Foundations of Science

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 177–187 | Cite as

Systems and Beliefs

  • Hugh Gash


Systems thinking provides insights into how ideas interact and change, and constructivism is an example of this type of systemic approach. In the 1970s constructivism emphasised the development of mathematical and scientific ideas in children. Recently constructivist ideas are applied much more generally. Here I use this approach to consider beliefs and their role in conflicts and the conditions needed for reconciliation. If we look at Reality in terms of how we construct it as a human cognitive process, we recognise two things. First, that we cannot go beyond our senses and thoughts to what exists independently of us, and second, if we construct what we know we have to take responsibility for this. This inevitably focuses our thinking on the relation we have with the physical and social world, we are a part of the universe rather than apart from it. This paper argues that accepting and understanding these limits of human knowing together with our interconnectedness provide opportunities to understand conflicting positions. To resolve conflict, people with opposing viewpoints have to be prepared to understand each other. That is a challenge because our own reality plays a vital role in our lives, for everything from personal survival to social support.


Constructivism Beliefs Conflict Realities  Certainty 


  1. Allport, G. (1954/1979). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  2. Bateson, G. (1979). Mind and nature. New York: Dutton.Google Scholar
  3. Bateson, G., & Bateson, M. C. (1987). Angels fear: An investigation into the nature and meaning of the sacred. London: Rider.Google Scholar
  4. British Medical Journal. (2010). doi: 10.1136/bmj.c696.
  5. Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., pp. 993–1028). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Dewey, J. (1960) The quest for certainty. New York: Capricorn. (Originally published 1929).Google Scholar
  7. Dhont, K., Van Hiel, A., & Hewstone, M. (2014). Changing the ideological roots of prejudice: Longitudinal effects of ethnic intergroup contact on social dominance orientation. Group Process. Intergroup Relat., 17(1), 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dodig-Crnkovic, G. (2014). Info-computational constructivism and cognition. Constructivist Foundations, 9(2), 223–231.Google Scholar
  9. Dooley, T. (2010). The construction of mathematical insight by pupils in whole-class conversation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
  10. Douven, I. (2011). Peirce on abduction. Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Retrieved February 21, 2014, from
  11. Drudy, S., Gash, H., Lynch, K., Lavin, P., Moles, R., Lane, C., et al. (1991). Integrating equal opportunities in the curriculum of teacher education 1988–1991: TENET programme dissemination phase. Irish Educational Studies, 10, 271–289.Google Scholar
  12. Evans, D. (2012). Risk intelligence: How to live with uncertainty. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  13. Farzin, F., Hou, C., & Norcia, A. M. (2012). Piecing it together: Infants’ neural responses to face and object structure. Journal of Vision, 12(13), 6. doi: 10.1167/12.13.6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Floridi, L. (2011). A defence of constructionism: Philosophy as conceptual engineering. Metaphilosophy, 42(3), 282–304.
  15. Gash, H., & Morgan, M. (1993). School-based modifications of children’s gender-related beliefs. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 277–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gopnik, A., Glymour, C., Sobel, D., Schulz, L., Kushnir, T., & Danks, D. (2004). A theory of causal learning in children: Causal maps and Bayes nets. Psychological Review, 111(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Helm, T. (2014). Extremist religion is at the root of 21st-century wars, says Tony Blair. The Guardian, 25(1), 14.Google Scholar
  18. Hetherington, E. M., Parke, R. D., & Locke, V. O. (2003). Child psychology: A contemporary viewpoint. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  19. Johnson, S. (Ed.). (2009). Neoconstructivism: The new science of cognitive development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Laurenson, J. (2014). French boycott gender theory at school. Retrieved February 16, 2014, from
  21. Maturana, H. R. (1988). The search for objectivity, or the quest for a compelling argument. Irish Journal of Psychology, 9, 25–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Maturana, H. R. (1990). Science and daily life: The ontology of scientific explanations. In W. Krohn, G. Küppers, & H. Nowotny (Eds.), Selforganization: Portrait of a scientific revolution (pp. 12–35). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McCann, E. (2013). Irish Times 12.12.13. The lessons of peace learned in the North may not be that easy to export.Google Scholar
  24. Murphy, B. (2014). Dummett, M. (1925–2011). Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from
  25. Nescolarde-Selva, J., & Usó-Doménech, J.-L. (2013a). Topological structures of complex belief systems. Complexity, 19(1), 46–62.Google Scholar
  26. Nescolarde-Selva, J., & Usó-Doménech, J.-L. (2013b). Topological structures of complex belief systems (II): Textual materialization. Complexity, 19(2), 50–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Riegler, A. (2007). Is Glasersfeld’s constructivism a dangerous intellectual tendency? In R. Glanville & A. Riegler (Eds.), The importance of being Ernst (pp. 263–275). Echoraum: Vienna.Google Scholar
  28. Riegler, A., & Douven, I. (2009). Extending the Hegselmann–Krause model III: From single beliefs to complex belief states. Episteme, 6(2), 145–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rowlands, S., & Carson, R. The contradictions in the constructivism discourse.
  30. Sexton, K. A., & Dugas, M. J. (2009). Defining distinct negative beliefs about uncertainty: Validating the factor structure of the intolerance of uncertainty scale. Psychological Assessment, 21, 176–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tobias, S., & Duffy, T. M. (Eds.). (2009). Constructivist instruction: Success or failure. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory. New York: G. Braziller.Google Scholar
  33. von Glasersfeld, E. (1974). Piaget and the radical constructivist epistemology. In C. D. Smock & E. von Glasersfeld (Eds.), Epistemology and education. Follow through publications (pp. 1–24). Athens.Google Scholar
  34. von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: Falmer Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.St Patrick’s College, DublinDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations