Abstract
This chapter will present the key concepts of Lipman and Sharp’s philosophical-educational vision. Firstly, their reframing of philosophy in practical terms and its relevance to the achievement of a pluralistic and democratic society. Secondly, the aim to empower children through community-based philosophical inquiry. Engaging in philosophical dialogue with others, children could acquire the capacity to think for themselves and increase their self-defence against societal-political threats like consumerism and manipulation. Moreover, the belief that the generative potential of communal philosophical inquiry enabled children to flourish both as individuals and as good citizens. Thirdly, Lipman and Sharp’s educational reflection and practice revolved around the following notions which became regulative educational ideas, as well as the distinctive features of “better thinking”: self-correction, sensitivity to context, reasonableness, and fallibilism. Fourthly, these regulative educational ideals were complemented by a multidimensional approach to thinking, which was composed of critical, creative, and caring capacities. Finally, the above-mentioned characteristics of Lipman and Sharp’s educational philosophy converged in their idea of moral education, which could foster significant changes not only in individuals but also in society, and ultimately contribute to reducing violence and discrimination.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Indeed, the MoMA had hosted an art exhibition of this kind under the title Young People’s Art Work From an English School in 1948.
- 2.
- 3.
Coherent with this very perspective is also James J. Gibson’s “ecological psychology” (2015), whose research paradigm strikingly contrasted with the contemporaneous cognitivist mainstream.
- 4.
That the debate regarding the content of educational curricula is still a very hot topic within and outside the P4C community is testified by the lively debate which took place at the ICPIC conference held in Madrid in 2017 and was stimulated by Gert Biesta’s critical intervention on how contemporary education, including views like P4C, incurred in problematic trends like “mentalisation” and being too narrowly “learning-focused” (Biesta, 2017; Kennedy & Kohan, 2017). When in other writings Biesta (2022, 3) levels equal criticism at the “pure child-centred education”, on the one hand, and the “pure curriculum-centred” one, on the other, he seems closely in line with Lipman and Sharp’s educational vision.
- 5.
It is worth mentioning that all three aspects were also shared by other contemporary radical pedagogists and educational innovators, such as Paulo Freire.
- 6.
In the late essay “Philosophy for Children’s Debt to Dewey”, Lipman carried out a comparison and a critical analysis of Dewey’s pedagogy and P4C approach. As a result, he stated that “Philosophy for Children is built unapologetically on Deweyan foundations” (Lipman, 2008b, 150).
- 7.
For a different, non-conflicting view of the relationship between the Piagetian theory and teaching philosophical thinking to children, see Haas (1976).
- 8.
As regards the contribution of religious pluralism to this tradition, see Boisi (2007).
- 9.
It is worth noting the affinity of these reflections by Lipman and Sharp with the “ethics and politics of care” perspective, developed by coeval philosophers, generally stemming from feminism, such as Carol Gilligan, Nel Noddings, Seyla Benhabib, Iris Murdoch, and Joan Tronto. This relationship will be analysed in more detail in one of the next sections.
- 10.
As regards the influence of Sharp’s ideas on P4C scholarship, see Glaser (1992) and Nowell (1992). Glaser focused on the self in the community of inquiry, while Nowell developed interesting comparisons between Sharp and Freire. On the development of personhood, see also Sharp (1986,1992). Finally, it is worth mentioning that Sharp’s thinking in this regard was influenced by Nietzsche’s view of the “growth process” of freedom as the “cultivation of the power over oneself” and as “the process of ACTIVELY REDIRECTING the basic energy of human life” (Sharp, 1975, 99–100).
- 11.
- 12.
See Sect. 3.2 of this chapter, focusing on “The challenge of democracy and citizenship”.
- 13.
See the last section of Chap. 2 and the first of this chapter.
- 14.
- 15.
- 16.
