20

Educational Perspectives ❖ Volume 44 ❖ Numbers 1 and 2

Practicing Philosophy for Children in the Search
for a Better Society
Mitsuyo Toyoda
University of Hyogo

My Belief in p4c
My first impression of the philosophy for children
program in Hawai‘i (p4c) was a strong, intuitive feelingthat this approach to education can be a vehicle to change
the world. This feeling has not faded at all in the courseof my five-year commitment to p4c. Rather, it has been
growing into a deeper belief that p4c has an important role insociety, not only to improve education at schools but also todevelop a democratic, responsible community. Yet, as I haveexchanged my ideas about p4c with teachers and researchers,
I have come to realize that these beliefs are not necessarily
shared by others. Some of them have expressed a serious
concern that p4c might result in value relativism.
This concern might be articulated in the form of two
rhetorical questions: If the cultivation of thinking abilities
per se is the central concern of p4c, is there a danger inthis form of education of directing children to a relativistic
position that any idea is welcome as long as it is generated
as a result of a careful collaborative deliberation? If free
thinking is one of the values of p4c, should we let it go
when children reach a conclusion that might discriminate,scorn or hurt other people? These questions become critical,
especially when the focus of inquiry moves into sensitive
moral areas. Inquiry, for example, might end up with theidea that it is OK to destroy the earth because nothing in
nature stays the same and the earth might be destroyed by thecollision of a meteorite anyway. One might argue that in thisexample, at least, there is no need to worry about arriving at
such an extreme conclusion because, in actual dialogue, it is
not likely that all children support this sort of controversial
answer. Yet, it seems theoretically impossible to showthat an open-ended inquiry will never generate morally
problematic ideas.
As a p4c practitioner, I would answer NO to both of
the above questions. I believe that not all ideas can be given

equal standing even if they are produced through the processof inquiry. There is an important distinction between “alloutcomes have equal value” and “all views need to be given
a fair hearing.” What, then, are the reasons for my belief
that p4c does not promote value relativism? If this form ofeducation should not be identified with moral relativism,
what else do we need to emphasize in practicing inquiry
other than the value of children-oriented, open-ended
thinking? In this essay, I will consider a role of philosophy
for children in conducting moral education at public schools,
particularly on the basis of my experiences with the p4c
Hawai‘i-Japan exchange program, in which I have explored
the application of p4c to moral education.

A Gap Between p4c and a Standardized
Moral Education
The p4c Hawai‘i-Japan exchange program, funded by
the Uehiro Foundation on Ethics and Education, has been
providing important opportunities for teachers and researchers to consider the possible contributions of p4c toward theimprovement of moral education. I have been participating inthis program as a coordinator since it began in 2006. Everysummer, Hawai‘i teachers demonstrate p4c inquiries withelementary students in Japan and observe moral lessons
conducted as a part of a standard curriculum. Teachers fromJapan then attempt moral lessons with students at Waikïkï
Elementary School and participate in the p4c workshop coordinated by the p4c practitioners at the University of Hawai‘i(UH). One of the greatest benefits of this program is the advancement of a cross-cultural inquiry concerning schoolingand education. Although the educational systems are not thesame, it is stimulating to exchange ideas from both countries
about current worries and hopes for better schooling and topromote dialogue on what they can do in order to improve
the quality of education.

Philosophy for Children

It has been pointed out that p4c does not necessarily
fit into the framework of a standardized moral education in
Japan because the latter is designed to teach a predetermined
set of moral values. The guidelines on moral education developed by the government of Japan set the framework for thelessons by designating approximately twenty moral values
that need to be covered within one school year. Most teachersbuild their lesson-plans in accordance with the governmental
guidelines. Thus, even if the teacher respects students’thoughts and encourages them to think for themselves about
moral issues by attempting student-centered moral dialogues,
it seems difficult to conduct fully open-ended inquiry: students are encouraged to think only within a provided framework. This content-driven aspect of moral education in Japanis somewhat incompatible with a key requirement of p4c
Hawai‘i that we should follow the argument where it leads
in inquiry. Because of this difference, some people think that
p4c is not fully applicable to moral education in Japan.
I witnessed a critical gap between p4c and Japanese
moral education when I observed a first-grade classroom
lesson at a Japanese elementary school. In the class, students
read a story about a girl massaging her grandmother’s shoulders that had become stiff from her everyday domestic duties.
The grandmother, being happy with this girl’s kindness,promises her a small tip. But the girl says that she does notwant a tip and keeps massaging her grandmother’s shoulders
even after her arms start to hurt. Students exchanged ideas
about the grandmother’s feelings—why she wanted to givea tip to the girl, and the girl’s feelings—why she said she
wanted no tip and why she did not stop massaging her grandmother’s shoulders after her arms started to hurt. Students
considered these points from various angles and broadened
their interpretations of this story. Since I observed children
actively participating in the exchange of ideas, I was surprised to hear the teacher say, “The class was not successful.
It was supposed to be about filial piety. But most children’s
ideas had different foci such as familial love, kindness, andself-renunciation.”
From a prevailing view of moral education in Japan, theevaluation of the class often depends upon whether students
could obtain a shared understanding about a particular moralvalue. If the teachers have to teach twenty or more values
in a limited timeframe, it is inevitable for them to prepare
each lesson with a particular focus. The major difference
from p4c lies in this point. One of the important aspects

21of p4c is to provide an appropriate environment in which
students are able to explore their own interests and to seek adeeper understanding of things. According to the educational
perspective of p4c, the lesson I observed seemed quite successful because it provided the students with the opportunity
to identify various moral meanings in a daily context withwhich they are familiar.
Moreover, the difference in the expectations about
educational outcomes leads to different notions and methodologies in preparing lessons. The content and the directionof p4c inquiry cannot be fully prepared in advance: they
develop through dynamic interaction in dialogues among
students and teacher. In a p4c-style lesson, it is, therefore,
not appropriate to determine the end point of an inquiry
before the lesson. People who are not used to this style ofteaching might ask, “Can we really teach morality in such an
unprepared framework?” The misidentification of p4c withvalue relativism is partly rooted in this worry. In contrast toJapan where moral education has been included in a standard
curriculum, the state of Hawai‘i does not provide a statewide
proposal for this area of education. However, moral growthis still regarded as an important issue in schooling, and someschools are developing unique approaches to teaching it.
Waikïkï Elementary School regards moral education as theirhighest priority and works on cultivating a morally sensitive,
intellectual community through everyday school activities.
Mindfulness is the main value that guides the philosophyof this school. Based on the work of Art Costa’s “Habits ofthe Mind,” the school identifies mindful behaviors, such as
cooperation and caring, flexibility in thinking, listening withempathy, and managing impulsivity. These habits are sharedwith teachers and students through the use of signs that are
posted around the school facility. Students are encouraged toreflect on the educational values in these signs and express
their understanding of them through essays, pictures, and soon. Furthermore, p4c inquiry has been providing important
opportunities for children to share ideas about moral issues,and it has helped provide ways to practice mindfulness.
The sessions of p4c allow for actual moral dialogues in theclassroom, which serve to integrate both critical and caring
aspects of thinking.
The p4c Hawai‘i-Japan exchange program has not only
provided educators with an opportunity to explore the gap
articulated above, it has also provided evidence that p4c does
not entail moral relativism.