 Dear Professor von
Glasersfeld,

 in the book "Radical Constructivism  A Way of
Knowing and Learning" you
 start the definition of radical constructivism with
this assumption: "...
 knowledge, no matter how it is defined, is in the
heads of persons, and
 that the thinking subject has no alternative but to
construct what he or
 she knows on the basis of his or her own
experience".

 I take this assumption as a metaphor. I belive that
a consequent
 constructivist must consider that also concepts like
"head",
 "person", "assumption" and "knowledge" are just
constructions. I
 think that even notions as "subject" (or "self") and
"construction" are
 constructions. This results in an epistemological
approach which
 considers only constructions of constructions (or
perhaps cognition of
 cognition). In such an approach (which considers
itself also as an
 construction) there is no need of any ontological
assumptions including
 assumption of an ontological or substantial subject
manifesting itself
 through constructions. As I understand it, the
assumption of such kind of
 substantial subject will lead to solipsism.

 Do you agree? Or do you assume some kind of
ontological subject?

 Thank you very much for any help.
 Best wishes,
 Jan Burian
 University of economics, Prague
 Czech Republic
