Playdough to Plato
The following story was in the March 2018 edition of Columns magazine.
On a chilly day in November, the third grade classroom in Seattle鈥檚 John Muir Elementary School is cozy. Colorful posters cover the walls and beneath them, children fidget and giggle. The teacher, Marjorie Lamarre, urges the class to quiet down and gather in a circle on a big red mat.
The day鈥檚 guest, Debi Talukdar, a 爆走黑料 爆走黑料 PhD candidate in multicultural education, sits on the floor with them. A fellow in the UW鈥檚 , Talukdar leads off a discussion that will soon focus on life, death and decision-making. Heavy material for seven- and eight-year-olds. 鈥淟et鈥檚 start with a warm-up question,鈥 she says. 鈥淗ow do you know what is the right thing to do?鈥 After a few minutes to ponder, one girl raises her hand and offers, 鈥淢y mom says always be nice to people if you want them to be nice to you.鈥
鈥淵ou should treat people how you want to be treated,鈥 responds another. A boy in a striped T-shirt adds, 鈥淚f someone is bullying you, tell them to stop it.鈥 Talukdar thanks the children and explains that this sort of question鈥攈ow should we act鈥攊s the kind of question philosophers have been thinking about for centuries.
Children have a knack for deep philosophical issues and an intuitive grasp of concepts of fairness, says Jana Mohr Lone, who completed her PhD in philosophy at the UW in 1996. It鈥檚 that sort of instinctive curiosity that Lone wanted to tap into when she created the center, which she now leads. The origins and aims of this program, one of only a few in the country, are to encourage teachers and schools to nurture the childrens鈥 philosophical selves.
The center-guided classroom talks are tinged with flavors of Descartes, Confucious and Kant and have recently covered topics such as race, human rights and fairness. 鈥淏ecause they are so new to the world,鈥 says Lone, 鈥渃hildren really wonder a lot. Often they鈥檙e asking what we think of as philosophical questions without the context of these thousands of-years-old conversations.鈥
Lone fell in love with philosophy as an undergraduate. After college, she started a career in law, a direction that provided a grounding in family law and children鈥檚 rights. After the birth of her first child, she decided to return to philosophy and enrolled in a doctoral program at the UW. As she was working on her dissertation, she noticed that her son, Will, now four, was asking profound questions like: Are numbers real? And can you be sad and happy at the same time?
She was surprised. 鈥淚 never really thought of children as having philosophical potential,鈥 she says. But then she started remembering her own childhood and how she would stay awake at night wondering about these types of questions.
Lone began to speculate that kids were engaging with these questions in ways that philosophers should be paying attention to. She decided to treat the constant 鈥渨hy鈥 questions that children ask鈥攁nd that adults sometimes ignore鈥攁s serious philosophical inquiry. 鈥淚t鈥檚 tempting for adults to regard children鈥檚 philosophical questions as just adorable or that they don鈥檛 really understand what they鈥檙e saying,鈥 Lone says. She is convinced the opposite is true, and that children are often more flexible in their thinking than adults. 鈥淜ids are aware of how much they don鈥檛 know,鈥 she says. 鈥淎dults get embarrassed about admitting this.鈥
As she wrote her dissertation, Lone worked out an arrangement with her son鈥檚 teacher to visit the classroom on occasion and lead philosophical discussions with the children. Then in 1996, Lone created a nonprofit dedicated to philosophy for children, one of the first in the nation. It wasn鈥檛 exactly a welcome development in the rigorous world of academic philosophy. 鈥淚 had people tell me: you鈥檙e committing professional suicide,鈥 Lone remembers.
But the nonprofit grew and eventually became the Center for Philosophy for Children, now officially affiliated with the UW Department of Philosophy. In cooperation with the 爆走黑料, the center places graduate students like Debi Talukdar in Seattle鈥檚 public schools each year as part of the program. In addition, the center provides training for teachers wanting to incorporate philosophical inquiry into their curriculum, sponsors the state鈥檚 high school ethics bowl and conducts parent seminars.
When children are introduced to philosophy, they learn to trust their own ideas and questions, says Lone. This intellectual adventure helps them realize that there are many different ways to understand the world and allows them to feel more confident in their own contributions, she adds.
