LEARNING AND INDUCTION

Abstract

Every being who learns chooses his learning style from two sources, the one that flows from the innate/individual or the one that comes from the empirical/environment. The improvement of learning styles will grow in the ascending spiral of the movement of cognitive resources (Piaget, 1977) which, in turn, will depend on the significance of the results of this processing which, on the one hand, will become the assumptions of Ausubel (1978) by acquiring a moral and/or true value judgment to the balance of the triads: psychomotor (cognition/motricity/affection) (Silva, 2020); psychoanalytical (id/ego/superego) (Freud, 2010) and morphological (Telebrain Lobos/Limbic System/Central Nervous System) (Wecker, 2001) that equate to post-disturbance equilibration (Piaget, 1977) and, therefore, true to the innate or not in the absence of this balance; on the other side they will become mere informational signs indicating a possibility of meaning at best or psychotic at worst. According to Wallon, the affective dimension of the psychomotor triad is the beginning of the equilibrium or imbalance of the knowing being. “Sensitivity has an affective and a cognitive level, as well as motor skills and language. The organic revolution caused by emotion is presented in sensations: visceral, metabolic, respiratory, decreased acuity of perception of the outside [...]” (Wallon 1879-1962 as quoted in Dantas, 1992, p. 93). The problem with the article is: would Wallon be right? What justifies the research.