I would like to call attention to David Russell's characterization (JAC13, 173-97) of Piaget as a dualist who advocates the existence of determined stages of cognitive (in a manner similar to Freud) and of natural as opposed to growth (in a manner similar to Rousseau). This characterization goes completely against my own reading of Piaget, whom I take to be advocating that development is the result, and only the result, of the of the structuring tendencies of the human organism with its social and physical environment. The mechanism of this growth is essentially pragmatic for Piaget, who hypothesized that develop ment is the ongoing reconstruction of experience brought on by the frustra tion of previously constructed cognitive and behavioral patterns from achiev ing their expected ends?much as Dewey proposed in Human Nature and Conduct The child finds a learned pattern of understanding to be inadequate to achieving anticipated ends and must reconfigure his or her prior and present understanding in order to act. The resulting cognitive structures, far from being biologically (or, for that matter, socially) determined, are artifacts of the interaction of organism and environment. Piaget writes,