Philosophy is the best discipline for cultivating analytic thinking, which is increasingly important as more information comes at us in contemporary life鈥攑resented as fact or truth when it really isn鈥檛. 鈥淐hildren need to be able to explore and discern for themselves,鈥 she says. 鈥淭hose skills are really the most important gifts we can give them.鈥
The Philosophers in the Schools program, now running for more than 20 years, continues to surprise Lone. One technique she and her graduate students often use is to have kids read children鈥檚 books and discuss the philosophical lessons. Once, Lone assigned 鈥淭he Paper Bag Princess鈥 to encourage a discussion of gender issues. When she asked why it was so surprising that the princess in the story has so much freedom, a boy replied that he thought boys in school had less freedom. She asked him to explain and he told her, 鈥淕irls can wear anything they want to wear. Boys can鈥檛 wear anything they want to wear, we can鈥檛 wear dresses, we can鈥檛 wear skirts.鈥
鈥淎nd that led the conversation into thinking about gender not just in terms of sexism and discrimination against women,鈥 Lone says, 鈥渂ut also the way in which gender roles can be harmful to both genders.鈥
Once, a fifth-grade class was discussing Colin Kaepernick and the Black Lives Matter movement. Lone was surprised when one student, an immigrant from East Africa, expressed that she was uncomfortable with people taking a knee during the national anthem. 鈥溾業t is so disrespectful,鈥 this girl said, 鈥榓nd it doesn鈥檛 acknowledge what this country is like.鈥欌 Lone was surprised at this, and it made her reconsider how cultural norms can affect how you respond to injustice.
鈥淥ne of the things I love about doing philosophy with kids,鈥 Lone says, 鈥渋s that it makes me think about philosophical questions in new ways.鈥
Back in the John Muir classroom, Talukdar presents the children with a hypothetical situation meant to spark their thinking. 鈥淵ou have one of two choices. They鈥檙e both difficult,鈥 Talukdar tells them. 鈥淚magine there is a trolley. It doesn鈥檛 have a driver. You can鈥檛 hit the brakes, and it鈥檚 going very fast. Here鈥檚 the problem: there are five people on the tracks ... .鈥
鈥淥h no!鈥 gasp the students. Talukdar then unfolds the classic trolley problem, a thought experiment in ethics in which a runaway streetcar can, with a pull of a lever, be diverted from a track with five people to a track with just one. 鈥淒o you pull the lever?鈥 The class squirms. Then a girl in in glasses and a pink shirt says, 鈥淚 would switch it.鈥 Talukdar encourages others to share. One boy explains why he鈥檇 pull the lever. 鈥淚 might go to jail for killing one person, but it would be less than if I killed five.鈥
After taking a show of hands, it turns out most of the children think pulling the lever is a good idea. But one boy insists he wouldn鈥檛 pull the switch because he doesn鈥檛 want to go to jail. 鈥淚f you pull the switch, you killed someone,鈥 he says.
The girl in the pink shirt has changed her mind. 鈥淚 wouldn鈥檛 pull the switch,鈥 she says, 鈥渂ecause if they were older people, like in their sixties, then they鈥檝e only got a little bit of time until they die.鈥 Talukdar, following a turn in the students鈥 discussion, adds age to the trolley problem. 鈥淟et鈥檚 assume the five people are children and the one person is a much older person in their 80s or 90s. Does this change your response?鈥
The kids boisterously start to shout out answers and Talukdar urges them to take turns. 鈥淚f that person was about to die anyway, then you probably should choose them,鈥 says one girl. Another girl sighs: 鈥淚鈥檇 just run away.鈥 It鈥檚 a hard choice, admits their guest teacher.
Talukdar grew up and attended college in India. She obtained a master鈥檚 in psychology in London, then returned to India to teach. After several years, she became interested in teacher development and enrolled at the UW to pursue a PhD in education. Then she found the program at the Center for Philosophy for Children. 鈥淚 was so excited about it because growing up in India, our education system is not like this at all,鈥 Talukdar says. 鈥淚t does not privilege questioning and doesn鈥檛 have group inquiry like we do here.鈥 She obtained a two-year fellowship with the center and is now in her second year. A large part of her work involves leading discussions with school children. She is also researching how children鈥檚 books can inspire adults to explore philosophical issues. She has found that books for kids get straight to the point.
Back in Lamarre鈥檚 class, Talukdar has added a new twist to the trolley problem. What if, instead of a lever, students had the option of pushing someone off a bridge to their death as a way of stopping the train? 鈥淚 would push the person off because I would be saving lives,鈥 one boy says. A girl chimes in, 鈥淚 would pretend I hated the person. If I pushed someone off, I would feel super guilty.鈥
Before the children can get into a much deeper discussion of whether all lives are equal, they鈥檙e suddenly distracted. Outside, white flakes are starting to fall. They can sense the bell is about to ring. 鈥淪o, who wants to go outside and see the snow?鈥 asks their teacher. The classroom erupts into cheers. This is one point on which they can all agree. Further philosophical inquiry will have to wait until next week.
Contact
Dustin Wunderlich, Director of Marketing and Communications
206-543-1035, dwunder@uw.edu