Teaching Kids Philosophy

Teaching Kids Philosophy

“There are many attempts to improve student performance which result in a host of measures, ranging from misguided to inspired. Such efforts include not assigning students homework, recalibrating standardized tests to account for unfair background advantages, or subjecting students to the hard-to-fathom Common Core standards. But a recent endeavor in the UK found another solution which actually appeared to have worked – the students were taught philosophy!”

#philosophy #education

http://bigthink.com/paul-ratner/teaching-students-philosophy-will-improve-their-academic-performance-shows-study?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox#link_time=1468878372

68 Replies to “Teaching Kids Philosophy”

  1. No, no it won’t.

    It will get them ridiculed at first, punished the 2nd time, and then caste out or demonized to silence the ones who are always asking questions, in an effort of better understanding-a concept contrary to the existence of the institutions which control academia.

  2. 是的!哲學教法,非常靈活!也非常有趣味性

    這?有點奇妙!只是在教育中?學生的腦袋可能會變笨

    因為?一個心理與智能的開>>>會教出懶學生!爛人生

    就像宗教?要教出宗教人>>>他們學會皮毛!只會掩蓋在字理

    事實?宗教的哲理!是非常慈悲的心靈>>>讓他們無力救世!走上愚弄教徒

    這?也許非常打擊宗教與教徒>>>在真相之前?事實勝於雄辯

    哲理!的無情?是嚴厲的!冷漠的!鄙視的!智慧的!而不是無能!哲理強有力的情境?不是力量所能解說!當你有達到這個層面時

  3. 所以?哲學家!是孤獨的!叡智的!也是非常危險性的開啟者>>>他們能看清楚罪犯與錯誤的發展!因為他們會看到真相=歷史事實

  4. Gordon Ballinger,

    Why is understanding dangerous for children? It certainly is dangerous for the state to have kids taught a solid philosophical foundation (this doesn’t mean memorizing quotes from Socrates, Marx, and Jesus), but I see no harm in teaching kids about understanding and logic.

  5. Ryan

    基本上!這是有將近20~30年以上的接觸!不管是現在成為中年!或現在還是青年?>>>對一個主觀強烈的人!本身就具備邪惡行逕!他們的哲理?非常反常

    而講授哲理的時機?是在遭遇某些狀況,和本身有靈性本質的人>>>在機遇上!的強烈碰撞的意識時?產生的哲理會非常強烈

    非常奇妙的事?就會發生!萬惡之人>>>那一時間的震撼!立馬轉換新的思維與行為

    這是很多經驗之談!實踐出來的事實

  6. 而主觀強烈的人!曾經看到別的師父,講授哲理>>>提供某些信眾!要看那些哲學書籍

    之後?與他們接觸談及生活>>>他們的意念?竟然會是強詞奪理!非常偏執主見!想要轉移他們的錯誤?在他們的感受非常靈敏!馬上生氣?或做出敵意!或抗拒!

    這是無法再造的現象了

  7. Gordon Ballinger,

    Right there is the problem: knowledge and understanding are very different, and the “little knowledge” you speak of isn’t the problem-it is possessing that knowledge without an understanding of its contextual origins that can be dangerous. The quantity of knowledge is irrelevant, what matters is whether or not you understand the origins and contextual applications of said knowledge.

    It is for this reason, and a couple others, that I believe understanding to be superior to “knowledge”.

  8. 在此還有要說的問題!那就是邪惡的人?>>>犯罪心理!有強烈的反應

    他們是非常聰明!又狡猾!甚至隨時運用犯罪心理學>>>玩弄智商!玩起魔糊焦點!也裝作精神分裂!扮裝 2~3個角色

    這在媒體界!很多的政治操作?>>>最愛使用謊言!來轉移他們的錯誤!加害的手段?尤其強烈!近乎衝撞表示正當!掩蓋犯罪的企圖

    所以?他們不講邏輯!與哲理!>>>理直氣壯!才是犯罪的成效!

  9. 就舉一個實例!

    在美國衝撞中國南海的事實!與演驛過程

    有去瞭解的人?就像看電影般>>>情節非常高潮!不輸電影編劇

    美國每一個劇情與人物的出現,產生的威脅>>>幾乎?令人摒住呼吸!而中國處於弱者一樣的挨打挨罵!強力解釋與抗議?還是無法解脫

    這美國扮演了美國!日本!越南!菲律賓各種角色>>>在在理直氣壯>>>近乎無懈可擊!

    不仿回味回味編劇謊言的邏輯性?與推理!發展到結局的奇妙手法!值得觀察與當做案例

  10. 希望!有關心哲學與邏輯的人?都能為此論述多多提出有力的哲學思維與真相!

    互相分享!不論案例的大小>>>至少在文明的現代!做出一些哲人的智慧!提供教育!生活!環境與法制的支撐

  11. Ryan Ryles I have asked many 9 year old children if they understand the political news on the TV. All of them said “No.” – which surprised their parents: all of them. So good luck in your valiant quest.