Worth noting is that Lipman and Sharp reframed the notion of responsibility proposed earlier by Dewey (1908) in a less conservative and less consequentialist way. On the other hand, both Dewey and Lipman/Sharp stressed the social relevance of responsibility, as well as its essential connection with education. On responsibility and the community of philosophical inquiry, see Franzini Tibaldeo (2014).
- 17.
Consequently, the author details the phases or aspects of reflective thinking: suggestions, intellectualisation, hypothesis, reasoning, and testing the hypothesis by action (Dewey, 1933, 107–115).
- 18.
- 19.
As will be seen later, the other equally important article published in 1995 by Lipman under the title “Caring as Thinking” (1995b) focused on this very issue, among others.
- 20.
Lipman also recognised that the “threefold distinction has more recently trickled down into curriculum theory, as in Bloom’s taxonomy. Bloom and his associates have identified three aspects of higher-order thinking: the analytical, the synthetic and the evaluative” (Lipman, 1995b, 5–6; Bloom et al., 1956). For an earlier allusion to the classical tripartition, albeit with no reference to higher-order thinking, see Lipman (1988, 173).
- 21.
Also interesting in this regard were Lipman’s earlier allusions to “philosophical creativity” and creativity as “ampliative reasoning” (Lipman, 1988, 180–181, 185).
- 22.
These articles probably developed from a paper Lipman presented to the Sixth International Conference on Thinking, which took place in 1994 at the MIT in Boston (Sharp, 2007, 256).
- 23.
As a result, added Morehouse, from “the late 1990s through the remainder of their lives, the two [Lipman and Sharp] promoted the tripartite of critical, creative, and caring thinking as an analytical and educational heuristic, and contended with one another about the meaning of the latter term” (Morehouse, 2018, 198).
- 24.
In a passage of Philosophy goes to School (Lipman et al., 1977–1980) can be found one of the earliest references to “caring” in the works of Lipman and Sharp. Here, although not yet defined in terms of “caring thinking”, caring already reveals the double meaning it will maintain in the following years (e.g. Lipman, 2003, 262). First, it evidences the attitude of children as co-inquirers, who care about what they discuss, since it is “something meaningful and important” (Lipman et al., 1977–1980, 199). Second, care also evidences the attention given by children to “the procedures of philosophical inquiry itself and the rigor that these procedures involve” (Lipman et al., 1977–1980, 199–200).
- 25.
As for the Deweyan inspiration for this non-dualistic approach by Lipman and Sharp, see Bleazby (2013, 92–112).
- 26.
- 27.
See the reflections in the previous section on self-correction, sensitivity to context, reasonableness, and fallibilism.
- 28.
Here is the full text: “Mirror, you’re a mime, /A mimic! /Every day you mock me. //You never affirm me /when I’m happy /As if you’re always saying /‘Who do you think you’re /kidding?’ //You don’t care /about me. /You never reflect my thoughts /my dreams /You’re not interested in /my ideas, my ideals. //But you do reflect my body. /And, I am my body, too. /You mirror the tension, the lines, /the awful struggle of the /sense-making. /You glare me straight when /I hurt. /You stare me down when /I pain. /The ugliness, the awful ugliness. /The neck, the jaw, the mouth, /the breasts. //Have you ever reflected my beauty? /Was there once a time? /In my eyes? /Or could you? //But, if I were to die /You could no longer /mock me. You could no /longer mimic and /reflect the ugliness. /And I would have my vengeance! Ann Margaret Sharp, Dec 4, 1980”.
- 29.
Among the women intellectuals quoted by Sharp (1994b) were the following: Virginia Woolf, Simone Weil, Kathryn A. Rabuzzi, Sarah Ruddick, Lorraine Code, Evelyn Fox Keller, Carol Gilligan, Nel Noddings, Catherine Keller, Iris Murdoch, Rosemary Ruether, and Martha Nussbaum. On Sharp and feminism, see Garza (2018). On gender perspective's capacity to broaden the individual's glance, see Loretoni (2014).
- 30.
