Walter Kohan

Paulo Freire es una figura extraordinaria no solo para la educación brasileña, sino también para la educación latinoamericana y mundial. Sus contribuciones no se limitan a una obra escrita, mucho menos a un método, ni siquiera a un paradigma teórico; también refieren a una práctica y, de un modo más general, a una vida dedicada a la educación, una vida hecha escuela, o sea, una manera de ocupar el espacio de educador que lo llevó de viaje por el mundo entero ‘haciendo escuela. Este libro es por sí mismo un símbolo de lo que un maestro puede provocarnos y del gesto material de dar una respuesta en nombre de sus efectos y afectos.

La filosofía de la educación ocupa un lugar paradójico en el campo de los saberes. Diversas producciones teóricas - de filósofos y pedagogos - convergen en señalar este carácter problemático. Siendo un área temática propia de la filosofía, resulta un espacio en general poco disputado entre los filósofos, como si la educación no estuviera entre las grandes preocupaciones filosóficas de nuestro tiempo. Por el contrario, suelen ser pedagogos quienes llevan a cabo investigaciones y publicaciones en el área y, más aún, quienes ofrecen la disciplina en universidades e institutos de formación. Por lo menos en la inmensa mayoría de las universidades de América Latina, filosofía de la educación, como disciplina, ya no pertenece a los Departamentos o Facultades de Filosofía sino a los de Ciencias de la Educación o Pedagogía. En filosofía de la educación, el “de” ha pasado de indicar materia y tema, aplicación de la filosofía, a señalar pertenencia a la educación. En los Congresos de Filosofía no suele siquiera conformarse un área de la materia. Con reticencias, algunas veces los filósofos admiten discutir cuestiones de didáctica de la filosofía.

We lead off this issue of Childhood and Philosophy with a collection of testimonies, homages, and brief memoirs offered from around the world in response to the death of the founder of Philosophy for Children, Matthew Lipman on December 26, 2010, at the age of 87. To characterize Lipman as “founder” is completely accurate, but barely evokes the role he played in conceiving, giving birth to, and nurturing this curriculum cum pedagogy that became a movement, and which has taken root in over 40 countries, from Iceland to Nigeria to Taiwan to Chile and everywhere in between. The movement itself is broader than the program, which has in fact experienced multiple transformations in multiple contexts over its half-century of life. In fact, as many of the testimonies below either state outright or imply, the movement is an emancipatory one and thus implicitly political, infused with all the long-suffering hope for our species inspired in us by the fact of natality, and by our own intuitive faith in the transformative power of reason—or as Lipman came to call it, “reasonableness.” For those seized by its educational possibilities, it presents a sudden influx of sunlight and fresh air into an institution long stultified by its own rigid habitus, and promises the reconstruction of schooling in the image of authentic democratic practice that recognizes and honors the unique capacities of children. As Philosophy in the Classroom—Lipman’s first and now classic statement of educational philosophy--puts it, the movement promises a re-orientation of the goal of education from information (or “learning”) to meaning, and inaugurates the dialogue with childhood and children that follows from that. Lipman was not just founder of this movement but creator, inventor, developer, convener, organizer, faithful soldier, ambassador, apologist, polemicist, propagandist, and, finally, undying optimist.

The present narrative describes and problematizes one year of Educational and philosophical work with illiterate adults in contexts of urban poverty in the Public School Joaquim da Silva Peçanha, city of Duque de Caxias, suburbs of the State of Rio de Janeiro during 2008. The project, “Em Caxias a Filosofia En-caixa?!”, consists of a teacher education program in which public school teachers study and practice the art of composing philosophical experiences with their students, and the realization of actual experiences of philosophy in classrooms with children and students in an adult literacy class. This narrative is concerned with the latter aspect of the project, more specifically experiences working with adult students practicing philosophy. The thirty students and three teachers involved in the course do not study the history of philosophy, nor do they create philosophical systems or theories. Rather they participate in a philosophical experience that might best be able to understand by examining Pierre Hadot’s concept of philosophy “as a way of living”.

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.

Este ha sido el mundo infantil – imposible y contradictorio – que sentimos habitar en este escrito, en esta escritura. En ese mundo, como ahora, el inicio y el final coinciden. En ese mundo, que Heráclito llamaría aión, es la infancia la que gobierna. Un gobierno infantil. Por lo tanto, es tiempo de callarnos. De estarnos sin tanta luz y sin tantas palabras. Para dormir y soñar. Es tiempo de terminar. O de comenzar. Los y las lectores infantiles (no) tienen la palabra. Nosotros ya (no) la tenemos… (¡hipo!)

At the very least, even though Chinese schools do not look very different from those in the West, China offers an opportunity for Philosophy for Children to question its basis, its methodology, its aims. It seems to be expressing a different cultural voice, and to be disposed to the kind of dialogue we are more used to claiming than practicing. Both Kunming and Shanghai provide, in their own ways, formidable contexts: the deep, strong and disciplined educators of Railway Station School of Kunming and the scholarly, sophisticated and committed members of the Shanghai institute for Research in the Human Sciences seem determined to take Philosophy for Children, not just beyond their own limits as Chinese, but beyond the limits Philosophy for Children has already established for itself in the West. Philosophy for Children in China, then, looks like a wonderful opportunity to think ourselves--what we are as educators engaged in the practice of philosophy--again. An invitation to think ourselves again. Is this not what dialogue and philosophy are about? It’s up to us to accept the invitation.

A child arrives as a new world because in her and with her we feel that the whole world can start over. But that is not the only reason. A child also arrives as a new world because her arrival tells us what, being so simple, we had almost forgotten: that the world is not just old and unquestionable. The child doesn’t let us be indif-ferent; she breaks with conformity and arrives as hope, reeking of the unpredictable. Of questions. A similar arrival to that of a child is that of certain childlike ideas, such as the idea offered by Matthew Lipman when he created “philosophy for children.” We cele-brate his childlike, daring, irreverent, inquiring character, commemorating his birth nearly 50 years ago. With this childlike idea, a new world began—or at least it be-came possible to start—in worlds which were already a little old and stuck in con-formity. When those in institutionalized philosophy and education heard about the audacity of welcoming children among their reputable interlocutors in dialogue and thought, they frowned and turned up their noses. Philosophy for children? How come? Childhood in philosophy?

In the world of Philosophy for Children, 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 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, 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.

This paper deals with two forms of education—Platonic and Socratic. The former educates childhood to transform it into what it ought to be. The latter does not form childhood, but makes education childlike. To unfold the philosophical and pedagogical dimensions of this opposition, the first part of the paper highlights the way in which philosophy is presented indirectly in some of Plato’s dialogues, beginning with a characterisation that Socrates makes of himself in the dialogue Phaedrus. The second part details Plato’s condemnation of writing in the Phaedrus, and draws on the critique by Jacques Derrida and Gilles Deleuze to establish what is at stake in this condemnation. In the third part, the pedagogical and political implications of this condemnation are reviewed, and Plato is placed in a surprising position in relation to his own teacher, Socrates. Finally, through a comparison between childhood and philosophy, the educational value of putting childhood and philosophy together is questioned. Through a number of questions, the paper ends problematising the pedagogical, political and philosophical value of placing the practice of philosophy in the realm of childhood citizenship education. It also recovers the value of philosophy—as a form of questioning and unlearning what we know and affirming the value of not knowing—in a childlike education.

In this paper, I present an experience of philosophical dialogue with small children in a public school in Bari, Italy in the context of the Philosophia Ludens for Children project. I present the experience, including the transcripts of six conversations with several groups of children, and then draw some inferences concerning the importance of the relationship between Universities and schools; the philosophical strength of both children’s commitment and philosophical ideas and their positive understanding of childhood.