  12. LALOBA PLATEADA Hey, thanks. We all like some recognition. May I compliment you on your clarity of mind. You are not alone in concluding I am probably pretty right. I think so too! ( English joke about humility ).

  13. Gordon Ballinger,

    Why the hell would you ask a 9 year-at least one not working -their political views???

    That you would do so, exposes that the problem in understanding (anything) is you, not the 9 yr old:/.

  14. 噢!哲理?是成熟性的思維>>>不會有所顧慮和顧忌

    是的!以前在接觸哲學時>>>總是感覺身體和思想總是有衝突

    產生?一種對身體的無能>>>說無能也好?沒自信也好!就是矛盾

    心裡想別做錯事?>>>身體卻無法控制去做出錯誤

    就像知道買了喜愛的東西不好>>>可是身體總是要貪求喜愛的東西

    煎熬的非常苦惱!>>>又像維特的煩惱小說

    當你須要朋友?>>>偏偏好的沒有遇到!壞朋友卻像蒼蠅圍繞著你

    這些!是一個個的現實考驗>>>考試不及格!連資格都沒有!還學哲學

    這是實踐哲學!>>>你的哲學態度要先成立

  15. 有了態度的穩定?之後才能進入哲學理論>>>處理能力的效率

    這不是紙上談兵>>>也不能任性!更要完全掌握=控制自我

    實踐!>>>表現能力到什麼程度

    沒有辦法處理事物?>>>表示缺乏瞭解

    瞭解什麼呢?首先要瞭解的是事物>>>中國的哲學!首先是格物致知>>>你對物資如何控制欲念!就要先知道必要性!與先決條件

    只能到此為止!不可以說太多!>>>因為時間關係!先做實踐!才知道這個階段

  16. Ryan Ryles Why would you think I ask a 9 year their political views???

    That you would do so, exposes that the problem in understanding is yours.

    Mayhap you might read it again -. ” I have asked many 9 year old children if they understand the political news on the TV. All of them said “No…” – which surprised their parents: all of them. So good luck in your valiant quest.” – Being your quest to teach them philosophy when they don’t even understand the dumb-down political news on mainstream media, that is.

    And, less importantly…Why use “Why the hell” to ask a question? I feel it contains an assumption of righteousness and is more than a little condescending, possibly somewhat rude even, innit. It is certainly an argumentum ad lapidem.

  17. Gordon Ballinger,

    I’ll repeat again: why the hell would you ask a 9 yr old, political views on anything (especially any who don’t work)?

    The phrase “why the hell” is an expression of incredulity at the wanton ignorance it takes to think such questions appropriate for a 9 year old.

  18. 噢!我的天哪

    我們為什麼要講++++哲學++++的議題?一定要把議題定位好!才是

    定位之後?才不會產生偏離>>>哲學是非常叡智的!我們學哲學!不是變無知愚蠢,那不是哲學的立義

    定位!是我們的立場>>>不能失去立場!沒有定位?肯定要亂了

  19. Enna Zausen , your sentence is too general to have any usable meaning. My sentence was short – but it was a precise reply to a series of emails and a particular topic of conversation. To say chaos is order would be to say order is chaos, but which came first – the chicken or the egg? This paradoxical philosophical egg has been around for a long time now. Pedantic mathematicians say that islands of order naturally arise from a relatively infinite ocean of chaos. To prove there point they cite a book of random numbers produced by a computer and on page 23 row 5 it has “0123456789”. – Well that order has to come up randomly somewhere, sometimes. But then it gets tricky. Infinite chaos must give rise to infinite order, but is order relative to chaos or was it a pre-existent absolute principle (ergo pre-time!). If you know the answer to that then can you work out which one is the chicken?

  20. 黃鵬飛 You are right to laugh. But consider this… We not only know it is a confusing question – we know it is definitely unanswerable and always will be. So it ( paradoxically) then becomes answerable. The confusion becomes an illusion if you are aware that you know what you know and also know that you are aware of the things you don’t know. Such sentient consciousness will always be beyond the bounds (parameters) of computer “intelligence” – and, sadly, most humans. So I laugh too, when my thinking comes back down to Earth.

  21. Laloba

    聰明?不是我!在這裡主題來說話>>>每個人!在自己的認知層面發表自己的哲學態度

    而你看到的字義?其實每個人每個說法>>>相信!你也有不能接受的感覺

    在哲學>>>早就定義的?哲學是冷漠無情!也是孤獨高貴!最主要你從哲學是要取得~~~~智慧與真相~~~~~的法理!而不是無知錯誤與罪惡

    這要搞清楚!你才會快樂自在>>>哲學不是戰爭!強者生存!哲學是智慧的薰陶

  22. I have alway loved this picture, I can see, all the thoughts of the painting, I love reading pictures, Divine spirit of thoughts that the people left for the imagination of your creation hmm you think?

Leave a Reply to 黃鵬飛 Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *