philosophy and children: for or with?

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: alarcon castillo, vania
Data de Publicação: 2020
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: spa
Título da fonte: Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online)
Texto Completo: https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/51240
Resumo: In this paper, two different philosophical proposals to introduce and carry out philosophy in school spaces which include the participation of children are compared, these are: Philosophy for Children (P4C), mainly developed by Matthew Lipman and Ann Sharp, and Philosophy with Children (PwC), which is actually a set of “second generation” (counter)proposals –as described by Vansieleghem and Kennedy (2011), based on Reed and Johnson (1999)–, among which those created by Walter Kohan and Karin Murris, to mention a few, stand out. The text begins with some similarities between both proposals, before comparing them in each of their dimensions. First, P4C is discussed. Second, PwC. Their ideas about education, school, philosophical education, their concept of childhood, the role given to teachers and their relation with politics are the main focus. Third, PwC’s critique of the P4C programme is studied. Finally, the paper concludes with some ideas on the issue of introducing philosophy to the school space. Particularly, PwC’s proposal is supported, fundamentally because of its coherent acknowledgment of the autonomy of teachers and of the political element in education, since philosophical experience with children is particularly questioning, defying, and, therefore, it has the possibility of bringing about important transformations, both at a personal-individual level, as well as a collective one.
id UERJ-22_ac67e85a5c7d885aacc05db26601d04f
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br:article/51240
network_acronym_str UERJ-22
network_name_str Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online)
repository_id_str
spelling philosophy and children: for or with?filosofía y niños: ¿para o con?filosofia e crianças: para ou com?filosofiaeducaçãoinfânciafpcfcc.philosophyeducationchildhoodp4cpwc.filosofíaeducacióninfanciaFpNFcNIn this paper, two different philosophical proposals to introduce and carry out philosophy in school spaces which include the participation of children are compared, these are: Philosophy for Children (P4C), mainly developed by Matthew Lipman and Ann Sharp, and Philosophy with Children (PwC), which is actually a set of “second generation” (counter)proposals –as described by Vansieleghem and Kennedy (2011), based on Reed and Johnson (1999)–, among which those created by Walter Kohan and Karin Murris, to mention a few, stand out. The text begins with some similarities between both proposals, before comparing them in each of their dimensions. First, P4C is discussed. Second, PwC. Their ideas about education, school, philosophical education, their concept of childhood, the role given to teachers and their relation with politics are the main focus. Third, PwC’s critique of the P4C programme is studied. Finally, the paper concludes with some ideas on the issue of introducing philosophy to the school space. Particularly, PwC’s proposal is supported, fundamentally because of its coherent acknowledgment of the autonomy of teachers and of the political element in education, since philosophical experience with children is particularly questioning, defying, and, therefore, it has the possibility of bringing about important transformations, both at a personal-individual level, as well as a collective one.El presente artículo traza una comparación entre dos propuestas para introducir y ejercer la filosofía en espacios escolares que incluyan la participación de niños y niñas, estas son Filosofía para Niños (FpN), programa diseñado principalmente por Matthew Lipman y Ann Sharp, y Filosofía con Niños (FcN), la cual, de hecho, engloba un conjunto de (contra)propuestas de “segunda generación” –como las describen Vansieleghem y Kennedy (2011), en base a Reed y Johnson (1999)–, entre las que destacan aquellas de Walter Kohan y Karin Murris, por mencionar algunas. Partimos de algunos de los puntos de encuentro entre ambas para luego compararlas en cada una de sus dimensiones. Primero, tratamos la propuesta de FpN. Segundo, la de FcN. Los puntos en los que nos detenemos son sus ideas sobre la educación, la escuela y la educación filosófica, sus conceptos de infancia, el papel otorgado a los docentes y el vínculo establecido entre educación y política. Tercero, detallamos la crítica de FcN a FpN en relación a estos temas. Finalmente, concluimos con algunas de nuestras ideas sobre la problemática de la introducción de la filosofía al espacio escolar. Particularmente, nos inclinamos por la propuesta de FcN, sobre todo, debido a su coherente reconocimiento de la autonomía de los docentes y el elemento político de la educación. En efecto, consideramos que la experiencia filosófica con niños es esencialmente cuestionadora, desafiante, y, por lo tanto, tiene la posibilidad de gestar transformaciones importantes, a nivel individual-personal y también colectivo.In this paper, we compare two different philosophical proposals to introduce and carry out philosophy in school spaces which include the participation of children, these are: Philosophy for Children (P4C), mainly developed by Matthew Lipman and Ann Sharp, and Philosophy with Children (PwC), which is actually a set of “second generation” (counter)proposals –as described by Vansieleghem and Kennedy (2011), based on Reed and Johnson (1999)–, among which those created by Walter Kohan and Karin Murris, to mention a few, stand out. We begin with some similarities between both proposals, before comparing them in each of their dimensions. First, we discuss P4C. Second, PwC. We focus on their ideas about education, school, philosophical education, their concept of childhood, the role given to teachers and their relation with politics. Third, we study PwC’s critique of the P4C programme. Finally, we conclude with some of our own ideas on the issue of introducing philosophy to the school space. Particularly, we incline towards PwC’s proposal, especially because of its coherent acknowledgment of the autonomy of teachers and of the political element in education. Certainly, we think that philosophical experience with children is particularly questioning, defying, and, therefore, it