This conversation offers a discussion of the meaning, sense and social function of school, both as an institution and as a time-space for the practice of schole . It also discusses the different types of Greek time : Schole is, as aion or childhood, a further emergence, a radicalization of school as an experimental zone of subjectivity and of collectivity. Schole is, as aion or childhood, a further emergence, a radicalization of school as an experimental zone of subjectivity and of collectivity. The source of this radicalization is philosophy, to the extent that the philosophical impulse turns us inward upon ourselves in the interest, not of techniques for the enhancement of productive time, but of an emergent new brain: in the interest of new values, new sensibilities, new capacities, new connections, new centers of meaning, new bodies. Today we are in a global situation—the situation of late capitalism and late empire—in which school turns upon and ruthlessly suppresses schole, which distorts their relation almost beyond recognition. There is a struggle between school as a more efficient, far-reaching vehicle for the technical transformation of the chore curriculum, and schole as utopia. The paper also examines the place of childhood in educational discourse, and some critiques of the practice of community of philosophical inquiry in schools are considered as well as the role of questions and questioning in both philosophy and schooling. Finally, it problematizes the role of philosophy in school and in scholé: if the role of philosophy in schole is an active one, even an activist one, then the role of the child in producing dikaiosyne in school as scholé should be no less active. The conversation ends with some questions: in what way is the philosophical life preferable to the political life? Why are the politics of philosophy worth any more than the politics of the political order?

Gareth B. Matthews, The Child’s Philosopher brings together groundbreaking essays by renowned American philosopher Gareth B. Matthews in three fields he helped to initiate: philosophy in children’s literature, philosophy for children, and philosophy of childhood. In addition, contemporary scholars critically assess Matthews’ pioneering efforts and his legacy. Matthews (1929-2011) was a specialist in ancient and medieval philosophy who had conversations with young children, discovering that they delight in philosophical puzzlement and that their philosophical thinking often enriched his own understanding. Those conversations became the impetus for a substantial component of Matthews’ scholarship, from which this book features essays spanning the length of his career. Contemporary contributors to the book critically evaluate Matthews’ scholarship, showing where he broke new ground and identifying developments and debates in the fields he helped to initiate. They take up pressing challenges, including biased idealizations of childhood in children’s literature; the tensions between teaching philosophy to, and doing philosophy with young people; the merits of theorizing childhood without theorizing children; and how professional philosophy at once desires and resists a return to childhood. This second volume in the Philosophy for Children Founders series is an important resource for philosophers, educators, and anyone interested in children’s philosophical thinking, developmental psychology, what it means to philosophize with children, the nature of childhood, and how children’s literature goes philosophical. It will guide and inspire those who share Matthews’ conviction that the impulse to philosophize begins in early childhood.

This work aims to consider philosophically the issue of the method in philosophical practices with children. It analyzes some influences received by the creators of Philosophy for Children, Matthew Lipman and Ann Margaret Sharp, like the pragmatism of J. Dewey. It describes the meanings of three similar expressions in Lipman's work: methodical, methodological and method. It offers some criticisms of method: Hans-Georg Gadamer, but especially Henri Bergson and Gilles Deleuze. Finally, he questions the need of a method for doing philosophy with children or, more broadly, for thinking childishly in education. Este trabajo tiene como objetivo pensar filosóficamente el tema del método en las prácticas filosóficas con niñas y niños. Analiza algunas influencias recibidas por los creadores de Filosofía para Niños, Matthew Lipman y Ann Margaret Sharp, como el pragmatismo de J. Dewey. Describe los significados de tres expresiones similares en el trabajo de Lipman: metódico, metodológico y metodológico. Ofrece algunas críticas del método: Hans-Georg Gadamer, pero especialmente Henri Bergson y Gilles Deleuze. Finalmente, cuestiona la necesidad de un método para hacer filosofía con niñas y niños o, más ampliamente, para pensar infantilmente en educación. Este trabalho busca pensar filosoficamente a questão do método nas práticas filosóficas com crianças. Analisa algumas influencias recebidas pelos criadores da Filosofia para Crianças, Matthew Lipman e Ann Margaret Sharp, como o pragmatismo de J. Dewey. Descreve os sentidos de três expressões afins na obra de Lipman: metódico, metodologia e método. Oferece algumas críticas a leituras do método: Hans-Georg Gadamer, mas sobretudo Henri Bergson e Gilles Deleuze. Finalmente, problematiza a necessidade de um método para fazer filosofia com crianças ou, de um modo mais geral, para pensar infantilmente na educação.

