Philosophy for Children and its Critics

A Mendham Dialogue

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

As conceived by founders Matthew Lipman and Ann Margaret Sharp, Philosophy for Children is a humanistic practice with roots in the Hellenistic tradition of philosophy as a way of life given to the search for meaning, in American pragmatism with its emphasis on qualitative experience, collaborative inquiry and democratic society, and in American and Soviet social learning theory. The programme has attracted overlapping and conflicting criticism from religious and social conservatives who don't want children to question traditional values, from educational psychologists who believe certain kinds of thinking are beyond children of certain ages, from philosophers who define their discipline as theoretical and exegetical, from critical theorists who see the programme as politically compliant, and from postmodernists who see it as scientistic and imperialist. The paper is written as a dialogue in order to illustrate the complex interactions among these normative positions. Rather than respond to particular criticisms in depth, I indicate the general nature of my position regarding them and provide references to published material where they have been made and responded to over the past 40 years.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)199-219
Number of pages21
JournalJournal of Philosophy of Education
Volume45
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 May 2011

Fingerprint

critic
dialogue
criticism
pragmatism
social learning
way of life
learning theory
psychologist
interaction
philosophy
Philosophy for children
Criticism
Values
experience
Education
Interaction
Traditional Values
Way of Life
Philosophy
Philosopher

Cite this

@article{879dfec103de440eab3e21650d2460b2,
title = "Philosophy for Children and its Critics: A Mendham Dialogue",
abstract = "As conceived by founders Matthew Lipman and Ann Margaret Sharp, Philosophy for Children is a humanistic practice with roots in the Hellenistic tradition of philosophy as a way of life given to the search for meaning, in American pragmatism with its emphasis on qualitative experience, collaborative inquiry and democratic society, and in American and Soviet social learning theory. The programme has attracted overlapping and conflicting criticism from religious and social conservatives who don't want children to question traditional values, from educational psychologists who believe certain kinds of thinking are beyond children of certain ages, from philosophers who define their discipline as theoretical and exegetical, from critical theorists who see the programme as politically compliant, and from postmodernists who see it as scientistic and imperialist. The paper is written as a dialogue in order to illustrate the complex interactions among these normative positions. Rather than respond to particular criticisms in depth, I indicate the general nature of my position regarding them and provide references to published material where they have been made and responded to over the past 40 years.",
author = "Maughn Gregory",
year = "2011",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1467-9752.2011.00795.x",
language = "English",
volume = "45",
pages = "199--219",
journal = "Journal of Philosophy of Education",
issn = "0309-8249",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd",
number = "2",

}

Philosophy for Children and its Critics : A Mendham Dialogue. / Gregory, Maughn.

In: Journal of Philosophy of Education, Vol. 45, No. 2, 01.05.2011, p. 199-219.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Philosophy for Children and its Critics

T2 - A Mendham Dialogue

AU - Gregory, Maughn

PY - 2011/5/1

Y1 - 2011/5/1

N2 - As conceived by founders Matthew Lipman and Ann Margaret Sharp, Philosophy for Children is a humanistic practice with roots in the Hellenistic tradition of philosophy as a way of life given to the search for meaning, in American pragmatism with its emphasis on qualitative experience, collaborative inquiry and democratic society, and in American and Soviet social learning theory. The programme has attracted overlapping and conflicting criticism from religious and social conservatives who don't want children to question traditional values, from educational psychologists who believe certain kinds of thinking are beyond children of certain ages, from philosophers who define their discipline as theoretical and exegetical, from critical theorists who see the programme as politically compliant, and from postmodernists who see it as scientistic and imperialist. The paper is written as a dialogue in order to illustrate the complex interactions among these normative positions. Rather than respond to particular criticisms in depth, I indicate the general nature of my position regarding them and provide references to published material where they have been made and responded to over the past 40 years.

AB - As conceived by founders Matthew Lipman and Ann Margaret Sharp, Philosophy for Children is a humanistic practice with roots in the Hellenistic tradition of philosophy as a way of life given to the search for meaning, in American pragmatism with its emphasis on qualitative experience, collaborative inquiry and democratic society, and in American and Soviet social learning theory. The programme has attracted overlapping and conflicting criticism from religious and social conservatives who don't want children to question traditional values, from educational psychologists who believe certain kinds of thinking are beyond children of certain ages, from philosophers who define their discipline as theoretical and exegetical, from critical theorists who see the programme as politically compliant, and from postmodernists who see it as scientistic and imperialist. The paper is written as a dialogue in order to illustrate the complex interactions among these normative positions. Rather than respond to particular criticisms in depth, I indicate the general nature of my position regarding them and provide references to published material where they have been made and responded to over the past 40 years.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79957485118&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1467-9752.2011.00795.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1467-9752.2011.00795.x

M3 - Article

VL - 45

SP - 199

EP - 219

JO - Journal of Philosophy of Education

JF - Journal of Philosophy of Education

SN - 0309-8249

IS - 2

ER -