Finding Treasures: Is the Community of Philosophical Inquiry a Methodology?
In the world of Philosophy for Children (P4C), the word “method” is found frequently in its literature and in its practitioner’s handbooks. This paper focuses on the idea of community of philosophical inquiry (CPI) as P4C’s methodological framework for educational purposes, and evaluates that framework and those purposes in light of the question, what does it mean to bring children and philosophy together, and what methodological framework, if any, is appropriate to that project? Our broader aim is to highlight a problem with regards to the concept of method in P4C, and to question the consequences of that concept in the practice of philosophical dialogue with children. To better situate the concept of method within P4C (which, we think, will help to clarify some of the dialogues and debates within P4C as a philosophical field), we will identify two different historical understandings—represented by Rene Descartes and Hans Georg Gadamer—of the concept, and suggest new possibilities for understanding philosophical practice with children in light of their difference.
KeywordsMethod Methodology Philosophy for children Inquiry
Funding was provided by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (Grant No. 202447/2017-0) and Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Grant No. E_03/2018).
- Biesta, G. 2017. Touching the Soul? Exploring an Alternative Outlook for Philosophical Work with Children and Young People. Childhood & Philosophy 13(28): 415–452.Google Scholar
- Canon, D. 2000. How has Involvement with Philosophy for Children Changed How I/We Understand Philosophy? Analytic Teaching 22(2): 97–105.Google Scholar
- Carvalho, B. 1994. Jogos cotidianos e lições metafísicas. Matthew Lipman fala sobre seu método de ensino. Folha de São Paulo, 1/5/1994. Caderno Mais.Google Scholar
- Deleuze, G. 1994. Difference and Repetition. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
- Descartes, R. 1998. Os Princípios da Filosofia. Lisboa: Guimarães Editores.Google Scholar
- Dewey, J. 1995. The Political Writings. Indianapolis/Cambrigde: Hackett.Google Scholar
- Dewey, J. 2004. Democracy and Education. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. Delhi: Aakar Books.Google Scholar
- Duthie, E., F.G. Moriyón, and R. Loro. 2018. Parecidos de Familia. Propuestas Actuales en Filosofía para Niños. Family Resemblances. Current Trends in Philosophy for Children. Madrid: Anaya.Google Scholar
- Gadamer, H.-G. 2004. Truth and Method. New York/London: Continuum.Google Scholar
- Golding, C. 2010. “That’s a better idea!” philosophical progress for philosophy for children. PhD thesis, Graduate School of Education & School of Philosophy, Anthropology and Social Inquiry, The University of Melbourne, http://hdl.handle.net/11343/35757. Access: 08/20/2018.
- Haynes, J., and K. Murris. 2012. Picturebooks, Pedagogy and Philosophy. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- James, W. 1975. Pragmatism: A New Name for Old Ways of Thinking. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Jasinski, I. 2018. The Use of Philosophy with Children as a Pedagogical Practice. Theses, Dissertations and Culminating Projects. Upper Montclair: MSU, (Dissertation). Accessed March 3, 2019. https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/etd/171.
- Juuso, H. 2007. Child, Philosophy and Education Discussing the Intellectual Sources of Philosophy for Children. Oulu: Oulu University Press.Google Scholar
- Kennedy, N., and D. Kennedy. 2012. Community of Philosophical Inquiry as a Discoursive Structure, and its Role in School Curriculum Design. In Philosophy for Children in Transition. Problems and Prospects, ed. N. Vansieleghem and D. Kennedy, 97–116. Wiley-Blackwell: Malden.Google Scholar
- Kohan, W.O. 1996. Two conversations with John Dewey and Matthew Lipman. In: Pensando la filosofía en la educación de los niños. México: Univ. Iberoamericana, Dissertation.Google Scholar
- Lawn, C., and N. Keane. 2011. The Gadamer Dictionary. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
- Liddell, Henry G., Robert Scott, and Henry Stuart James. 1966. A Greek English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
- Lipman, M. 1995. Good Thinking. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 12(2): 37–41.Google Scholar
- Lipman, M. 1999. Sobre a diferença entre ‘filosofia para crianças’, ‘filosofia com crianças’ e a ‘filosofia da infância’. In Filosofia para crianças em debate, ed. W.O. Kohan and B. Leal, 362–364. Petrópolis: Vozes.Google Scholar
- Lipman, M. 2008. Philosophy for Children’s Debt to Dewey. In Pragmatism, Education and Children. International Philosophical Perspectives, ed. M. Taylor et al., 143–152. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
- Mizell, K. 2015. The Epistemology of Imagination and Play in the Community of Inquiry. Analytic Teaching and Philosophical Praxis 36: 76–87.Google Scholar
- Murris, K. 2016. Philosophy with Picturebooks. In Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory, ed. M. Peters. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
- Moriyón, F., J. Botella, D. Centeno-Gutiérrez, and J.G. Lamas. 2018. Does Philosophy for Children make a Difference? In Parecidos de familia. Propuestas actuales en Filosofía para Niños/Family ressemblances. Current proposals in Philosophy for Children, ed. F. García, E. Duthie, and R. Robles, 421–432. Madrid: Anaya.Google Scholar
- Palmer, R.E. 1969. Hermeneutics. Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger, and Gadamer, 1969. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
- Peirce, Ch.S. 1877. The Fixation of Belief. Popular Science Monthly 12: 1–15.Google Scholar
- Vansieleghem, N., and D. Kennedy. 2012. Philosophy for Children in Transition: Problems and Prospects, 152–169. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Weber, B., and A. Wolf. 2017. Questioning the Question. A Hermeneutical Perspective on the ‘Art of Questioning’ in a Community of Philosophical Inquiry. In The Routledge International Handbook of Philosophy for Children, ed. M.R. Gregory, J. Haynes, and K. Murris, 74–82. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar