Open AccessThe Generic Argument for teaching philosophy
Author(s) -
Philip Cam
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of philosophy in schools
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2204-2482
DOI - 10.21913/jps.v5i1.1485
Subject(s) - argument (complex analysis) , epistemology , philosophy of computer science , philosophy of education , subject (documents) , curriculum , philosophy education , philosophy , inclusion (mineral) , character (mathematics) , scientific thinking , philosophy of science , parallel thinking , sociology , critical thinking , pedagogy , higher education , social science , critical systems thinking , computer science , political science , chemistry , law , biochemistry , geometry , mathematics , library science
John Dewey wished to place development of the ability to think at the core of school education. The kind of thinking that Dewey had in mind was based on his conception of scientific inquiry. Matthew Lipman was likewise committed to an education centred on thinking, but he claimed that we should turn to philosophy rather than to science in order to secure this end. In his view, philosophy has a stronger claim to this mantle than does science, or any other subject, when it is appropriately reconstructed and taught. He developed various arguments to that effect, but the one considered here is that philosophical thinking has a generic character that especially suits it for the role. I examine this argument to see how compelling a case it makes for the inclusion of philosophy in the school curriculum.