Teaching Philosophy

There are many teaching techniques designed to elicit student participation in a philosophy classroom. In this paper I present a student-centered discussion model that makes the students directly responsible for most aspects of discussion. I used this model in a first year seminar devoted to the nature of art, and I explain how this collaborative model has certain advantages over other collaborative learning models, how I implemented it in the course, and the results I observed. The model I discuss here is similar in some ways to other collaborative learning techniques, but I highlight some of its unique features and discuss how it might be implemented in other philosophy courses.

In this paper I develop a theoretical framework for instruction in Critical Thinking courses which integrates informal logic with both psycho­logical work on error tendencies in human reasoning and the intellectual virtues. I argue that matters of cogency, which concern the content of one’s arguments, should be distinguished from matters of reasoning, which concern the actual inferences people draw. Informal logic and the intellectual virtues supply the normative standards for each of these dimensions of critical think­ing, and the fallacies and error tendencies supply students with a stock of common errors. Understanding this framework has important pedagogical consequences for how we teach these courses. In particular, instructors ought to aim at developing metacognitive skill at reflection upon the inferences one draws in addition to logical skill in evaluating the cogency of one’s arguments. I conclude by drawing concrete lessons for Critical Thinking pedagogy.

This essay argues that a course in philosophy of the body can be used to introduce students to philosophical investigation. The course includes a theoretical component that draws on classical and contemporary readings in philosophy of the body. It also includes a practical component that allows students to learn how concepts drawn from the literature are embodied in studio practice and in everyday life. Learning basic movement strategies of tai chi and body-mind centering allows students to enact their own phenomenological investigation and encourages them to consider the manner in which the medical sciences and cultural values shape their appreciation and performance of movement. Further, engaging in these practices raises philosophical issues including the relationship between the body and the self, freedom and determinism, and the correspondence and pragmatic conceptions of truth.

Like many other foreign students, Chinese students studying at American universities face special challenges in value-centered humanities courses as cultural outsiders. Moral and political philosophy can be particularly difficult, since these subjects focus on delicate issues of great personal significance, yet rely on cultural norms, discourse contexts, and basic assumptions that Chinese students may not share, understand, or feel comfortable discussing. Programs that invite American professors to teach summer classes to such students in China for American university credit allow for interesting new opportunities to circumvent some of the learning obstacles these students face in the United States. This essay reflects upon general teaching strategies that take advantage of these opportunities, and presents promising approaches to three sensitive topics in this teaching context: cultural relativism as a normative moral theory, diversity, and human rights. Many of the approaches and examples discussed may also be applicable to teaching Chinese students in the U.S. or discussing key issues with them in office hours.

Starting with this issue, Teaching Philosophy will initiate a series of articles entitled “How to Teach.” The aim of these articles is to provide an overview of how to teach a particular course commonly offered in philosophy departments and programs, with the hope that the articles will assist those who are asked to teach a course unfamiliar to them. We welcome feedback about this series and the articles contained therein.—MC

How should we teach philosophy in high schools? While electives are useful, I advocate going further to integrate philosophy into each traditional subject. High school instructors, working with philosophers, first teach logic as a foundation for asking philosophical questions within their subjects. Students are then encouraged to think about how they reason and what assumptions they are making in each subject. In English, students might consider what makes a novel a work of art; in science, they might explore what it means to call a theory “true.” Unlike an elective model, my approach ensures that all students benefit from philosophy during their secondary education. I conclude the paper with suggestions for implementation.

Building a high school philosophy program from scratch requires vision, creativity, determination, and patience. I recount the steps my colleagues and I took to implement philosophy courses at The Stony Brook School and discuss the challenges that arose along the way. I also offer general outlines of the three courses we have implemented (Critical Reading and Reasoning, History of Philosophy, and Ethics and Politics), discuss pedagogical approaches that we have found to work with high school students, and share feedback on the courses from my students.

We regularly teach for the Wyoming High School Institute (“HSI”), a three-week college experience for rising high school juniors. The purpose of HSI is to introduce pre-college students to subjects not regularly taught in the secondary school curriculum. In our course, we introduce moral philosophy through the use of feature films. More narrowly, we challenge the students to examine moral reasoning through analysis of the moral reasoning of characters in these films. Our pedagogical approach is based in the methods of Socrates and in the technique of “scaffolding.” We attempt to show how our approach can be incorporated into any pre-college philosophy classroom.

This paper is about teaching philosophy to high school students through Lincoln-Douglas (LD) debate. LD, also known as “values debate,” includes topics from ethics and political philosophy. Thousands of high school students across the U.S. debate these topics in class, after school, and at weekend tournaments. We argue that LD is a particularly effective tool for teaching philosophy, but also that LD today falls short of its potential. We argue that the problems with LD are not inevitable, and we offer strategic recommendations for improving LD as a tool for teaching philosophy. Ultimately, our aim is to create a dialogue between LD and academic philosophy, with the hope that such dialogue will improve LD’s capacity to teach students how to do philosophy.