In this essay, Sharp mentioned and analysed the works by the following thinkers, theologians, and psychologists: S. Augustine, M. Buber, E. Erikson, M. Heidegger, E. Husserl, S. Kierkegaard, R. May, M. Nussbaum, R. Solomon, P. Tillich, A. N. Whitehead.
- 31.
- 32.
- 33.
In one of her earlier essays on the thinking of S. Weil, Sharp remarkably stated in this regard: “This attention manifests itself in care, a striving for excellence, objectivity, beauty, and quality” (Sharp, 1984a, 494).
- 34.
As regards the education of perception, see for instance Masschelein (2010) and Biesta (2020). As regards the centrality of emotions in education, co-inquiry, and cognitive transformation, see Candiotto (2022). Moreover, the education of emotions seems to fit in with the recent “affective turn” in social sciences and education.
- 35.
- 36.
- 37.
See Sharp, (1995–2018b). However, the paper was probably originally conceived as a chapter of the book Educating for Global Consciousness: A Philosophical Approach (Sharp & Guin, 1995), which was never published. Sharp derived the notion of “intelligent sympathy” from Dewey’s ethical theory (Sharp, 1955–2018a, 115, 1995–2018b). On the centrality of affection and relationship in Dewey’s ethics, see Pappas (1993). Of equal importance for the development of Sharp’s idea of compassion was the relational thinking of Lévinas (Sharp, 2006, 45). Finally, on compassion in Lipman and Sharp’s P4C, see Cassidy (2022).
- 38.
It is also worth mentioning that according to Nussbaum (2010, 95–120), the cultivation of imagination is a keystone of a vigorous individual and citizen.
- 39.
- 40.
In discourse ethics, and especially in the Habermasian project of “intersubjective universal reason”, there was “a real risk that reason might be reduced to the domain of argument by those who have the power and the power to speak, depriving ‘others’ of any chance to participate effectively in discourse” (Ortega Ruiz, 2004, 284). On the other hand, stated Megan Laverty, by building on Sharp’s intuitions, the “community of inquiry goes beyond a discourse ethic rooted in a Habermasian conception of reason by giving students a lived experience of being ethically situated” (Sharp & Laverty, 2018, 125).
- 41.
Lipman and Sharp evidenced a peculiar sensitivity to diversities like blindness, dyslexia, and communication disorders in children (Lipman, 2008a, 90, 95–96; Sharp, 1996–2018b). Over time, other diversities like deafness, as well as alternative audiences like gifted or talented students, incarcerated juveniles, and terminally ill children with cancer, were included in the activities of P4C practitioners (Cinquino, 1981; Dalin, 1979; Geisser, 1993; Lee, 1986).
- 42.
In Chap. 1, I alluded to the so-called “Little Rock Crisis” (1957–1958) and to Arendt’s criticism of the political decision to exploit education in order to overthrow racial segregation. Her position relied on the distinction between the social and the political domains. Racial segregation was a political issue which had to be tackled at the proper political-legislative level. On the contrary, social discrimination was a social matter, in the sense that it referred to the “innumerable variety” of social “groups and associations”, each of which possessed a unique identity (Arendt, 1959–2003, 205). Education was a social matter of this kind. According to Arendt, any attempt to legally enforce social discrimination was obviously to be banned and fought politically. However, it was equally problematic not to respect the right of groups to their social specificity and force them to integrate with other groups. And, reminded Arendt, “the government has no right to interfere with the prejudices and discriminatory practices of society” (Arendt, 1959–2003, 208), as happened in the “Little Rock Crisis”. As already mentioned in Chap. 1, Lipman replied to Arendt’s arguments, but his considerations were never published. He sent his reflections to Arendt privately, and she replied with a letter dated 30 March 1959. Arendt concludes her letter with the following words, which are consistent with her previous reflections: “I am afraid your whole syllogism resides on your not distinguishing between (social) discrimination and (political) persecution” (Arendt, 1959, 3). Indeed, neither Lipman nor Sharp could ever agree with this distinction, which was at odds with their personal experiences and their convictions about the role played by education in fostering both social and political change. Also, they probably did not agree with Arendt’s reductive criticism of utopia (Arendt, 1959–2003, 197); an idea that Lipman and Sharp endeavoured to revive for the sake of democracy.
References
Arendt, H. (1959). Letter to M. Lipman dated 30 March 1959. IAPC archive.
Arendt, H. (1959–2003). Reflections on Little Rock (1959). Republished in Arendt, H. (2003). Responsibility and Judgment, pp. 193–213. Schocken.
Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual thinking. University of California Press.
Asch, S. (1958). The metaphor: A psychological inquiry. In R. Tagiuri & L. Petrullo (Eds.), Person perception and interpersonal behavior (pp. 86–94). Stanford University Press.
Biesta, G. (2017). Touching the soul? Exploring an alternative outlook for philosophical work with children and young people. Childhood & Philosophy, 13(28), 415–452.
Biesta, G. (2020). Have we been paying attention? Educational anaesthetics in a time of crises. Educational Philosophy and Theory. Accessed March 31, 2022. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full, https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1792612
Biesta, G. (2022). World-Centred education. A view for the present. Routledge.
Bleazby, J. (2013). Social reconstruction learning: Dualism, Dewey and philosophy in schools. Routledge.
Bloom, B. et al. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. McKay.
Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life. (2007). Religious pluralism in the United States, vol. 1 of the Boisi Center Papers on Religion in the United States. Accessed March 31, 2022. https://www.bc.edu/bc-web/centers/boisi-center/publications/papers.html
Brenifier, O. (2007). La pratique de la philosophie à l’école primaire. Alcofribas Nasier.
Buchler, J. (1954). What is a discussion? The Journal of General Education, 8(1), 7–17.
Cam, P. (2018). The theory of education made flesh. In M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 29–37). Routledge.
Candiotto, L. (2022). Epistemic emotions and co-inquiry: A situated approach. Topoi. Accessed April 8, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-021-09789-4
Cassidy, C. (2022). Philosophy with children as and for moral education. In D. Mendonça, & F. Franken Figueiredo, (Eds.), Conceptions of childhood and moral education in philosophy for children (pp. 13–28). Metzler.
Cinquino, D. (1981). An evaluation of a philosophy program with 5th and 6th grade academically talented students. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 2(3–4), 79–83.
Code, L. (1991). What can she know? Feminist theory and the construction of knowledge. Cornell University Press.
Costa Carvalho, M., & Mendonça, D. (2017). Thinking as a community: Reasonableness and emotions. In M. Gregory, J. Haynes & K. Murris (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of philosophy for children (pp. 127–134). Routledge.
Dalin, G. (1979). A philosophy for children workshop for Chicago teachers of the gifted. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 1(3–4), 40–42.
Davey, S. (2005). Creative, critical and caring engagements: Philosophy through inquiry. In D. Shepherd (Ed.), Creative engagements: Thinking with children (pp. 35–40). Inter-Disciplinary Press.
Davey Chesters, S. (2012). The Socratic classroom. Reflective thinking through collaborative inquiry. Sense Publishers.
Dewey, J. (1908). Responsibility and freedom. Accessed March 31, 2022. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/responsibility-and-freedom/
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Lexington.
Dewey, J. (1938a). Logic, the theory of inquiry. Holt.
Dewey, J. (1938b). Experience and education. Simon & Schuster.
Dewey, J. (1916–2014). Democracy and education. Aakar Books.
Dewey, J. (2013). A common faith (1934). Yale University Press.
Franzini Tibaldeo, R. (2014). Reframing and practicing community inclusion: The relevance of philosophy for children. Childhood & Philosophy, 10(20), 401–420.
Freire, P. (2001). Pedagogy of freedom. Ethics, democracy, and courage (1996). Rowman & Littlefield.
