Teaching Philosophy To Children

Parents and teachers alike want their pupils and children to become something grand. They wish success for them. These children are the future! They are the next generation of doctors, dentists, statesmen, scientists, chemists, and caregivers. Instructors demand rigor, the student advocates complacency. The higher objective becomes inanely difficult when the child desires nothing more than to satisfy base desires for apathy and entertainment. How do you sufficiently inspire them? It comes down to the thoughts and the free will of the child; the philosophy, if you will. A person, no matter the age, acts based on their worldviews and inner philosophy.

Children come with different attributes and dispositions which comprise their personality. Some children seem to be innately charismatic while others are witty, gentle, angry, rebellious, athletic, intelligent, heroic, simple, hawkish, enterprising, or passionate. The children come into this world with their own deck of cards to play. Upon this deck, they build the inklings of their foundling philosophy. The young athlete, will automatically assume based on his empirical observation that he achieves ends through that skill. Thereby strength and stamina are the summum bonum (the greatest good) of his existence. When faced between applied study and athletic expression, he will choose the latter. Understanding the philosophical drive of the student will always enhance the parent or teacher's ability to educate the student and bring out their best self. 

Some students are more difficult than others. How do you discover the philosophy of the child? something that has been found to be successful is simply having a simple, candid conversation with the person. Ask them questions to help them think about what they believe. for example, what do they believe the purpose of life is? what do they believe about themselves? do they have a large ego or are they self depredating? what do they think the greatest good is? 

It's important that you have a good relationship with this person for this conversation to have success. If the relationship is poor, the child will believe you might not have their best interest in mind. They may believe you have an agenda to run and that you not yield any "personal sovereignty" to them. this is fuel for defiance which expresses itself in arguing, non-compliance, giving canned responses, and playing political games. in other words the person could feel threatened. If this is the circumstances you find yourself in, then you must do to things: build the relationship by selfless service (yes, even to the chid) and by setting expectations at the beginning of the conversation about what you are trying to achieve. 

an example of a conversation with a difficult child might look like this;

Raymond: "Mom, I'm going out with friends in a little while."

Mom: "Which friends?"

Raymond: "guys from school."

Mom: "Ok, what can I do to expedite your travels?'

Raymond: "…Uh, can I have money for gas?"

Mom: "Sure. Here you are." pause "Can I ask you a question? What do you think your purpose in life is? I'm just curious what you think and want to know if I am helping you fulfill your purpose as a mother."

Raymond: "Err… I don't really know."

Mom: "That's okay, I know you will find it. Your friends are pulling up. Have fun! Make good choices!"

Raymond: "I will Mom!"

Note some interesting things "Mom" said in this conversation. She acknowledged her sons agency to make choices. This gave Raymond no latitude to argue while at the same time putting him in a position of responsibility for his actions. She asked questions, but did not pry. She expressed confidence in him. She served her son by helping him reach his on objectives. She asked a question geared towards inspiring her son and casually introducing his mind to a higher plain of thought. Questions will allays direct the mind to the determiners subject. While in a mode of higher thought, poor choices are harder to make. If Raymond was thinking about his purpose in life, would he do something dumb? If he knew his purpose in life with whom else would he be associating with? What would he be doing differently? 

Different Philosophies lead to different choice patterns. Until the backbone of philosophy changes, actions will remain more or less the same. If Raymond was an Epicurean, he would think that pleasure was the highest good and would make him happy. Therefore he would indulge in the things of the world. The spiritual counterpart is epicureanism and the physical manifestation is fast living. 

Ultimately, being able to help a child take out their assumptions and examine them are vitally important to helping them develop into hearty adults. Even the mature person will benefit from some self-examination once in a while. The more conscious decisions we make, the better position we will be in to make them good ones.