Philosophy for Kids—Part 2

What is exciting about these experiments in philosophy is that educators have noted definitive benefits that kids derive from philosophical discussions. For example, students' reading and communication skills improve. Their critical thinking skills improve, as they learn to develop reasoning and sound arguments. The value in these kinds of open-ended questions is that—like most all questions in philosophy—they have no right/wrong answers. This is valuable for kids, because it encourages them to break free of the limited mental framework of multiple-choice standardized tests.

When kids become exposed to philosophy in this manner, they begin to change their way of thinking and expressing themselves. They learn what it means to become a little skeptical and begin to question things, without it causing them to feel either cynical or helpless. They develop confidence without hubris. They begin to exercise independent judgment and self-correction, and even develop a respect for diversity and exhibit empathy for others. Are those not advantageous qualities for anyone to acquire?

Consider these two comments from 5^th graders who became exposed to philosophical discussions: “I've started to actually solve arguments and problems with philosophy. And it works better than violence or anything else.” And another 5^th grader who participated in a discussion of the possibility of time travel: “Time is different for us than it is for the universe, because 100 years passes in a flash for the universe, but seems like a long time to us... so time is a bit like a feeling.” Talk about an insightful comment!

Reading these articles about encouraging grade schoolers to explore the true nature of things via philosophical discussions gave me lots of encouragement... on at least two fronts. First, it paints a very optimistic picture of what can happen when kids are introduced to open-ended thinking. I believe this can be a very effective antidote to an atmosphere in our schools that stresses standardized tests, which encourage narrow thinking and a viewpoint that emphasizes right/wrong responses which quickly are forgotten, shortly after the test is over. Valuable skills such as critical thinking, forming valid arguments, exercising discernment, and respecting diversity are too rare in our classrooms—let alone in the wider society.

Second, this news encourages this old hermit to keep plugging away at studying philosophy. If a 10-year-old kid can get into it, I should be able to. It's also nice to have it pointed out that I don't need to master the inscrutable prose and thick thinking of Descartes or Hegel. Yes, they have challenging and probing ideas and questions that tax my brain and it's worth doing so, but it's nice to be reminded that some of the same learning experience can be had by asking an elementary question such as: “Can you be a good person if you've done bad things?”