Garza, M. T. (2018). Education for Liberation. In M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 133–144). Routledge.
Gasparatou, R. (2017). Philosophy for/with children and the development of epistemically virtuous agents. In M. Gregory, J. Haynes & K. Murris (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of philosophy for children (pp. 103–110). Routledge.
Geisser, M. (1993). The role of language and stories in a community of inquiry with deaf children. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 11(1), 39–49.
Gibson, J. (2015). The ecological approach to visual perception (1979). Psychology Press.
Glaser, J. (1992). Reflections on personhood. Developing a sense of self through community of inquiry. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 10(1), 19–22.
Glaser, J. (2018). Social-political dimensions of the community of philosophical inquiry in an age of globalization. In M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 217–229). Routledge.
Green, L. (2017). Philosophy for children and developmental psychology: A historical review. In M. Gregory, J. Haynes & K. Murris (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of philosophy for children (pp. 37–45). Routledge.
Gregory, M. (2000). Care as a goal of democratic education. Journal of Moral Education, 29(4), 445–461.
Gregory, M. (2011). Philosophy for children and its critics: A Mendham dialogue. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 45(2), 199–219.
Gregory, M. (2022). Charles Peirce and the community of philosophical inquiry. Analytic Teaching and Philosophical Praxis, 42(1), 1–16.
Haas, H. (1976). The value of ‘philosophy for children’ within the Piagetian framework. Metaphilosophy, 7(1), 70–75.
Johnson, M. (1993). Moral imagination: Implications of cognitive sciences for ethics. University of Chicago Press.
Kennedy, D., & Kohan, W. (2017). Gert Biesta and philosophical work with children. Childhood & Philosophy, 13(28), 409–414.
Lee, K. (1986). Doing mark in a juvenile correctional facility. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 6(3), 9–16.
Levitas, R. (2013). Utopia as method: The imaginary reconstitution of society. Palgrave Macmillan.
Lipman, M. (1974). Harry Stottlemeier’s discovery (Revised). IAPC, Montclair State College.
Lipman, M. (1976). Philosophy for children. Metaphilosophy, 7(1), 17–33.
Lipman, M. (1980). Mark. IAPC, Montclair State College.
Lipman, M. (1985). Philosophical practice and educational reform. Journal of Thought, 20(4), 20–36.
Lipman, M. (1988). Philosophy goes to school. Temple University Press.
Lipman, M. (1991). Thinking in education. Cambridge University Press.
Lipman, M. (1995a). Moral education higher-order thinking and philosophy for children. Early Child Development and Care, 107(1), 61–70.
Lipman, M. (1995b). Caring as thinking. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 15(1), 1–13.
Lipman, M. (1996). Natasha: Vygotskian dialogues. Teachers College Press.
Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education. Cambridge University Press, second revised edition.
Lipman, M. (2008a). A life teaching thinking. IAPC, Montclair State University.
Lipman, M. (2008b). Philosophy for children’s debt to Dewey. In M. Taylor, H. Schreier & P. Ghiraldelli Jr. (Eds.), Pragmatism, education, and children. International philosophical perspectives (pp. 143–151). Rodopi.
Lipman, M. (2012). Matthew Lipman: An intellectual biography, edited by F. García Moriyón. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 20(1–2), 22–32.
Lipman, M., & Sharp, A. (1978). Can Moral education be divorced from philosophical education? In M. Lipman & A. Sharp (Eds.), Growing up with philosophy (pp. 338–367). Temple University Press.
Lipman, M., Sharp, A., & Oscanyan, F. (1977–1980). Philosophy in the classroom. IAPC, Montclair State College, 1977; second edition, Temple University Press, 1980.
Loretoni, A. (2014). Ampliare lo sguardo. Genere e teoria politica. Donzelli.
Masschelein, J. (2010). E-ducating the gaze: The idea of a poor pedagogy. Ethics and Education, 5(1), 43–53.
