Reflection is essential for learning, but in the lecture hall it doesn’t always work well. Students can hesitate to express their opinions for fear of saying something stupid, or they think there can be only one right answer. Philosophical questions can help overcome these barriers. Such questions are basic and open-ended, with no single answer. For example: Was money invented or discovered? Do we live in a better world today than we did a hundred years ago? These type of questions invite students to explore perspectives and question assumptions.
Although Socrates and Plato recognised the power of such questions millennia ago, this approach has gained new momentum in recent decades. American philosopher Matthew Lipman (2003) argued that students were mostly taught to think what others had thought, but rarely learned to think critically themselves. As a result, Lipman developed philosophical conversations as a way to teach students of all ages to reflect systematically. This approach also offers valuable opportunities in higher education.
What are philosophical questions?
Philosophical questions deal with core concepts such as truth, justice, freedom and knowledge. They are open and illuminating, and invite argument. You can find such questions in every discipline:
- Law: What makes a law just? Is freedom more important than security?
- Mathematics: Do numbers really exist, or are they made up?
- Natural sciences: Can a scientist ever really be sure?
- Linguistics: Do words have objective meaning, or does meaning always depend on context?
- History: Do we have a better understanding of what good is today than we did a hundred years ago?
Philosophical questions are short, clear and thought-provoking. Pete Worley (2015) describes ‘grammatically closed but conceptually open questions’, that is, questions that can be answered with yes or no, but immediately give rise to depth. For example: Is freedom more important than security?, which is normally immediately followed by Why do you think so?.
A good philosophical question doesn’t contain any hidden assumptions or positions. For example, Why are humans weaker than animals? is less useful because it contains a presupposition. Compare this with Are humans weaker than other animals?, which is more neutral, making it more suitable as a starting point for a conversation.
How do you encourage reflection on philosophical questions?
A philosophical conversation is a shared journey of discovery. As a teacher, you guide the conversation but don’t give answers. Students are therefore challenged to clarify and deepen their thinking. Remember the following guidelines for a successful philosophical conversation.
1. Start from a good question.
A philosophical conversation begins with a provocative question. You can formulate one yourself, but it’s often more powerful to make use of questions from students themselves. A good question is short, clear and evokes immediate reflection. For example: Is an apple alive? after a lesson on the characteristics of life. Such questions make abstract learning concrete.
2. Adopt a Socratic attitude.
A philosophical conversation requires the teacher to play a fundamentally different role from that of knowledge sharer. You guide the thought process without giving direction, which requires a curious, open attitude. Ask questions such as: Why do you think so? Can you give an example? Do you think so or do you know so? Who thinks something else? By adopting this attitude of supposedly not knowing, you allow students to come to their own insights.
3. Pick the right moment.
You can use philosophical questions at different times in the lesson. At the beginning of the lesson, the philosophical question can be used to activate thinking. At the end of the lesson, the conversation can often function as a reflective conclusion. For example, in a lesson on atomic models, the question Can you examine something if you can't see it? can make students think about perception, abstraction and knowledge production.
4. Prepare, but don’t impose.
Although philosophical conversations are open-ended, the same arguments will reappear. By thinking about possible reactions in advance, you can be better prepared. That said, it’s important to limit your input: ask questions, don't give answers. Let students' own ideas come to the surface.
5. Keep the focus on the main question.
Philosophical conversations tend to go off on many tangents. As moderator, you help keep things on track by regularly coming back to the central question, which ensures cohesion and depth in the conversation.
6. Provide a safe atmosphere.
A philosophical conversation is not a debate. It isn’t about winning, but about exploring together. Make it clear that it’s okay to doubt, disagree or change positions. Difficult or unpopular opinions may be heard, as long as they’re expressed respectfully.
7. Use students' language.
Use words that students themselves bring up. This keeps the conversation accessible and avoids unnecessary confusion. Sometimes it can also help not to say philosophical questions but big or thought-provoking questions, to make the conversation more approachable.
8. Let students formulate their own questions.
Students can also come up with their own philosophical questions. For example, after cases about injustice in health care, students put forward questions such as: Should rich people pay more for healthcare? Do smokers have the same right to a lung transplant as non-smokers? Are you responsible for your actions if you have an alcohol addiction?
Example of a conversation
Moderator: ‘Is solving the climate problem more important than preserving democracy?’ Student 1: ‘Yes, tackling the climate problem is the most important thing. People today are really blind, they don’t see the problems we’re facing and they only think in the short term.’ |
(Example of a philosophical dialogue [taken from KlimaatBurgers, 2022])
What effect does engaging in philosophical conversations have in education?
Philosophical questions help students make sense of concepts such as truth, justice and freedom. They challenge us to explore the meaning of words. As a result, this helps students think clearly as well as communicate. The questions also reveal what prior knowledge and ideas students have, even when they’re incorrect or ill-considered. By making these assumptions negotiable, the conversation promotes critical thinking as well as understanding of the content. Philosophical reflection also encourages the exploration of other perspectives. Even when we disagree, we learn to listen, weigh up and appreciate nuance. Finally, through these conversations, students practice important reflective skills: they learn to examine, adjust and substantiate their beliefs (see e.g. Galle, 2022, Anthone & Mortier, 2007; Dunlop & De Schrijver, 2020).
