Piaget’s Empirical Science

Jean Piaget, The Construction of Reality in the Child (New York: Basic Books, 1954).

Observation and experimentation combined seem to show that object concept, far from being innate or given ready-made in experience, is constructed little by little. Six stages can be discerned, corresponding to those of intellectual development in general. During the first two stages (those of reflexes and the earliest habits), the infantile universe is formed of pictures that can be recognized but that have no substantial permanence or spatial organization. During the third stage (secondary circular reactions), a beginning of permanence is conferred on things by prolongation of the movements of accommodation (grasping, etc.) but no systematic search for absent objects is yet observable. During the fourth stage (“application of known means to new situations”) there is searching for objects that have disappeared but no regard for their displacements. During a fifth stage (about 12 to 18 months old) the object is constituted to the extent that it is permanent individual substance and inserted in the groups of displacements, but the child still cannot take account of changes of position brought about outside the field of direct perception. In a sixth stage (beginning at the age of 16 to 18 months) there is an image of absent objects and their displacements. (4)

(Example of Piaget’s Method)

OBS. 40. At 0;10 (18) Jacqueline is seated on a mattress without anything to disturb or distract her (no coverlets, etc.). I take her parrot from her hands and hide it twice in succession under the mattress, on her left, in A. Both times Jacqueline looks for the object immediately and grabs it. Then I take it from her hands and move it very slowly before her eyes to the corresponding place on her right, under the mattress, in B. Jacqueline watches this movement very attentively, but at the moment when the parrot disappears in B she turns to her left and looks where it was before, in A.

During the next four attempts I hide the parrot in B every time without having first placed it in A. every time Jacqueline watches me attentively. Nevertheless each time she immediately tries to rediscover the object in A; she turns the mattress over and examines it conscientiously. During the last two attempts, however, the search tapers off.

Sixth attempt: She no longer searches.

From the end of the eleventh month the reactions are no longer as simple and become of the type we call “residual.” (51)

丰子恺的画（八）：诱惑

“Subjective Synthesis” in the Child/ 儿童的思维方式与"主观综合"

Jean Piaget, The Language and Thought of the Child (London, New York: Routledge, 2002).

...

“White dust will ne’er come out of sack of coal” is compared to “Those who waste their time neglect their business.” The proverb is understood verbally: “I thought it meant that white dust could never come out of a sack of coal, because coal is black”—Why do these two sentences mean the same thing?—People who waste their time don’t look after their children properly. They don’t wash them, and they become as black as coal, and no white dust comes out.—Tell me a story which means the same thing as: “White dust will ne’er … etc.”—“Once upon a time there was a coal merchant who was white. He got black and his wife said to him: 'How disgusting to have a man like that.' And so he washed, and he couldn’t get white, his wife washed him and he couldn’t get white. Coal can never get white, and so he washed his skin, and he only got blacker because the glove [washrag] was black.”

It is quite clear in a case like this that the mechanism of the subject’s reasoning cannot be explained by judgments of analogy affecting the details of the propositions. Having once read the proverb, the child is ready to attach to it any symbolic significance which chance may reveal in the perusal of the corresponding sentences. All that the proverb has left in his mind is a schema, a general image, if one prefers—that of the coal which cannot become white. This is the schema which has been projected, whole and unanalyzed, into the first of the corresponding sentences which was fitted to receive it (those who waste their time … etc). Not that this sentence really has anything in common with the proverb; it can simply imagined to do so. Now—and this is where syncretism comes in—the child who fuses two heterogeneous sentences in this way does not realize that he is doing anything artificial; he thinks that the two propositions united in this way involve one another objectively, that they imply one another. The corresponding sentence into which the proverb has been projected actually reacts upon the latter, and when the child is asked to tell a story illustrating the proverb, the story will bear witness to this interpenetration. To reason syncretistically is therefore to create between two propositions relations which are not objective. This subjectivity of reasoning explains the use of general schemas. If the schemas are general, it is because they are added on to the propositions and are not derived from them analytically. Syncretism is a “subjective synthesis,” whereas objective synthesis presupposes analysis. (141-142)

...

When the child hears people talk, he makes an effort, not so much to adapt himself and share the point of view of the other person as to assimilate everything he hears to his own point of view and to his own stock of information. An unknown word therefore seems to him less unknown than it would if he really tried to adapt himself to the other person. On the contrary, the word melts into the immediate context which the child feels he has quite sufficiently understood. (157)

...

SF 1900: Chinatown’s “Wolf Doctors”/ 旧金山 1900：“狼医”在唐人街

1900年开春以后，美国旧金山市(三藩市)的唐人街陷入一片恐慌。起因是由于在都板街（Dupont Street）上的环球酒店（Globe Hotel）里有一位华人房客突然病故。经卫生官员验证，认为是患鼠疫而死。

于是，就象中世纪的欧洲借着鼠疫迫害犹太居民一样，美国对加州华人的迫害掀开了新的篇章。唐人街一下子就被强行封锁了。房屋被焚毁或烟熏“消毒”，也有部分人口被驱赶到海边棚屋。虽然预测中的疫情扩散从来就没有出现，三藩市当局仍粗暴地对华埠实施强制防疫，骚扰了华人达数年之久。还有些人积极策划对华人进行彻底驱逐，只因华人把他们告上了联邦法庭才作罢。华人心里明白，其实是当局对唐人街在旧金山的中心地段位置觊觎已久，想推倒后重新开发，大赚一笔。