Morehouse, R. (2018). Caring thinking, education of the emotions and the community of inquiry. A psychological perspective. In M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 197–208). Routledge.
Murdoch, I. (1992). Metaphysics as a guide to morals. Chatto & Windus.
Neill, A. S. (1960). Summerhill. A radical approach to child rearing. Hart Publishing.
Noddings, N. (1984). Caring. A relational approach to ethics and moral education. University of California Press.
Nowell, L. (1992). ‘At Risk’: Development of personhood. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 10(1), 23–26.
Nussbaum, M. (1985). Philosophical books vs. philosophical dialogue. Thinking. The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 6(2), 13–14.
Nussbaum, M. (1996). Compassion: The basic social emotion. Social Philosophy and Policy, 13(1), 27–58.
Nussbaum, M. (2010). Not for profit. Why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton University Press.
Ortega Ruiz, P. (2004). Moral education as pedagogy of alterity. Journal of Moral Education, 33(3), 271–289.
Pappas, G. F. (1993). Dewey and feminism. The affective and relationships in Dewey’s ethics. Hypatia, 8(2), 78–95.
Peirce, C. S. (1955a). The fixation of belief (1877). In J. Buchler (Ed.), Philosophical writings of Peirce (pp. 5–22). Dover Publications.
Peirce, C. S. (1955b). The scientific attitude and fallibilism (1896–1899). In J. Buchler (Ed.), Philosophical writings of Peirce (pp. 42–59). Dover Publications.
Peirce, C. S. (1955c). Concerning the author (1897). In J. Buchler (Ed.), Philosophical writings of Peirce (pp. 1–4). Dover Publications.
Pritchard, M. (1996). Reasonable children. University Press of Kansas.
Rorty, R. (ed.). (1967–1992). The linguistic turn. Essays in philosophical method. With two retrospective essays. University of Chicago Press.
Rorty, R. (1982). Consequences of pragmatism. University of Minnesota Press.
Ryle, G. (2009). Collected papers (vol. 1). Critical essays. Routledge.
Saner, S., & Manzo, J. (2022). Respect, resourcefulness, and empathy: Philosophy for children case studies in environmental ethics. Teaching Ethics. https://doi.org/10.5840/tej2022822114
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass.
Sharp, A. (1975). Nietzsche’s view of sublimation in the educational process. The Journal of Educational Thought, 9(2), 98–106.
Sharp, A. (1975–2018). Education and culture: A Nietzschean perspective (1975). Republished in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 76–87). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (1976). The teacher as liberator: A Nietzschean view. Paedagogica Historica, 16(2), 387–422.
Sharp, A. (1978). Simone Weil on friendship. Philosophy Today, 22(4), 266–275.
Sharp, A. (1980). To my mirror. Unpublished poem composed on 4 December 1980. IAPC archive.
Sharp, A. (1981). Children’s intellectual liberation. Educational Theory, 31(2), 197–214.
Sharp, A. (1984a). Work and education in the thought of Simone Weil. Paedagogica Historica, 24(2), 493–515.
Sharp, A. (1984b). Philosophical teaching as moral education. Journal of Moral Education, 13(1), 3–8.
Sharp, A. (1986). The development of personhood and philosophy for children. Analytic Teaching, 6(2), 20–26.
Sharp, A. (1992). Discovering yourself as a person. In A. Sharp & R. Reed (Eds.), Studies in philosophy for children. Harry Stottlemeier’s discovery (pp. 56–63). Temple University Press.
Sharp, A. (1986–2018). Is there an essence of education? (1986). Reprinted in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 186–194). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (1987–2018). What is a ‘community of inquiry’? (1987). Republished in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 38–48). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (1991–2018). The community of inquiry: Education for democracy (1991). Reprinted in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 241–250). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (1992–2018). A letter to a novice teacher: Teaching ‘Harry Stottlemeier’s Discovery’ (1992). Reprinted in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 88–95). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (1993). Peirce, feminism, and philosophy for children. Analytic Teaching, 14(1), 51–62.
