irony and caring thinking in philosophy for children

félix garcía-moriyón


The practice of philosophical dialogue as proposed by the Philosophy for Children program requires that this dialogue begin in primary school, and even earlier. Philosophical dialogue, based on the model of the Socratic dialogues, requires the development of critical thinking, cognitively very demanding, FpN, from its origins, insists that such thinking must be linked to creative and caring thinking, understood as thinking that takes into account the ethical dimension of rigorous dialogue. For this very reason, the program stresses that education is an ethical endeavor, it is intrinsically moral. This is expressed in the effort to turn the classroom into a community of philosophical inquiry, with the ethical commitments that any community of inquiry demands. But the community of inquiry is applied in a context in which there is an asymmetrical relationship between students and teachers, which requires special attention on the part of teachers in how they facilitate dialogue. The use of fundamental resources in dialogue such as radical questioning and irony must be governed by this claim of equality. The philosophical community of inquiry must prefigure from the outset a genuine community of dialogue among equals, governed by critical, creative and careful thinking.




irony; inequality; careful thinking; philosophical inquiry community (cpi)


Appiah, K. A. (2018). The myth of meritocracy: who really gets what they deserve? The Guardian. Consultado el 06/07/2020 en

Biggeri, M., Ballet, J. and Comim, F. (2011). Children and the Capability Approach. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Bingham, C. And Sidorkin, A. (2001). Aesthetics and the Paradox of Educational Relation Journal of Philosophy of Education. Feb. v. 35, n. 1, pp. 21-30.

Brenifier, O. (2008). Caring thinking about caring thinking Revision and suggestions by Janette Poulton. Acceso 30/08/2020

Burgh, G & Thornton, S. (2016). Lucid education: resisting resistance to inquiry, Oxford Review of Education, v. 42, n. 2, pp. 1 – 13.

Burrough, G. And Mortari, L. (2017). melarete and peech: preface to an international philosophy with children. childhood & philosophy, rio de janeiro, v. 13, n. 26, jan.-abr. pp. 69-86.

Daniel, M. F. (1997). La Philosophie et les enfants. Les thèses de Lipman et l’influence de Dewey. Chap. 3. Bruxelles : Presses de l’Un, De Boeck.

Ezcurria, J. (2014). Sócrates y Lévinas: la importancia de la enseñanza de la filosofía a los niños. Errancia. n. 8. pp. 1 – 15.

García Moriyón, F. (1999). Profesores y alumnos: una relación desigual. En: Melero Martínez, J., Miranda Alonso, T. Y Blanco Mayor, C. (Coord.) Filosofía y Educación: IV Encuentro Hispano-Portugués de Profesores de Filosofía para Niño Albacete. Univ. Castilla La Mancha. pp. 37-42.

García Moriyón, F. (2007). La investigación filosófica, la investigación sobre la Filosofía. Episteme, jun. v. 27, n.1, p.41-58.

García Moriyón, F. (2008). La comunidad de investigación científica como modelo ético. En: Murillo, I. (Coord.) Ciencia y Hombre. Colmenar Viejo. Diálogo Filosófico, 2008. pp. 351-363

García Moriyón, F. (2010). El troquel de las conciencias. Madrid: De la Torre.

García Moriyón, F. (2013). Metaphors of the Teaching of Philosophy, childhood & philosophy, rio de janeiro, v.9, n. 18, jul-dez, pp. 345 – 361.

Glaser, J. (1998). Limits en Reasoning, critical thinking and the critical person: towards a dialogical theory of critical thinking. PhD thesis, Department of Philosophy, University of Melbourne.

Gopnik, A. (2010). El filósofo entre pañales, Barcelona: Temas de Hoy.

Granger, D. and Gregory, M. (2012). Introduction: John Dewey on Philosophy and Childhood. E&C Education and Culture, v. 28, n. 2, pp. 1-26.

Hoffmann, M. (2000). Empathy and moral development: implications for caring and justice. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press

Johnson, D. W. (2016). La controversia constructiva: argumentación, escucha y toma de decisiones razonada. Madrid: Boadilla del Monte.

