The Socratic method, when used correctly, is an ingenious and dependable way of fostering collaborative dialogic argument in the classroom. Yet the Victorian Department of Education and Training (DET) presents Socratic discussions as something more like a chinwag, with stock sentence-starters awkwardly jammed in. It’s not only a travesty of the spirit of Socratic dialogue, but a missed opportunity for supporting the development of genuine critical thinking in schools.
Does dialogue work to harmonise conflicting views, or does it simply entrench differences? According to extensive research in the psychology of polarised opinion, the answer is discouraging: when people of any ideological stripe encounter opposing views and evidence, their beliefs grow even more divergent. Hearing from the other side seems to make people double down on their original positions.
I’m proposing three strategies that educators can use to promote genuine dialogic argument. These strategies are ones that I’ve found useful in averting pseudo-arguments –– those superficial, directionless and disjointed conversations among individuals who inter-splice their monologues while remaining essentially deaf to one another. A friend of mine likens the pseudo-argument pattern of talk to the parallel play of two-year-olds, engrossed side-by-side in their respective imaginary worlds. Let’s see what we can do to make the switch from parallel play to cooperative play in the philosophy classroom.
I’ve been progressively building the argument that we educators need to help our students move beyond relativism, and towards an evaluativist level of understanding. But how can we achieve this? […]
(Or, how to be inimitable) We’re a motley crew, we Philosophy in Schools people. Our goals are so varied, it can be hard to say exactly what it is that […]
“This was the best morning of my life!”, a Year 9 student enthused, following our recent philosophy workshops at Albert Park College’s Liberal Arts Festival. Students in Years 9 – […]
The recent podcast episode ‘Debatable‘ from WNYC’s Radiolab got me thinking about formal debating and its relationship to the sort of collaborative enquiry we foster at The Philosophy Club. The podcast […]
We’re overjoyed that a culture of ‘thinking about thinking’ has taken root at Heatherhill Primary School as a direct result of our Big Questions philosophy program. We’d expected that our […]
The Philosophy Foundation has a track record of producing a kind of book that’s in short supply: truly innovative contemporary guides to teaching critical and creative thinking to children. Peter […]
… a big part of being good philosophers is being able to hold two or more different understandings in our head at once, and seeing the strengths (and possible weaknesses) […]
The Philosophy Club 