Sharp, A. (1994a). Introduction to the special double issue on “Women, feminism and philosophy for children.” Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 11(3–4), 1–4.
Sharp, A. (1994b). Feminism and philosophy for children: The ethical dimension. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 11(3–4), 24–28.
Sharp, A. (1995–2018a). Philosophy for children and the development of ethical values (1995). Reprinted in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 109–119). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (1995–2018b). The role of intelligent sympathy in educating for global ethical consciousness (1995). Reprinted in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 230–240). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (1996–2018a). Self-Transformation in the community of inquiry (1996). Reprinted in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 49–59). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (1996–2018b). Silence and speech in Pixie (1996). Republished in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 174–185). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (Ed.). (1997). Second special issue devoted to “Women, feminism and philosophy for children”. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 13(1), 1–48.
Sharp, A. (2004). And the children shall lead them. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 18(2), 177–187.
Sharp, A. (2004–2018). The other dimension of caring thinking (2004). Reprinted in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 209–214). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (2006). The face of the other. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 18(2), 43–47.
Sharp, A. (2007). Education of the emotions in the classroom community of inquiry. Gifted Education International, 22(2–3), 248–257.
Sharp, A. (2012). Philosophy for children: An educational path to philosophy. Interview with A. Sharp by M. Striano & S. Oliverio. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 20(1–2), 33–43.
Sharp, A. (2017). Philosophy in the school curriculum. In S. Naji & R. Hashim (Eds.), History, theory and practice of philosophy for children (pp. 30–42). Routledge.
Sharp, A. (s.d.a). Can we evaluate a philosophy for children session? Unpublished typescript probably composed by Sharp in her later years (approx. 2004) and preserved in the IAPC archive.
Sharp. A. (s.d.b). Beyond personalism. A poem probably composed in the 1980s and inspired by Simone Weil’s article on “Beyond Personalism”. Typescript preserved in the archive of the IAPC.
Sharp, A., & Gregory, M. (2009–2018). Towards a feminist philosophy of education (2009). Reprinted in M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 145–158). Routledge.
Sharp, A., & Guin, P. (1995). Educating for global consciousness: A philosophical approach. Unpublished incomplete typescript [detailed book project and the completed version of Chapter 6 on “Education of Intelligent Sympathy or Compassion”, then published autonomously by Ann Sharp (1995–2018b)]. IAPC archive.
Sharp, A., & Laverty, M. (2018). Looking at others’ faces. In M. Gregory & M. Laverty (Eds.), In community of inquiry with Ann Margaret Sharp: Childhood, philosophy and education (pp. 120–130). Routledge. A free revision of Sharp 2006.
Strauss, L. (1952). Persecution and the art of writing. Free Press.
Thayer-Bacon, B. (1993). Caring and its relationship to critical thinking. Educational Theory, 43(3), 323–340.
Thayer-Bacon, B. (2000). Transforming critical thinking. Thinking constructively. Teachers College Press.
UNESCO. (2007). Philosophy. A school of freedom. Unesco. Accessed March 31, 2022. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001541/154173e.pdf
Walczak, P. (2019). Why Piaget does not philosophize? Critical discussion of Gareth B. Matthews with the Piagetian concept of cognitive development. Childhood & Philosophy, 15, 1–25.
Weil, S. (1952). Beyond personalism (1942). CrossCurrents, 2(3), 59–76.
Young Silva, C. (1991). Environmental ethics? What? Why? How? Thinking. The Journal of Philosophy for Children, 9(2), 38–39.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Franzini Tibaldeo, R. (2023). Lipman and Sharp’s Philosophical-Educational Vision. In: Matthew Lipman and Ann Margaret Sharp. SpringerBriefs in Education(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24148-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24148-2_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-24147-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-24148-2
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)