折腾了一两年，卫生当局“盼望”的鼠疫疫情始终没有爆发，相反，连零星患病个案都在唐人街的街区里找不到了，最终不了了之。事情的来龙去脉，保存在英文资料 中，也记录在三藩当时一份中文报纸《中西日报》上。今天的学者在追述这一公众历史事件的时候，有大量的英文文献可以印证从三藩市、州政府、联邦政府到公众、公共卫生官员和新闻界的种种态度和说法。然而在这些英文文献里，唯独缺少的是受害者华人的声音。他们不属于英语社会。他们是用母语——中文来表达他们的悲愤的。翻一翻当时唐人街里自己的报纸——《中西日报》就知道了。那时在《中西日报》上差不多每天都会有对事态的报道和评论。

这些华人主要是从广东台山及附近的五个或六个“邑”来美作工，寻求不到什么保护，那时又没有什么“国际人权组织”之类的势力来说句公道话。在这个危机关头，华人团结在中华总会馆周围，靠中华总会馆来和美国人周旋。中华总会馆是“六邑”会馆的联合，差不多是他们非正式的自治政府了。大清国驻美“使宪”（大使）伍廷芳和驻旧金山的“领宪”（总领事）何佑也都是五邑同乡。可是他们干着急也起不到什么作用，因为美国人压根儿就不怕大清国，特别是在1900庚子年那个 “拳匪”变乱的多事之夏。洋人里面也有那么几个好人，包括了“佛珠”等几个医生，能为华人说上一两句话的几个教会人士，和被华人寄予了无限希望的青天大老爷——“本省督宪”（加州州长）。

唐人街的敌人，就是那个挑起无限事端的旧金山和“嘉省”（加州）的“卫生院” （Health Board）。在《中西日报》上，卫生院的人被称为“狼医”。这还真不是冤枉了他们。且看其中一个“狼医” (Dr. Crowley, California State Health Board) 是怎么说的： “Chinatown ought to be burned to the ground. It is a natural breeder of disease and a permanent menace to the city. It is best to destroy it while there is a good excuse for so doing.”（“唐人街应该被焚为平地。它天生就是疾病的渊薮，是对市政的永久威胁。最好现在就把它摧毁，趁着目前有这个难得的借口。”）(SF Bulletin, May 31, 1900, p. 1) 这样的医生如果不该叫做“狼医”，那么恶狼就该叫做绵羊的外科主治医生了。

我不知道在别的地方能不能找到一百多年前的这些《中西日报》。幸运的是，在加大伯克利分校，此报基本保存完好。加大伯克利分校与三藩市只隔着一个海湾大桥。我能在加大伯克利分校留学并于此阅读并抄录《中西日报》，也算是得了天时、地利、人和之便了。走在三藩市唐人街百年前的街道上，自然而然就会想起这里曾经被“狼医”蹂躏过。大大小小的会馆依然林立，马路路牌上的中文街名也居然还和一百年前《中西日报》里的一模一样。比如说“都板街”，是对英文 Dupont Street 的音译。（“都板”是广东话音译，普通话的音译是“杜邦”。）虽然 Dupont Street 改名叫 Grant Street 了，但“都板街”这个中文名字还是一直传了下来。这些都见证着华裔沧桑的历史。

附：

下面抄录的一则关于“鼠疫”的新闻虽然短小，倒也可以“管中窥豹”了。句读是我自己所加。

（1900年6月1日 ﹐星期四）

思患預防

昨狼醫焚埠之議起。人心惶惶。中華會館出示以安人心。並云。狼醫用心叵測。誠恐變生倉猝。凡我唐人大小生意。宜照實抄錄。以交昭一公所客商會館存案等語。此思患預防之道也。本年乃逢美國十年清查戶口以驗民數之期。本埠則由是日起查。 領憲早旬已遍貼告示。說明來歷。實非查冊紙使商民等勿驚等語。亦思患預防之道也。故並紀之。

又记：事情总是相互关联的。1900年6月 旧金山（三藩）的华人遭难之际，也正是国内义和团运动如火如荼的时候。从国内局势来讲，一方面，洋人在我国北方的日子不太好过，另一方面，义和团的桀骜不 驯又给了列强以侵略我国的口实。华侨对国内时局的关注，也可以从三藩的《中西日报》上看到。在上则新闻的同一期，也有这样的报道：

虛聲嚇人

初五日天津來電云。現有大隊俄兵在大沽處登岸。方欲整隊直向北京進發。其時大沽海口華人炮台適放大炮數響。俄兵聞之。即為退縮。未敢前進。在俄兵以為。華人放炮拒之也。不知此時因中國有某大員所坐之船在此停泊。故炮台鳴炮迎接以示敬意。實非欲拒俄兵云。誰謂中國之兵有名無實。不足以拒外人。此次祗放虛炮。雖以俄國之兵。久稱強悍者。亦為驚心畏縮。若實以藥彈。更不知俄兵如何失魂喪膽矣。前膠州之失。因聞敵來而不敢放一炮者。應亦知悔矣。

把两则新闻放在一起看，直觉得在1900年，不论海内海外，天下已经没有一个能让华人安稳生活的地方了，覆巢之下，岂有完卵？即便唐人街已被封锁而自顾不暇，华侨还是希望国内的守军能把即将入侵的洋人给狠狠地揍回去。从洋人的心理角度分析，他们拿唐人街的华侨出气，也可能与义和团让他们在华北呆得不爽有关。

© Copyright by Dun Wang (王敦). All rights reserved. 著作权拥有者：Dun Wang (王敦)。