Abstract

Open peer commentary on the article “Towards a Dialogue Among Constructivist Research Programs” by Gastón Becerra & José Antonio Castorina. Upshot: Becerra and Castorina aim to consolidate lines of dialogue among the research programs of constructivism by elucidating the differences between them. In my commentary I question the efficacy of their methodological choice, wondering if marking differences and drawing dichotomous axes indeed establishes a good ground for dialogue to take place. I suggest that perhaps offering a broader conceptual container to hold the seemingly mutually excluding positions could be what is needed for a deeper communication between distinct lines of research to unfold.