). And the conclusion re-examines the original claim in light of everything else discussed. The ultimate result, though, is not only a new way to consider Piaget’s standard theory of stages. I also present a new way to understand his broader view of the development of knowledge. This also in turn informs a new way of doing history, presented in the Appendix. iv Dedicated to my wife LAURA to my sister JACQUIE to my nephew GREGORY and to my parents MARGOT & TONY who have each, in their own way, helped me more than they know v Acknowledgements A reflection. That’s what this is; of all those who have helped or influenced me. And I don’t just mean this section. The entire project reflects different interactions with different people on different topics, in different places, and at different times. Indeed, they have shaped the results that you now hold. Granted, the beginnings of the project are discussed in more detail in Chapter I. But that’s just because it was necessary there to walk readers through my own journey from Psychology to History—in case they hadn’t yet taken that journey themselves. Here, though, I can be more personal. The work that informed this dissertation was conducted with a cohort of graduate students at York University in Toronto. First inspired by interactions with Cathy Faye, Jason Goertzen, Kate Harper, and Paula Miceli. Then in collaboration with Laura Ball, Ryan Barnhart, Marissa Barnes, Jenn Bazar, Elissa Rodkey, Kelli Vaughn, and Jacy Young. And then later with Arlie Belliveau and Eric Oosenbrug, along with my teaching assistants Ben Zabinski and Dan Lahham. They all played a role in the development of these ideas (or related thinking upon which subsequent work was based). Sometimes they also served as foils, but all were always supportive. And I am grateful to each of them, separately and together. (Our Historiography Breakfast meetings were especially valuable.) Of course, it was the professors who often set the agenda that we explored. I will talk in some depth about two earliest influences—Jordan Peterson and Jan Sapp—in Chapter I. But the explorations that informed this project, after they had made their mark, were guided primarily by my doctoral advisor: Christopher Green. vi Chris makes fun of me sometimes for “wooing” him when I was still a master’s student in another department. But I’m very glad I did it. The resulting apprenticeship was extremely gratifying: we created a blog that attracted hundreds of thousands of readers (Advances in the History of Psychology), we explored—and helped to construct— a new field of inquiry (the digital history of psychology), and we created a laboratory that has now published more than a dozen articles (the PsyBorgs Lab). Chris deserves a big thank you for supporting my journeys to all of the places I thought looked interesting or relevant, both intellectual and geographical. And so too do my other committee members: Thomas Teo and Fred Weizmann, who himself also provides some continuity from my MA in Interdisciplinary Studies. I am grateful for that continuity too, especially since this project both extends and transcends that earlier work. The other full-time faculty in the History and Theory Area in the Department of Psychology, along with Chris and Thomas, are also due both credit and thanks: Mike Pettit and Alex Rutherford. Together, they provided the context in which I developed. (Mike also served as Dean’s Rep for my MA, and then chaired my dissertation defence.) Of course, several other faculty from friendly areas and departments contributed to my formation outside of the regular coursework: David Jopling, Martin Fichman, Bernie Lightman, Juan Pascual-Leone, and David Reid, as well as Anton Yasnitsky and Marga Vicedo from the University of Toronto. But two in particular must be marked out for special thanks. I served as Stuart Shanker’s teaching assistant for five years, and he taught me a great many things. Key among them is the absolutely critical importance of making all vii research relevant. These lessons came primarily through my service in various capacities at his research institute: first as research assistant for three years, then as associate director for one year (during which time I helped him to create the Canadian Self- Regulation Initiative), and ultimately as research director for a final year. I learned a tremendous amount. And furthermore, from another perspective, he paid for a lot of what follows. I will be forever grateful. An opportunity arose, at the end of the project, for me to take up a position in Geneva as an assistant to Marc Ratcliff in the Piaget Archives. This followed an invitation to speak at the FAPSE Centennial in 2012, as well as a ThinkSwiss Research Scholarship from the Swiss Embassy in 2014. And I was delighted to join his team. Marc is a rare scholar: he is fluent in a half-dozen languages, has PhDs in both developmental psychology (with Montangero at Geneva) and the history of science (with Bynum at UCL), and is a genuinely caring and supportive person who is interested only in doing good and interesting work with good and interesting people. He has built a fabulous team, and am grateful for their support. (I am especially thankful to Ariane Noël, and also Nathalie Delli-Gatti, whose support and friendship made my life in Geneva possible.) I am looking forward to working with this team for many years. And I am also glad to call Marc a friend. There is also a wider circle of friends of colleagues without whom this project would have been much more difficult. Most notably, however, are those at the Jean Piaget Society (which is not fan club, but is rather “the society for the study of viii knowledge and development”). JPS is my home-conference. This is partly for the subjects discussed at its meetings, and its audience of interested participants. But its stalwart members are the main reason. Chris Lalonde, Ashley Maynard, and Eric Amsel have become good friends. But I am also glad for such supportive and generous colleagues such as Mark Bickhard, Tom Bidell, Jan Boom, Nancy Budwig, Robert Campbell, Jeremy Carpendale, Brian Cox, Colette Daiute, Ayelet Lahat, Cynthia Lightfoot, Ulrich Mueller, Larry Nucci, Bill Overton, Pete Pufall, Geoffrey Saxe, Elliot Turiel, Abel Hernandez-Ulloa, and Phil Zelazo. And, of course, I must also thank and recognize Michael Chandler and Jeanette McCarthy-Gallagher as extraordinary mentors. My work has been supported over the years by several sponsors, funders, and awards. It is my privilege now to recognize them, and thank them. I was recruited into the doctoral program in Psychology in part through a York Graduate Award in 2007, although I had not yet completed my MA. This was followed by two awards from the Jean Piaget Society: the Pufall Award in 2009 and the International Emerging Scholars Award in 2010. (The latter was provided formally by the Jacobs Foundation.) In 2011- 2012, I was supported by an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. In 2012, I was honoured to be named a finalist for the Anne Anastasi Graduate Student Research Award by Division 1 of the American Psychological Association. In 2013, I received the Ambassador Gary J. Smith Award for research with an international focus. And in 2013-2014, I was supported by the Norman S. Endler Research Fellowship and the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Fellowship. Additional financial support was provided by the Science Directorate of the ix American Psychological Association, Cheiron: The International Society for the History of Behavioral & Social Sciences, the Présidence-Psy of the Faculté de Psychologie et des Sciences de l'Éducation at the University of Geneva, and the Fonds national suisse de la recherche scientifique (grant n° 100011-146145, to Marc Ratcliff).