Kizel, A. (2016). Enabling identity: The challenge of presenting the silenced voices of repressed groups in philosophic communities of inquiry. Journal of Philosophy in Schools, v. 3, n. 1, pp. 16-39.

Kennedy, D. (2010). Philosophical Dialogue with Children: Essays on Theory and Practice. Lewiston, New York The Edwin Mellen Press.

Kennedy, D. (2012). Lipman, Dewey, and the Community of Philosophical Inquiry David Kennedy. E&C Education and Culture, v. 28, n. 2, p-36-53.

Kohan, W. O. (2019). Paulo Freire y la Igualdad. Archivos de Ciencias de la Educación, v. 13, n. 16.

Kohan, W. and Kennedy, D. (2008). Aión, Kairós and Chrónos: fragments of an endless conversation on childhood, philosophy and education. childhood & philosophy, Rio de Janeiro, v. 4, n. 8, jul./dez. 2008, pp.

Lipman, M. (1992). La filosofía en el aula. Madrid: De la Torre.

Lipman, M. (1992). Sources and References for Harry Stottlemeier’s Discovert. En Sharp, A.M. and Reed, R.F. Studies in Philosophy for Children: Harry. Philadelphia. Temple Univ. Press. Pp. 189-266

Lipman, M. (1995). Caring as thinking. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, Autumn, 1995, v. 15, n. 1, pp. 1 – 13.

Lipman, M. (1996). Sources and references for Pixie. En: Sharp, A.M and Reed, R. Studies in Philosophy for Children: Pixie. Madrid: De la Torre. pp. 315-404.

Lipman, M. (2011). Philosophy for Children: Some Assumptions and Implications. Ethics in Progress. v. 2, n. 1, pp. 3-16.

Lipman, M. and Sharp, A.M. (1978). Some Educational Presuppositions of Philosophy for Children, Oxford Review of Education, v. 4, n. 1, pp. 85-90.

Mcnamee, S. J. and Miller, R.J. Jr. The Meritcocracy Mith. Sociation Today. The Official Journal of The North Carolina Sociological Association. v. 2, n. 1, Spring 2004. Consultado el 06/07/2020

Murris, K. S. (2008). Philosophy with Children, the Stingray and the Educative Value of Disequilibrium. Journal of Philosophy of Education, v. 42, n. 3-4, pp. 667 – 685.

Pihlgren, A. S. (2008). Socrates in the Classroom. Rationales and Effects of Philosophizing with Children. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Department of Education.

Putnam, H. (2004). El desplome de la dicotomía hecho-valor y otros ensayos. Barcelona: Paidós, en especial el capítulo 2.

Sánchez Artega, J. (2007). La razón salvaje. La lógica del dominio: tecnociencia, racismo y racionalidad. Madrid: Lengua de Trapo.

Sharp, A. M. (1994). Habit in the Thought of Charles S. Peirce. Documento de trabajo..

Matthews, G. B. (1983). El niño y la filosofía, México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Sharp, A. M. (1995). Philosophy for children and the development of ethical values, Early Child Development and Care, v. 107, n. 1, pp. 45-55.

Sharp, A. M. (2014). Thinking. The Other Dimension of Caring. Journal of Philosophy in Schools, v. 1, n. 1, p. 20.

Sharp, A. M. and Splitter, L. (1995). Teaching Better Thinking. The Classroom Community of Inquiry. Melbourne: The Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd, p. 58.

Steinberg, L. (2012). Should the Science of Adolescent Brain Development Inform Public Policy. Issues in Science and Technology. v. 28, n. 3, pp. 1 -14.

Stojanov, K. (2007). Intersubjective Recognition and the Development of Propositional Thinking. Joumal of Philosophy of Education, v. 41, n. 1, pp. 75 – 93.

Sutcliffe, R. (2008). Razones y pruebas que avalan los beneficios de practicar el diálogo en la clase- En Grupo Menón. Diálogo sobre el diálogo. Comenius 2.1 Action 226597-CP-1-2005-1-MT-COMENIUS-C21.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

childhood & philosophy Creative Commons License
e-issn 1984-5987 | p-issn 2525-5061