has the possibility of bringing about important transformations, both at a personal-individual level, as well as on a collective one.Neste artigo, são comparadas duas diferentes propostas filosóficas para introduzir e manter a filosofia em espaços escolares que incluem a participação de crianças. São elas: Filosofia para Crianças (FpC), desenvolvida principalmente por Matthew Lipman e Ann Sharp, e Filosofia com Crianças (FcC), que é na verdade um conjunto de (contra)propostas de uma “segunda geração” – como descrevem Vansieleghem e Kennedy (2011), baseados em Reed e Johnson (1999) –, entre as quais, aquelas criadas por Walter Kohan e Karin Murris, para mencionar algumas. O texto parte de alguns pontos de encontro entre as duas propostas, antes de compará-las em cada uma de suas dimensões. Primeiro, trata da proposta de FpC. Depois, da FcC. Os pontos de discussão são suas ideias sobre a educação, a escola e a educação filosófica, seus conceitos de infância, o papel outorgado aos professores e professoras e o vínculo estabelecido por cada uma dessas propostas entre educação e política. Então, detalha a crítica da FcC à FpC concernente a estes temas. Finalmente, o texto conclui com algumas ideias sobre a problemática da introdução da filosofia no espaço escolar. Particularmente, se apoia a proposta de FcC, fundamentalmente, devido a seu coerente reconhecimento da autonomia dos professores e o elemento político da educação, já que a experiência filosófica com crianças é essencialmente questionadora, desafiante e, por isso, tem a possibilidade de gerar transformações importantes, num nível individual-pessoal e também no nível coletivo.Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro2020-07-21info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/5124010.12957/childphilo.2020.51240childhood & philosophy; Vol. 16 (2020); 01 - 29childhood & philosophy; v. 16 (2020); 01 - 29childhood & philosophy; Vol. 16 (2020); 01 - 291984-5987reponame:Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online)instname:Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)instacron:UERJspahttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/51240/34385Copyright (c) 2020 childhood & philosophyinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessalarcon castillo, vania2020-12-21T20:10:39Zoai:ojs.www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br:article/51240Revistahttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/childhoodPUBhttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/childhood/oaiwokohan@gmail.com || wokohan@gmail.com1984-59871984-5987opendoar:2020-12-21T20:10:39Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online) - Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv philosophy and children: for or with?
filosofía y niños: ¿para o con?
filosofia e crianças: para ou com?
title philosophy and children: for or with?
spellingShingle philosophy and children: for or with?
alarcon castillo, vania
filosofia
educação
infância
fpc
fcc.
philosophy
education
childhood
p4c
pwc.
filosofía
educación
infancia
FpN
FcN
title_short philosophy and children: for or with?
title_full philosophy and children: for or with?
title_fullStr philosophy and children: for or with?
title_full_unstemmed philosophy and children: for or with?
title_sort philosophy and children: for or with?
author alarcon castillo, vania
author_facet alarcon castillo, vania
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv alarcon castillo, vania
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv filosofia
educação
infância
fpc
fcc.
philosophy
education
childhood
p4c
pwc.
filosofía
educación
infancia
FpN
FcN
topic filosofia
educação
infância
fpc
fcc.
philosophy
education
childhood
p4c
pwc.
filosofía
educación
infancia
FpN
FcN
description In this paper, two different philosophical proposals to introduce and carry out philosophy in school spaces which include the participation of children are compared, these are: Philosophy for Children (P4C), mainly developed by Matthew Lipman and Ann Sharp, and Philosophy with Children (PwC), which is actually a set of “second generation” (counter)proposals –as described by Vansieleghem and Kennedy (2011), based on Reed and Johnson (1999)–, among which those created by Walter Kohan and Karin Murris, to mention a few, stand out. The text begins with some similarities between both proposals, before comparing them in each of their dimensions. First, P4C is discussed. Second, PwC. Their ideas about education, school, philosophical education, their concept of childhood, the role given to teachers and their relation with politics are the main focus. Third, PwC’s critique of the P4C programme is studied. Finally, the paper concludes with some ideas on the issue of introducing philosophy to the school space. Particularly, PwC’s proposal is supported, fundamentally because of its coherent acknowledgment of the autonomy of teachers and of the political element in education, since philosophical experience with children is particularly questioning, defying, and, therefore, it has the possibility of bringing about important transformations, both at a personal-individual level, as well as a collective one.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-07-21
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/51240
10.12957/childphilo.2020.51240
url https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/51240
identifier_str_mv 10.12957/childphilo.2020.51240
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/childhood/article/view/51240/34385
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 childhood & philosophy
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 childhood & philosophy
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv childhood & philosophy; Vol. 16 (2020); 01 - 29
childhood & philosophy; v. 16 (2020); 01 - 29
childhood & philosophy; Vol. 16 (2020); 01 - 29
1984-5987
reponame:Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online)
instname:Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)
instacron:UERJ
instname_str Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)
instacron_str UERJ
institution UERJ
reponame_str Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online)
collection Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Childhood & Philosophy (Rio de Janeiro. Online) - Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv wokohan@gmail.com || wokohan@gmail.com
_version_ 1799317592349868032