This paper acts as an introduction to a dossier centered on the ethical implications of Practicing Philosophy with Children and Adults. It identifies ethical themes in the P4C movement over three generations of theorists and practitioners, and argues that, historically and materially, the transition to a “new” hermeneutics of childhood that has occurred within the P4C movement may be said to have emerged as a response to the ever-increasing pressure of neoliberalism and a weaponized capitalism to construct public policies in education on an over-regulated, prescribed, state-monitored, model. Could a new relationship to childhood provide the ethical and political agenda that our times require for doing philosophy with children with integrity? Could a radical listening and openness to childhood—which has been an intrinsic confessional characteristic of P4C pedagogy from the beginning--sustain the movement through these dark times? Finally, the paper presents a set of articles written in response to these questions: What, if any, should the ethical commitments of the P4C facilitator be? Is political/ideological neutrality required of the P4C facilitator? Is political neutrality possible? What constitutes indoctrination in educational settings? Are children more vulnerable to indoctrination than adults, and if so, what are the implications of that fact for the practice of P4C? What are the uses of P4C in the dramatically polarized ideological landscape we currently inhabit? What, if any, are the ethical responsibilities of a teacher engaging in philosophical practice? Are the philosophical practitioner’s ethical responsibilities similar or different when the subjects are children or adults? Does every methodology have a “hidden curriculum”? If so, what is the hidden curriculum of P4C? What distinguishes dialogical from monological practice? May one have the appearance of the other? Is the “Socratic method” as we conceive it dialogical? What, if any, are the uses of irony in philosophical practice? Should Socrates be considered a model for P4C practitioners?

O sentido principal deste livro é provocar uma experiência de leitura em pessoas interessadas no ensino de filosofia. TAlvez seja mais justo dizer que o que se almeja é propiciar experiências de leitura filosófica sobre tal ensino. ISso significa provocar experiências que transformem a relação que temos com o ensino de filosofia, que incomodem o que há de verdade adormecida quando pensamos sobre o ensino de filosofia, e de modo mais direto, quando ensinamos filosofia. ESte livro procura discutir o tipo de filosofia que se vai ensinar e os seus sentidos educacionais: qual filosofia ensinar? Para que fazê-lo? E não se pretende propiciar respostas conclusivas a favor ou contra a filosofia. AO contrário, busca-se mudar a relação com uma verdade apenas afirmativa ou negativa, apologética ou condenatória; busca-se pensar diversas formas de conceber a filosofia e uma pluralidade de sentidos para ensiná-la.

Childhood & philosophy é uma revista que está esperando por nascer pelo menos desde que Sócrates ocupou um lugar singular (pelo menos para nós) na pólis do século v a. C. e fundou uma disciplina. A concepção dessa revista se sustenta, muito mais tarde, no providencial encontro histórico entre a educação da infância e a filosofia. Esse encontro, por sua vez, teve que esperar pelas proféticas declarações de Rousseau no Emílio, enviadas qual manuscrito posto numa garrafa à revolução iminente e pelo lento desenvolvimento, ao longo dos séculos XIX e XX, de um adulto realmente capaz de ouvir as crianças, senão de escutá-las. Para isso foi necessária a desconstrução romântica de tal adulto (masculino) vivamente esclarecido quem, devemos admitir, fez possível a revolução

