Vygotsky and Piaget are two landmark figures in the history of developmental psychology. They expounded the basic viewpoints of children's development from different angles, which triggered a long-lasting century debate in the history of cognitive development research. Today, this debate is not as tense and deadly as it was then. However, the aftertaste of the debate still affects the contemporary research on children's development. Dialectical analysis of the relationship between the two theories has far-reaching historical significance and positive practical significance.
1 clear barriers: the research orientation is significantly different.
1. 1 The profound differences between the two theories
First of all, the two masters contacted children's cognitive development from different starting points and starting points. The core career Piaget pursued all his life is epistemology. He is not so much a developmental psychologist as an expert in epistemology. He is exploring the origin and essence of knowledge and logic through the study of children's development, and the study of children's development is a means rather than a goal to complete his career. Vygotsky is concerned about how children become members of the same subject of high culture, and is committed to developing a new holistic psychology. From the beginning, there were significant differences between the two masters in the orientation of research direction.
Secondly, the world outlook, philosophy and epistemology held by the two masters are obviously different. Piaget's theory advocates liberalism and shows individualism in research orientation, while Vygotsky's theory obviously tends to socialism; Piaget's research is institutionalism and biological orientation, while Vygotsky's method is obviously social and cultural orientation; Piaget was deeply influenced by philosophers such as Plato, Descartes, Rousseau and especially Kant, while Vygotsky was deeply influenced by Marx, Engels and Lenin. Vygotsky adopted realistic epistemology, and his view of ontogeny was materialistic, while Piaget "refused to take a firm stand" on these issues; Vygotsky is a monist in philosophy, insisting that Marxist philosophy is dialectical materialism and taking it as the commander-in-chief of his own epistemology. Piaget, on the other hand, is a pluralist, influenced by many philosophical views, and his attitude is eclectic and used by me.
Third, the two theories pay different attention to the initial reasons of individual development. Piaget did not point out the primary motive of development, and Vygotsky criticized him, "regarding development as an endless process of interaction between A and B, there is no primary reason for development". On the contrary, Vygotsky clearly pointed out that social interaction is the primary reason for the development of individual knowledge. "In children's cultural development, every function is performed twice in two aspects, first, social, as a psychological category of interpersonal relationship, second, psychological, psychological category within children ... all advanced psychological functions are internalized in social relations." Most of the differences between the two theories stem from this simple and important difference.
The surface difference between 1.2 two theories
1.2. 1 the pattern of human individual development
Piaget paid attention to the individual and explained the socialization of the individual. Piaget's early views were deeply influenced by Freud's views. He believed that the development was characterized by the gradual socialization of undifferentiated pre-ego, which was strongly proved by the weakening of children's "egocentrism" and the corresponding promotion of "social center". Vygotsky believes that the general mode of individual occurrence is from the initial social interpersonal process to the level of individualization and individualization, and development is not towards socialization, but towards individualization of social functions.
1.2.2 cognitive development process
Piaget believes that "the driving force behind cognitive structure" is balance, that is, the optimal adaptability between cognitive structure driven by biological forces and environment. Social factors or interpersonal factors can only have some indirect effects on children's individual development, which can play a role by creating cognitive conflicts, "interfering" children's format system from the outside, causing imbalance and then pushing out balance. The core process of development does not include the influence of social culture, which is secondary and external to development and can only affect children's "natural" cognitive development. In contrast, Vygotsky opposes the binary division of the external world and the internal psychological process. He clearly pointed out that it is not what is inside children that determines the development process, but the mutual infiltration of psychological process and external social and cultural environment. Vygotsky regards external social and cultural phenomena not only as the source of information and feedback, but also as concrete external psychological media.
1.2.3 the influence of adults and peers on individual development
Piaget believes that children think there is a huge difference between themselves and adults, who are knowledgeable and efficient and can do almost anything. From children's point of view, it is reasonable that there are inconsistencies between different types of individuals, so children's cognitive balance will not be affected. Children have completely different views on their peers. They realize that their peers belong to the same kind of people and perceive the world in the same way. Therefore, the differences and inconsistencies between peers often bother children and need them to solve them. Inconsistency with peers is more likely to lead to cognitive conflict and imbalance than disagreement with adults. Vygotsky emphasized children's internalization and acceptance of culture. Adults have more cultural knowledge than their peers and can better help children adapt and assimilate. It is adults who guide children's progress and promote important changes in individual development. If Piaget emphasized the influence of peers on development, then Vygotsky emphasized the important role of adults.
1.2.4 cognitive development stage
Piaget's famous development stage theory points out that the overall transformation of children's cognitive format system occurs in the process of transformation between stages, which can be understood according to the changes of children's internal psychological quality. Piaget believes that the stage sequence of his cognitive format structure has universal applicability across cultures, and the specific content of cognitive structure and stages may change greatly, but its development form remains consistent in different cultures. In Vygotsky's research, there is also the idea of development stage theory. Vygotsky's orientation of social occurrence holds that the development of people's psychological process is realized by reflecting and internalizing the characteristics of practical activities. These characteristics are social at first and external to individuals. Vygotsky describes this as the transformation from psychological process to psychological internal process. It can be inferred that Vygotsky's development theory has two stages, namely, the inter-psychological stage and the intra-psychological stage. Vygotsky also discussed the process from "natural" psychological function to "cultural" or "advanced psychological function", in which the natural process experienced "cultural reconstruction". This difference between "nature" and "culture" functions, just like the difference between "psychology" and "psychological" processes, can be interpreted as two different stages of development. Unlike Piaget, Vygotsky did not try to prove the existence of an internal logical structure independent of the situation. He devoted himself to studying the characteristics of specific psychological activities determined by culture and history, and firmly believed that psychological activities were rooted in specific social and cultural conditions.
