Search Forum:

1: Someone (maybe Apostel) once remarked: in reading Piaget, you see yourself in the sense of you reveal yourself. Given Piaget's encyclopaedic erudition, that leaves open an endless number of doors. Which doors lead nowhere ? 2: Piaget, J. (1995). Sociological studies. London: Routledge. In his interpretation of the transpersonal, Piaget was influenced by N.S Timacheff [his name is also give as Timasheff] - see the 1995 English translation and follow the Index + Select Bibilography - transpersonal relationships - Timacheff As you know, Piaget was attempting to differentiate moral from legal obligation in his 1944 + 1960 papers in this text, and to do so without requiring any metaphysical [aka supra-scientific] commitments. 3: Transpersonal psychology I fail to see any glimpse of this in Piaget’s published work, and definitely no commitment to any transcendent kind of spirituality. Actually, his own position in Insights and Illusions of Philosophy [and even in Recherche with its central aim of building a novel science - later called developmental epostemologyy - out of what he regarded as Bergson’s metaphysical ruins] would locate transpersonal psychology in the illusion category along with, e.g., Husserl’s phenomenology. Psychology, for Piaget, was not in the business of providing supra-scientific knowledge. And epistemology, for Piaget, was in the business of demarcating objective knowledge in the sciences from the 1001 kinds of subjectivity, loosely categorised as Ego-centrism and Socio-centrism (e.g. his 1951 paper in the 1995 text above, though he has better things on this duality?elsewhere). Spiritual experiences in any transcendent sense would amount to both kinds of centrism.