O presente texto narra uma experiência de formação de alfabetizadores de jovens e adultos: uma alfabetização filosófica de 40 horas com 300 alfabetizadores em julho de 2022, como primeira etapa do Programa “Supera RN” em Pau dos Ferros, dentro da Política de Superação do Analfabetismo do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (RN). O texto tematiza em que sentido a experiência de Alfabetização filosófica se inspira e ao mesmo tempo se diferencia do curso de Alfabetização oferecido por Paulo Freire em Angicos em 1963. Inspirado na curiosidade e no compromisso de Paulo Freire com os esfarrapados do mundo, o conceito “alfabetização filosófica” propõe uma formação experiencial sustentada nas seguintes disposições: escutar atentamente o mundo humano e não humano que nos rodeia; pensar juntos com cuidado e calma; relacionarmo-nos cooperativa e não competitivamente com as ideias das outras pessoas; perguntarmo-nos, colocando em questão, nossa vida e a maneira como nos relacionamos com ela, num tempo especial, singular, suspendido; conversar como iguais na busca de enfrentar as exigências de nossa comunidade; inventar novas formas de estar com outras e outros. O texto apresenta como essas disposições foram pensadas e praticadas durante a alfabetização filosófica em Pau dos Ferros, RN, através de cinco princípios (perguntar; escutar; tempo de infância; igualdade; pensar juntos) e lança algumas perguntas sobre possíveis desdobramentos da alfabetização filosófica no campo de formação de professores.

Neste dossiê nós apresentamos dez textos que, desde diferentes perspectivas, pensam a infância. Oito deles foram selecionados entre as comunicações apresentadas no IX Colóquio de Filosofia e Educação, cuja reflexão traz “Filosofia e educação em errância: inventar escola, infâncias do pensar”, ocorrido na Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro entre os dias 1 e 5 de outubro de 2018. Desses textos, dois procedem do fluxo normal da revista. Independentemente de sua procedência, quer dizer, de sua postura e da disciplina a partir da qual desenvolvem os seus argumentos, bem como das práticas que os alimentam, etc., todos eles se entregam à tarefa de “estar à escuta” da infância, de ficar tendidos a ela. Desejamos aos leitores-escutadores que este dossiê lhes deixe boas e estimulantes ressonâncias; que os deixe ser rompidos pela infância que convida à escuta de si e do outro num corpo só que comporta toda a diversidade que este dossiê convida.

Este texto explora una inversión entre las relaciones usualmente afirmadas entre infancia y currículo. En vez de preocuparse por buscar fundamentar o presentar un currículo para educar a la infancia, busca imágenes infantiles para educar el currículo. Encuentra dos: una en las invenciones narrativas del poeta Mato-grossense Manoel de Barros; otra, en la filosofía de la historia y de la infancia de Giorgio Agamben. Se trata, como el título lo sugiere, de un ejercicio menor cuyo sentido principal es contribuir a pensar el espacio de la infancia y del currículo en la educación brasilera de nuestros días.

Paulo Freire está hoje no meio de uma acirrada disputa ideológica. Mas este não é um livro sobre a ideologia ou a política partidária de Paulo Freire. Aqui não se entende por política o que se faz dentro da lógica do sistema democrático representativo, mas sim, num sentido mais amplo, o modo como se exerce o poder nas relações estabelecidas com outros e outras numa trama social e, mais especificamente, os modos de exercer o poder ao ensinar e aprender. Paulo Freire nos ajuda a pensar as possibilidades da filosofia em conexão muito próxima com a educação e a política. E é nesse sentido que ele é um filósofo: pela forma como faz de sua vida um problema filosófico e de sua filosofia uma questão existencial na busca de um mundo sem opressores e oprimidos. Nesse contexto, o livro é construído em torno de cinco princípios inspirados na vida de Paulo Freire: a vida (como inseparável de qualquer prática educativa); a igualdade (no início, como pressuposto, e não como finalidade da educação); o amor (não apenas pelas pessoas, mas também pela posição educadora que se ocupa); a errância (no duplo sentido de equivocar-se e de viajar sem destino predeterminado) e a infância (como impulso vital, e não apenas idade cronológica). A obra traz também duas entrevistas reveladoras, uma com filho caçula de Paulo Freire, Lutgardes Costa Freire, e outra com a educadora e amiga Esther Pilar Grossi; além de um apêndice que trata da relação de Paulo Freire com a filosofia com crianças.