




















































Book Review Philosophy and Childhood: Critical Perspectives and Affirmative Practices


BOOK REVIEWS FOR ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS   Volume 35 (2014) 

 

59 
 

Book Review 

Philosophy and Childhood: Critical Perspectives and 
Affirmative Practices 

 
Review by Richard Morehouse   
 

Philosophy and Childhood: Critical Perspectives and Affirmative Practices  
Walter Omar Kohan 
Palgrave MacMillan, 2014. 
172 pages  

      ISBN-10: 1137469161  
      ISBN-13: 9781137469168 
 

he first bit of context for this fascinating work is that it unfolds before the reader in a 
subtle and intimate manner.  For example, the chapter headings do not foreshadow the 
depth of content or method of the book, as they often do in other works. On the other 

hand, after reading the entire book thoroughly and reflecting back, perhaps something of the 
books’ extraordinary depth does begin to reveal itself in the way it’s put together. Let’s begin with 
the following quote.  
 

Given the centrality of collaborative philosophizing in our project, our goal 
has been to organize an experience without pre-determined methods or 
curriculum material, and to approach pedagogical practice like an artist, who 
needs not only skill and practical sensibilities but also radical openness to the 
world (p. 89). 

 
       Read out of context the above quote may seem like an idea that has been stated many times 
before and so may be expected to have little, if any, genuine impact on the reader. Alternately, it 
might appear as an impossible dream of an armchair philosopher. However, read in context, that 
is, after the nearly 90 pages that precede and set up this passage, the statement is rife with 
meaning and significance for teachers and students alike. Rather than explain the quotation 
now, I will attempt to place it within the larger context of the work.  
 

For now, let’s get back to examining the book idea-by-idea, chapter-by-chapter. Even before 
the book begins, there is a Forward by Maughn Gregory that needs to be recognized. Dr. Gregory 
notes that the book is an intersection of childhood philosophy and education that will challenge 
the reader both singularly and at their intersection points.  Maughn further states that the book 
is “idiosyncratic and universal”; something of no small order and no small accomplishment. This 
introduction prepares the reader for what is to come —a critique of P4C based on “[m]y own 
practice with children and educators” leading to a strong belief in the educational possibilities 
of the practice of philosophy with children and teachers along with “serious doubts 
(philosophical, educational, political) regarding the benefits of the application of the Institute 
for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children (IAPC) model” (p. 3). One of Kohan’s points 
is that there has been too much praise and condemnation and too little critique of the Lipman 
program. Kohan begins by recognizing three important elements of Lipman’s approach to 

T 



BOOK REVIEWS FOR ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS   Volume 35 (2014) 

 

60 
 

philosophy: 1) philosophy is about questioning (critical, creative, and caring thinking), 2) 
distributive thinking, and 3) self-corrective questioning (logical and dialogical inquiry). However, 
Kohan calls Lipman to task for limiting the scope, conceptualization, and form within which 
philosophical questions are asked. Kohan argues that the power of philosophical questioning is 
in the ability or willingness to put “ourselves into the question” (p. 6). “Collective philosophical 
inquiry always expands the field of the problematic in us, to us, within us” (p. 6). To do anything 
less is to stop being philosophical. Kohan’s reading of Jaspers is that philosophy is informed by 
wonder, doubt and commotion to which he adds dissatisfaction. This is, in my view, not only a 
part of Kohan’s reading of the world, but also his reading of Paulo Freire. The presentation of 
the idea of dissatisfaction leads to a fuller examination of the relationship of philosophy, 
education and politics (section 1.3). There is more to the critique of Lipman’s P4C in this short 
chapter, but I leave it to the reader to discover the implications of this critique for themselves.  
 

Chapter 2 is “The Celebration of 30 years of Philosophy for Children.” On a personal note, 
I was pleased to read that Kohan included his participation in an early conference of the North 
American Association for Community of Inquiry (NAACI) as formative in his education along 
with three visits to Mendham. For anyone who has not experienced an extended encounter at 
Mendham, Kohan provides some insight into its transformative powers, but in his spirit of 
critique which is the leitmotif of the work, he also includes his critique of Mendham —its 
disconnection with the issues of the larger world. It is his discussion of Invented Memories: 
Childhood, however, that, at least for me, struck home the most. The passage from Manoel Barros 
that Kohan cites “All that I do not invent is false” mirror and extend Piaget’s “To invent is to 
understand.”  
 

Kohan’s discussion of Lipman and Sharp in his chapter “Goodbye to Matthew Lipman (and 
Ann Margret Sharp)” is personal and touching and provides a gentle transition to “The Politics 
of Formation: A Critique of Philosophy for Children.” Kohan’s critical voice here is to me 
reminiscent of Erich Fromm. Among my memories of reading Fromm for the first time so many 
years ago, is Fromm’s use of etymology as a teaching tool. Kohan continues this tradition with 
his presentation of “formation.” Drawing on Plato, Kohan discusses the equivocal meaning of 
formation. 
 

In this text of the Republic, it is someone external — the educator, the 
philosopher, the politician, the legislator, the founder of the pólis — who will 
think and plant in each child the seed of what he or she should be in the 
future. Implicit here is the idea of education as giving form to another (p. 
33). 

