The educational method Philosophy for Children (P4C) is a combined thinking skills program and a democratic dialogic approach, implemented in approximately 50 countries and translated into about 20 languages. Lately, with P4C as a point of departure, the area of philosophical dialogue has extended into the inclusion of a range of contextualized methods with different starting points for the dialogues. In this paper, two arguments for having films as starting points for philosophical dialogues are presented: a) The argument from perspective taking, and b) The argument from emotional content and response. Briefly, the arguments state that films, through the perceptual input, offer the opportunity to take shared emotional content and an array of different perspectives as starting points in philosophical dialogue. These arguments are supported by warranted theses in contemporary film theory and empirical data from participants’ evaluations of philosophical dialogues during the PhilosoFilmFestival, a Swedish film festival with basic principles of P4C as a point of departure

What is naive philosophizing of childhood and what is its particularity? Synthesizing concepts “naivety” and “philosophizing” we come to the concept of “naive philosophizing”. This philosophizing is not the kind overstepping the bounds of ordinary-practical knowledge and, moreover, rooting in mythical consciousness, but the one comprising reflective, existential and critical components. As a matter of fact it is a self-reflection of a myth done by all possible intellectual means, where the myth remains a symbol of unity, pleasure, knowledge and belief. Beginning with such conceptual affects as surprise, doubt, experience of existential conditions, naive philosophizing finds direct continuation in the intellectual game as the form of communication. We consider communication as a necessary condition of realization of naive philosophizing; therefore the best way of its realization is the live conversation in the form of a dialogue or a “polylogue” provoked by spontaneous asking. Naive philosophizing acts as an attempt of rational comprehension of a myth; however the myth remains the principal means of perception of the world and world-view.

Over forty years ago, the American philosopher and educationalist began work on what was to become a series of philosophical novels for children. As time went on, he also constructed accompanying teacher resources together with colleagues. The most popular of these works were designed for primary education and constitute what came to be known as the IAPC Curriculum for the younger years. The influence of Lipman has been immense. He taught us that philosophy is not beyond the reach of primary school children when appropriately presented; that the questions of philosophy are germane to all primary school subjects; and that philosophy can be used to encourage thinking across the curriculum. Influential and instructive as these materials have been, however, they do not constitute a curriculum in the sense in which that is generally understood in school education. This paper explores both the strengths and limitations of Lipman’s pioneering effort from the viewpoint of curriculum construction in order to see what lessons can be leaned.

The aim of this paper is to examine whether philosophical dialogue can be an effective tool for persons with acquired brain injuries (ABI) to regain lost abilities and develop new capabilities that are relevant for participating in society. The empirical data was collected from a philosophical practice, inspired by Philosophy for Children (P4C), with students at a specialized program for adult people with ABI at a Swedish folk high school. Persons with ABI may have difficulties taking standpoints and giving arguments for their positions. For them it is necessary to re-learn and develop new thinking, participation and communication skills. Both students and their staff have answered questionnaires about the philosophical dialogues and are all of the opinion that the dialogues have had positive impact on the students. Results point to that philosophical dialogue can be effective for persons with ABI for functioning as citizens and as parts in a democratic society. A possible explanation is that the form and content of P4C correspond to important needs of people with ABI.

There is a constant need for new ways to improve the Swedish school system. One such way could be to implement Matthew Lipman’s philosophy of education, which then must be proven compatible with the curriculum governing the Swedish school system. We restricted our examination to a comparison between Lipman’s Thinking in Education and the first chapter of the Swedish curriculum for upper secondary schools. We divided the results into three degrees of coherence: inconsistence, compatibility, and accordance, where accordance was a stronger form of compatibility which would not only allow but encourage the implementation of Lipman’s philosophy of education. We found that the two parties were overall in accordance with each other, though with a few elements of mere compatibility. No inconsistencies were found. The parties were in accordance on especially two key points. Firstly, the critical, creative, and caring thinking emphasized by Lipman were all present in the curriculum. Secondly, there is in the curriculum an emphasis on the mediation of democratic values through democratic means, something inherent in Lipman’s community of inquiry. In conclusion, Lipman’s philosophy of education is not merely compatible, but in large part in accordance with the curriculum.

