MRAVNÁ VÝCHOVA V ŠKOLÁCH NA SLOVENSKU A V ZAHRANI ČÍ

1.2. Philosophy for Children (and Community of Inquiry)
I think that one of the possibilities how to put this intention into practice could be the usage of
methods and experience from the world gained through the moral education model known as
Philosophy for Children (P4C), or its modification Community of Inquiry (CI). 1 Robert Fisher, in
connection with the basic P4C ideas formulated at the end of 1960s by Matthew Lipman, stated that
the aim of P4C is to develop in children the ability to go beyond the horizon of information they
receive from texts not only in their literal meaning but also on the level of analytic and notional
thinking. According to him we have to try hard to make children think and solve problems
independently, critically and creatively. The aim of P4C is to encourage and develop these skills: to
understand the text they read, to identify what they understand and do not understand, to be interested
in what they read and discuss. Furthermore, it is about their ability to ask relevant questions, to
develop mental abilities, to express ideas and hypotheses, to use imagination in their own thinking, to
examine alternative ideas and explanations. At the same time, the purpose of P4C is to constitute
assessment attitudes, judgements, ability to assess value of ideas, ability of self-assessment and selfcorrection.
All these abilities are to be developed through cooperative activities. The means of
reaching the aim is open group discussion on questions interesting for teenagers with the assistance of
philosophy-conscious teacher (Fisher, 2001, s. 67 – 68). Nancy Vansieleghem says that Lipman based
his philosophy concept on Socratic questioning. Questions are always connected with statements,
terms analysis, validity, comprehensibility and reliability of argumentation. Philosophy and ethics
offer the possibility to think autonomously applying several means that enable individuals to ask
others or themselves. Thus we can doubt our deepest feelings, values and identities. Then the process
becomes self-education and constitutes new ethics of thinking and acting. The aim is to articulate
mutual understanding for the whole world via mutual dialog and understanding. This dialogue is
symbolized by the transformation of the class into CI (Vansieleghem, 2005, s. 177 – 178). Matthew
Schertz observes that CI is a dialogic form focused on constituting questions, which is a part of P4C
and which enables students to get involved in philosophical discussions by asking questions and
thinking of terms. Teacher stimulates and facilitates the philosophical discussion formulating various
questions during the discussion, makes positions problematic, asks for explanations or offers counterexamples.
Although the teacher leads the discussion, students determine the topic and formulate
questions during dialogues. Continually, as they are acquiring this procedure, the role of the teacher is
becoming less important. On the basis of his own experience, the author claims that students´
philosophical questions enriched their discussions on science, history and literature. The influence of
CI is shown also outside the philosophical discussions, e. g. in students´ mutual relationships and
attitudes to education. In his opinion, CI is becoming an important means of moral education because
it enables discussions on ethical and moral issues encouraging empathy and pro-social behaviour in
the social context. P4C encourages a thinking and rational subject, which is desirable because it
creates a solid basis for autonomous moral development (Schertz, 2007, s. 192 – 194). Karin Saskia
Murris is of the opinion that P4C is an introduction to the higher level thinking and critical reflexion
concerning methodology of all disciplines (Murris, 2008, s. 668). According to Laurance J. Splitter,
the most basic feature is the fact that CI teaches children how to think and reason well, providing a
kind of “vaccination” against manipulation and indoctrination, to which children are exposed and
which they will come across when thinking and deciding about themselves and others (Splitter, 2007,
s. 274). 2
1 I will not deal with the moral education concept by Robert T. Hall and with the possibilities of its usage for
needs of students at secondary schools in Slovakia, as I covered this topic in the past (Gluchman, 1996b, s. 422-
423, 2008b, s. 144-151).
2 World´s leading specialized magazines provide plenty of positive experience with these programmes in Ireland,
Germany, Slovenia, the USA, Great Britain etc. (Calvert, 2007, s. 309–328; Russell, 2002, s. 141-153; Šimenc,
2008, s. 323–336).
286