The paradox of learning and a semiotic approach to its solution

Understanding the process of learning requires an examination of the 'paradox of learning' that was first formulated by Plato and then taken up by Jerry Fodor. This paradox raises the following question: how can the advancement form one level of knowledge to the next be explained if, by definition, the new cognitive level contains elements which can neither be deductively derived from the previous level nor be obtained inductively from experience alone? Fodor criticized Piaget's theory for not being able to solve this paradox. This article shows that Piaget's attempt to counter Fodor's objection by developing a concept of possibility is unconvincing because it is too strongly oriented towards the subject of cognition. A possible solution to this problem, however, can be seen in Peirce's concept of 'diagrammatic reasoning', which permits an understanding of learning as a process. In this process, the learners construct diagrams, which initially enable them to perceive vague possibilities of their own thinking. This is crucial for making these possibilities an object of reflection. Through subsequent experimentation with these diagrams, relations between their components become evident which are different from the relations the learner used in constructing the diagrams.