Bullying is a serious social problem that can have deleterious effects on school children. A variety of interventions have been implemented, and research shows that the majority, which are monological in nature, have demonstrated minimal, if any, impact on counteracting occurrences of bullying in schools. A quantitative content analysis of formal, conversational strategies within classroom discourse suggests that students who participated in a community of inquiry began to internalize behaviors, such as respect, fairness, and caring. The role of the facilitator in modeling and encouraging good inquiry and empowering students to fully engage in the process so that they can practice and, ultimately, internalize dispositions, such as respect, fairness, and caring, emerged as a critical element.

Philosophy is no longer an adult preserve; the past fifty years have seen the growth of workshops for children, with demonstrated merits in terms of developing intellectual and reasoning skills. Teaching philosophy for 18 months in schools and social centers has led me to focus on three research areas concerning this question of power. First, philosophical discussion reverses in-class hierarchy: all pupils and their ideas are equal; there are no right or wrong answers. They must adopt a different learning approach, and not seek teacher approval. The best students no longer stand out, a philosophical approach enables children to experience debate where all viewpoints are equal. Divergences do not result in the supremacy of some over others, but in mutual enlightenment. There is no single winner; all ideas coexist in a shared legitimacy. Third, Foucault’s theory that knowledge equals power allows us to say that all children have knowledge and therefore power in a philosophical debate; because they can reflect on the world, they can also express their philosophical knowledge. The teacher no longer holds the power of knowledge in the classroom.

In this paper I introduce some of the main theoretical principles of an educational and philosophical project that is still very much alive and in process. The project Does Philosophy Fit in Caxias? Public School Bets on Thinking is housed in two public schools in the city of Duque de Caxias, a suburb of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, that may be characterized as an urban poverty zone. The project involves philosophizing with students and the creation of a teacher education agenda in which teachers study and practice the art of facilitating philosophical experiences with their students. Created in 2007, it is sponsored by the Center for Philosophical Studies of Childhood (NEFI) at the University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), and includes roughly 20 teachers and 400 students from ages 6 to 70—with the latter as part of an adult literacy class. We have already presented how this project works it some Conferences and publications (see, for example, Kohan, 2013; Kohan & Olarieta, 2012; and Kohan & Wozniak, 2010). This paper presents some of its main theoretical principles, i. e.: “thinking experiences”; “intellectual equality”; “philosophy for children”; “a new policy”.

P4C allows initiating the child into diversity. Community of inquiry works in the classroom using cognitive tolerance and fallibalism, so they are epistemic virtues that should be components of our idea of education because they are essential to the idea of a future citizen committed with diversity and democracy. The notion of “being reasonable” is analyzed and considered as an aim in contemporary education and therefore of P4C.

Presupposing that children are able to philosophize within the frame of P4C approaches, this paper argues in favor of adults’ paying philosophical attention into children’s ways of thinking. It is argued that not only adults but also children can offer stimuli for philosophizing. Children’s ways of thinking should be explored philosophically not only in the way that adults would do by linking children’s ideas with existing philosophical matters, but also in the ways that children might indicate. Such approach could not only create new philosophical considerations that adults have not yet thought about but also lead at viewing afresh philosophy. An example of children’s philosophy during their play exemplifies further the importance of adults’ listening to them thinking critically and creatively.

Childhood and philosophizing are the kinds of being, not only social or natural being, but existence – being of a Subject, creating the self- world. All children are creators. The childhood doesn’t leave at all, it is retained, transforming, acquiring new forms of existence. Thus, the loss of the childhood is the loss of the integrity of Life-World. So, it means, we are all children, and when we stop being children, we are not human beings any more. Every human being is a philosopher. Philosophizing becomes an existence or a kind of Subject’s being by creating of the world. Philosophizing is one of the ways of this creation. We construct our own world in our minds and imagination. The kids do the same. Children’s philosophizing is an organic process of thinking developmentally. In this sense all children are creators and philosophers much like the classical Demiurge.