2 Different roads lead to the same goal: There are many overlapping research methods and specific viewpoints.
Piaget and Vygotsky, as two developmental psychologists in the same era, although there are obvious differences in research orientation and emphasis, this does not mean that the theories of the two masters are incompatible. On the contrary, they pay attention to the same problem from different angles, that is, children's development. Both of them believe that children's development has two intertwined aspects and two lines (individual and society), and it is impossible to fully understand development without either side. Both theoretical studies use dialectics consciously or unconsciously, and dialectics constitutes the methodological basis of the two theories. Dialectical logic is not only the source of similarity between the two theories, but also the basis of their consistency. The application of dialectical method makes the two theories stand together, which is obviously different from most western psychological theories. The general consistency of research objects and research methods determines the intersection and overlap of the two theoretical research processes and specific viewpoints.
2. 1 The central role of social factors in children's development
Vygotsky's emphasis on the decisive role of social factors in development is well known and need not be said. Piaget is often misunderstood as an isolated "scientist" who thinks that children are divorced from social situations. In fact, most of his research focuses on individuals in the laboratory environment. As an epistemologist, Piaget is concerned about how knowledge and ideas develop. As a child psychologist, Piaget emphasized the core role of social factors in knowledge construction. Even in his early works, we can see the conclusion that "social life is a necessary condition for the development of logic" and "social life has changed the attributes of individuals". Piaget even talked directly about "the relationship between individuals has changed the psychological structure of individuals" in his later works. It can be seen that Piaget and Vygotsky have highly consistent views on the role of social factors in children's development.
2.2 Internalization is not a simple copy of the environment, but a transformation process.
Piaget's stage theory describes the different structures of cognition, and his constructivism theory explains the internal transformation mechanism of intellectual development. Vygotsky emphasized the internalization in development. Without communication with others, there is no individual learning. People often mistakenly think that Vygotsky's inter-mental experience is only transformed into intra-mental experience in a constant form. Vygotsky's viewpoint strongly refutes this misunderstanding: "External symbolic operation ... has been transformed into a new psychological internal platform, resulting in a new psychological system". In the process of internalization and the transformation from the internal platform to the external platform, children do not passively copy and copy the environment, but actively transform it on the basis of the original development, which is the understanding reached by Vygotsky and Piaget on this issue.
2.3 the development of personality
Piaget's development theory has a very prominent individualistic orientation. In his theory, individual process is the "premise" of social process, and development analysis is the analysis of individual development first. Piaget's methodological strategy is to evaluate social processes from the perspective of individual cognitive processes. The possibility of children participating in social processes or those social processes affecting individual psychological functions depends on the level of individual development. Vygotsky criticized Piaget's theory as the theory of individual development, but also regarded the advanced psychological function of individuals as the goal of development. The internalization discussed above also regards the individual as a place for psychological activities. In this sense, the two theories have crossed again.
3 Interaction and Complementarity: The Future Trend of the Two Theories
One view is that the two theories represent two completely different research orientations and open up two theoretical routes for children's development, which should be treated differently. Piaget is a typical example of individualism, and Vygotsky is a pioneer of social and cultural orientation. The two theories developed along different routes from the beginning, and the research ideas and emphasis will naturally show great differences. Piaget focused on individuals, while Vygotsky focused on social, cultural and historical conditions. We can't artificially narrow this qualitative difference and rigidly combine the two theories.
Another view is that the differences between the two theories are superficial and unsystematic, and the differences exist because of the differences in emphasis and degree of concern rather than types, which can be found in a series of similarities between the two theories. In view of so many similarities between the two theories, we have every reason to go out of the traditional antinomy comments, such as emphasizing either the role of individuals or the social process; Either emphasize the communication function of speech or emphasize the dialogue function of speech. This antinomy is not so much based on rational debate or empirical facts, but rather on value, mistaking "what should be" for "what is". Only by getting rid of this old concept of antinomy can we re-examine the essence of the two theories and understand the development process of children more comprehensively.
Both of the above viewpoints are reasonable. There are differences and connections between the two theories, which can neither be completely separated nor hastily integrated. Complete separation will cut off their connection, and hasty integration may ignore their differences. Vygotsky tried to explain the process of individual development from a deeper level, while Piaget tried to describe the occurrence of individual psychology from an epistemological level. The fundamental difference of this starting point determines the principle difference of the two theories from the beginning. Obviously, it is unrealistic to combine Vygotsky's social and cultural orientation with Piaget's individual biological orientation in a short period of time, which will only lead to confusion of views and disregard of the principled differences between the two theories, which is by no means the expected result of Piaget and Vygotsky. In the future empirical research, it may be necessary to compare one paradigm with another, expand each theory from the inside, and explain the phenomena or processes that have been obviously ignored in their own terms, so as to truly realize the interaction and complementarity between the two paradigms.