Challenges in guiding philosophical conversations
Guiding philosophical conversations is valuable, but it also takes practice. Many teachers find it takes some getting used to, mainly because it requires letting go of the familiar role of knowledge sharer for a while. Instead of giving answers, you guide students, taking on a Socratic attitude: you ask questions but don’t formulate propositions yourself. That shift in role sometimes creates uncertainty, for both teacher and student.
A potential pitfall is that the teacher goes back to a content-focused role. This changes the dynamics of the conversation: students take a wait-and-see attitude again. So, it’s important to make clear that as a teacher you temporarily take on another role: that of co-researcher. It’s ok to defer answering questions. Rather, respond with a counter-question, such as What do you think?
Dealing with ill-considered ideas or misconceptions
Students sometimes bring scientifically incorrect or ill-considered ideas into the conversation. As a teacher, this is confronting. At the same time, this is a strength of this teaching method: it brings implicit views to the surface. In a philosophical conversation, you don't have to immediately correct wrong statements. Invite other students to respond and ask clarifying questions, which in turn often creates a self-correcting conversation. Afterwards, you can briefly go back to any key misconceptions if necessary.
Relativism as a thought stopper
A recurring challenge is the so-called naive relativism. Statements like ‘everyone has their own truth’ or ‘what is right is personal’ can block the conversation (Galle, 2024). While relativism is legitimate as a philosophical position, such statements are often used in teaching practice to avoid further thinking. Pfister (2019) speaks of naive relativism in this context, an attitude in which all points of view are considered equally valid, thus putting an end to critical enquiry. At the same time, such statements provide an opportunity to go deeper. You can ask questions such as: Can you question everything? What’s the difference between what is true and what is valuable? Can you judge without claiming truth? Such questions encourage students to clarify and strengthen their own beliefs.
Controversy and emotion
Philosophical conversations can also touch on fraught topics; think climate, racism or inequality. Emotions can flare up in the process. The moderator must then maintain a curious and non-judgemental attitude. By doing so, students learn that it’s possible to reflect respectfully and critically even on sensitive topics. As in any learning process, safety is a prerequisite for depth (see De Schrijver et al, 2021 and the ECHO-session 'Omgaan met hot moments tijdens de les'(In Dutch))
Bringing the conversation to an end
Concluding a philosophical conversation isn’t always easy. Often, one insight triggers the next. So, it helps to agree on a time limit in advance, say 10 minutes. Afterwards, you can look back briefly with students. What did they hear that surprised them? Which arguments convinced, despite disagreement? In this way, students experience what it means to think in a context of multiple perspectives.
In conclusion
Philosophical conversations take practice, but they can be very fruitful: students learn to think, articulate, listen and doubt. They learn that there’s room to seek, and that learning is more than giving correct answers. By making room for so-called big questions, we not only deepen the lesson content, but also the thinking skills students need in each discipline. In doing so, philosophical questions contribute to a rich learning experience that prepares students not only for academic success, but also to navigate the complex challenges of today's world responsibly and critically. In this way, they practise respectful and reasoned dialogue based on insights students acquire throughout their studies. Shouldn't that be central to each of our academic programmes?
Want to know more?
The insights provided above are based on the philosophy teaching methodology at the University of Antwerp and the research work of colleagues such as Griet Galle, Eef Cornelissen, or Kristof Van Rossem. Kristof Van Rossem is the author of the interesting introductory book (currently only available in Dutch) Het filosofisch gesprek: De basis (The philosophical conversation: The basics), published by LannooCampus. Want to get started? Refer to the resources below for useful learning materials or contact Jelle.Deschrijver@uantwerpen.be. The ExploRatio/Odisee research group has a website with sample material www.exploratio.be and you can find additional documentation on the website of the Flemish Association for Philosophy Education www.filosofieonderwijs.be (in Dutch).
Anthone, R., & Mortier, F. (2007). Socrates op de speelplaats: Theorie en praktijk van het filosoferen met kinderen (4e, volledig herwerkte editie). Acco.
Cornelissen, E., & De Schrijver, J. (2022). KlimaatBurgers. www.klimaatburgers.be (In Dutch)
De Schrijver, J., Cornelissen, E., Verschoren, V., & Sermeus, J. (2021). Controverse in de wetenschapsklas. Een dialogische en cultuursensitieve aanpak om student-leerkrachten voor te bereiden op gevoelige thema’s. VELON Tijdschrift voor Lerarenopleiders, 17(4), 95–102.
Dunlop, L., & De Schrijver, J. (2020). Reflecting about the nature of science through philosophical dialogue. In McComas, W. F., & Oramous, J. (Eds.), The nature of science: Rationales and strategies. Springer.
Galle, G. (2022). De effecten van filosoferen met kinderen in de klas. School- en klaspraktijk, 61(3), 37–45.
Galle, G. (2024). Naïef scepticisme en naïef relativisme. Ongepubliceerde cursus vakdidactiek wijsbegeerte. KULeuven.
Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Pfister, J. (2019). Classification of strategies for dealing with student relativism and the epistemic conceptual change strategy. Teaching Philosophy, 42, 221–246. https://doi.org/10.5840/teachphil2019730107
Worley, P. (2015). Open thinking, closed questioning: Two kinds of open and closed question. Journal of Philosophy in Schools, 2(2), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.21913/jps.v2i2.1269
Lees deze tip in het Nederlands