Helping students develop the skills of argument is increasingly seen as one of the key purposes of present day schooling (e.g., Kuhn & Udell, 2003; Postman, 1995; Viadero, 2009). The latest Common Core standards in the US place a special emphasis on argumentation development, claiming that argument skills are “critical to college and career readiness” and “broadly important for the literate, educated person living in the diverse, information-rich environment of the twenty first century.” (p. 25). Unfortunately, the widespread recognition of the value of argumentation skills has not resulted in better students’ performance on a variety of argument-related tasks (Gleason, 1999; Means & Voss, 1996.

This study is an attempt to advance the current instructional design approaches in online and blended learning settings. Our approach was inspired by the principles of the “Philosophy for Children” (P4C) program and exploited web 2.0 technologies to scaffold and monitor the development of teachers’ complex thinking while engaging in philosophical inquiry. Since its development, P4C has been used successfully in many schools worldwide and a few scholars have discussed its success in promoting students’ complex thinking. To date, P4C has not been used with adult learners, such as pre-service or in-service teachers. Moreover, the role of technology in P4C has not been explored. In this study we first sought to understand how collaboration and critical thinking unfolds within a small group of teachers in our technologically mediated environment. We then examined their interactions, in more depth, to understand how their arguments evolved as they argued about a philosophical dilemma and wrote a ‘thinking story’ to be used as a springboard for debate in a classroom environment. Finally, we discuss how the online learning environment using wiki and forum technologies assisted the development of complex thinking.

Dans cet article, nous souhaitons établir un lien entre la philosophie avec les enfants et la science-fiction. Nous exposerons d’abord notre conception de la philosophie en tant que savoir d’amour, et pas seulement amour du savoir. Nous ébaucherons ensuite quelques considérations sur la philosophie avec les enfants en prenant comme référence le projet «Em Caxias a Filosofia En-caixa?», coordonné par Walter Kohan à Rio de Janeiro et dont nous faisons partie. Notre défi sera d’articuler la philosophie avec les enfants à la science-fiction: nous chercherons à réfléchir sur les relations de l’enfance et de la pensée avec l’inconnu. Le rapport à l’inconnu sera entendu comme une relation au temps. Comme en science-fiction, on imagine un futur possible, car la philosophie avec les enfants crée un espace où la dimension temporelle devient fluide: l’impossible devient possible moyennant un acte de création de la pensée. Au-delà de la transmission de contenus, la philosophie avec les enfants veut créer des expériences de pensée. C’est en ce sens que nous penserons la philosophie comme un savoir d’amour. Enfin, nous soulèverons quelques problématiques autour du rôle du professeur, qui posent des difficiles questions sur le pouvoir et le savoir.

El reto actual de la educación es formar ciudadanos críticos, reflexivos, tolerantes, dialogantes y que participen activamente en la sociedad. El pensamiento crítico y creativo debe ser incorporado a la acción formativa en la que se generan prácticas reflexivas, críticas y éticas en la experiencia compartida del aula como comunidad de investigación y así la escuela se vislumbra como espacio de humanización. En este trabajo tratamos de poner de relieve cómo en el caso concreto de Venezuela, es fundamental la formación filosófica del docente para la educación concebida como acción reflexiva, ética y liberadora, una actividad cuya realización reclama la formación de diversas disposiciones y capacidades en los educadores. En las reformas actuales, se insiste en que la educación debe ser más humana, integral, reflexiva, ética, participativa, y para ello consideramos fundamental la filosofía. A partir de estas reflexiones, proponemos que las nuevas propuestas educativas, como objetivo de las reformas actuales, deben apoyarse en la formación filosófica como actividad crítica, reflexiva, ética y dialógica.