 
The child is to fit into a given society, and, by implication, a given social order. “When 

philosophy is practiced to affirm a politics —or a morality, a pedagogy, a religion, or any other 
determinate order— it disables. Morals, pedagogy, politics, and religion are problems for 
philosophy, not arrival points” (p.41). Kohan goes on to suggest that what makes philosophy 
possible is the empty space within which we can interrogate politics, religion and morality. This 
ends the first section of the book —“Philosophy for Children: Critical Perspectives.” 
 

The second part of the book is entitled “Philosophy in Children: Affirmative Practices.” The 
statement philosophy “in” children sets it off from both “for” and “with” children. What are the 
differences among the prepositions for, with and in? For implies doing something to someone, 



BOOK REVIEWS FOR ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS   Volume 35 (2014) 

 

61 
 

with implies being together, and in is at least initially a bit of a puzzle. The chapters in this section 
provide a sense of what is meant by philosophy in children as each chapter contains classroom 
dialogue. Part of my understanding of how Kohan uses the preposition in here is exemplified by 
the phrase “in their own words.” Kohan writes about the development of “self-determined 
subjectivity.” This may be why the dialogues are so important in this section of the book —they 
give voice to the subjectivity of the children. Children’s subjectivity is often suppressed by the 
dominant voices of society. Therefore, children, especially those at the margins of the dominant 
society, “need the intellectual and affective supplies in order to think more complexly and 
thoroughly about their lives” (p. 52). The stated goal of the project in the “Philosophy at Public 
Schools of Brasilia, DF” is “to suggest a direction toward a collective construction, developed 
through philosophical inquiry” as a set of ideas that are “open, problematic, questioning 
contestable and subject to controversy” (p. 60). 
 

“(Some) Reasons for Doing Philosophy with Children” is the title of the sixth chapter. The 
chapter is informed and shaped by the dialogue of the children taken from the details of the 
activities provided in chapter five. In the name of the students, Kohan make a case for radical 
educational reform. He argues that education should find its focus on transforming ourselves 
and our relationships, rather than transforming others, i.e., students; and “second, that our 
politics is fulfilled, not in the end, but in the beginning and in process – in the transformation 
of thinking that enables us to think philosophically together and to think through philosophy” 
(p. 66). The usual etymology of philosophy is “a friend of, or lover of knowledge.” Here the 
inversion of the etymology is suggested —friendship is both a condition and a beginning for 
thinking. It is both an old beginning and a new one; we do not think except in a friendly 
environment. While this understanding of philosophy may appear similar to how many who 
work in philosophy with children might talk about philosophy, I invite the reader to think again 
about what lies behind and beyond these words in light of the argument presented in this work, 
and argument for which I cannot, in this short review, do justice. 
 

“Philosophizing with Children at a Philosophy Camp,” chapter seven, documents some of 
Kohan’s classroom work in Korea, and is riveting in terms of the depth of philosophy he 
managed to achieve engaging the students. As this chapter illustrates, Kohan is not afraid of 
bringing the ideas and words of political leaders and philosophers to students. The class opens 
with the students reading a short story “The Story of the Search” written by the Mexican Sub 
Marcos, one of the leaders of the Zapatista Army for National Liberation. The students also read 
Plato’s Apology of Socrates as well as a short piece from the beginning of Nietzsche’s Zarathustra. 
What is so exciting about this Philosophy Camp is the depth of discussion achieved by the 
students and the skill of the facilitator at leading the discussion. While Kohan does not state it, 
to this reviewer he recreated a Mendham experience for these high school aged students. Quite 
an accomplishment! 
 

I will now address the quotation that opened this review, which is arguably the core 
perspective at the heart of chapter eight entitled “Does Philosophy fit in Caxis? A Latin American 
Project” (Caxis is short for Duque de Caxis, a suburb of Rio de Janeiro).  
 

Given the centrality of collaborative philosophizing in our project, our goal 
has been to organize an experience without pre-determined methods or 
curriculum material, and to approach pedagogical practice like an artist, who 



BOOK REVIEWS FOR ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS   Volume 35 (2014) 

 

62 
 

needs not only skill and practical sensibilities but also radical openness to the 
world (Kohan, p.89). 

 
This quote, coming as it does near the end of the book, struck me as a place to begin as it might 
shake the reader out of complacency while at the same time providing some enticement to engage 
with the ideas of this truly liberating work. To read this book is to enter into the world of radical 
philosophical educational theory and practice. To this reviewer it exemplifies Paulo Freire’s 
definition of praxis, that is, a radial integration of theory and practice, woven together so tightly 
it ends up redefining the very meaning of education.  
 

The final chapter is “Philosophy as Spiritual and Political Exercise in an Adult Literary 
Course.” It continues the radical spirit of praxis that Walter Kohan advocates and models 
throughout the book, and leaves us with a vivid picture of how he has practiced philosophy with 
children.  

 
Kohan’s book is one that inspires its readers to accept the challenge that comes with being 

both teachers and students of philosophy. The book is a must read! 
 

Address Correspondences to: 
 

Dr. Richard Morehouse, Emeritus Professor  
Viterbo University, La Crosse, WI.  
remorehouse@viterbo.edu 


