Interview with Øyvind Olsholt, co-founder of Children and Youth Philosophers, Norway

by Saeed Naji, June 2005

1. In 2001 you gave a speech at the International conference "Philosophy in Society" in Oslo about the Norwegian approach to philosophy for children. Can you tell us briefly, what are the main characteristics of the Norwegian approach and how does it differ from other approaches (e.g. the Lipman-approach)?

First, I think it may be a bit early to talk about one specific Norwegian approach to philosophy for children. One may speak meaningfully of the "Anglo-American" and the "European Continental" approaches as two more or less separate flavours of today's philosophy for children-movement—a division very similar to the traditional division in the history of Western philosophy. The first approach focuses on language and logic, the second on metaphysics and "Weltanschauung". However, it is not my impression that it is possible to subdivide the two into clearly distinguishable national styles and methods. In most countries where you find philosophy for children, there seem to be an array of individual practitioners, or groups of practitioners, most of which have slightly different aims and strategies.

At least this is the case in Norway so far. We are still in the "eclectic mode", absorbing teachings and methodologies from a variety of sources. For instance, the French philosopher Oscar Brenifier has recently won the hearts of many Norwegian educators and practitioners with his philosophical "interrogation" technique combined with a useful dose of humour and histrionics. Others have sought inspiration from the Danes Sanne Nielsen and Per Jespersen—two remarkable personalities with lots of practical experience with children.

However, despite this pluralist tendency, there is no denying that the well-structured and comprehensive IAPC curriculum has been a major source of inspiration from day one. People have translated excerpts from the novels and manuals and tried to use them with the children; and educators and researchers have shown great interest in the theoretical body of works from the IAPC. There is, of course, also criticism. First, there is the usual complaint that the novels are boring to read. Besides, many teachers find them culturally foreign, bearing too much upon American culture and world-view. Therefore, teachers often prefer other kinds of literature as starting points in their philosophical communities (e.g. children's books). Second, some find that the IAPC-programme focuses too heavily on the child's logical reasoning and the appropriation of analytic thinking skills, thus failing to address the child's spiritual and artistic aspirations and abilities.

Third, there is the existential qualm that the IAPC uses philosophical thinking as a mere tool to achieve certain desirable (and external) ends: improved writing and reading, improved output in other school subjects, friendliness, democratic attitudes etc. The qualm is that one should not try to convert philosophy into an instrument for achieving extra-philosophical goals. Then it is not philosophy proper anymore, not in the Socratic, wisdom-loving sense where one thinks for the sake of thinking; then philosophy becomes a method among methods, a way of doing things, a procedure—a curriculum. Then the philosophical spirit somehow gets lost along the way.

2. Are the cultural elements effective in the foundation of the approach and its development? If yes, can you discuss it?

Yes, I would indeed say that cultural elements are effective in the formation of a national approach. One central cultural issue in Norway would be, to quote Oscar Wilde, "the importance of being earnest". Norwegians are traditionally sober and solemn people, not known for taking things too lightly (a trait no doubt formed by a less than favourable mix of heavy Protestant religious background and our inhospitable and barren nature). Therefore, when we do philosophy, be it with children or adults, it is usually a most serious and grave undertaking. We have pragmatic ideals too, of course, but the picture of philosophy as an esoteric art for the initiated still prevails with many educators. This can sometimes make it rather difficult to introduce philosophy for children to new audiences: they do not believe that this is something they can do. Maybe they nurture an idea of philosophy as something divine and mystic (like the Norwegian nature), something to be admired on a pedestal (much as we admired/hated the Danish public officials that ruled in Norway for hundreds of years).

Another cultural aspect of a Norwegian approach would be that of equality. Modern Scandinavia adheres strongly to social democratic thinking with justice and equality as leading ideals. Therefore, I think, Norwegians are culturally inclined also to think of children and adults as equals. I suspect that this is the main reason why we seek to treat children in a philosophical setting with humility and respect (an important facet of "caring thinking").

A third cultural aspect is nicety (which relates to equality). In Norway, people generally want to appear nice and polite. It is always important to have a good time, especially when you are with friends and family. Not surprisingly then, research shows that Norwegian parents are very concerned that their offspring feel loved. In fact, this is more important to the parents than to accomplish parenting with authority and predictability. Poor children: their parents love them to death! Another unsavoury consequence of this nicety is that we often avoid or escape underlying problems and conflicts. This can create huge problems for the philosophical community of inquiry. For instance, it makes adults afraid to stop children from chatting away although what they say is not even remotely relevant to the topic, or to point out to children that this is not a very good argument (or example, definition etc.), or to insist on questioning when the children give obvious hints that they are bored with questions etc. They are simply afraid to spoil the nice atmosphere in the classroom (which is of course exactly what happens)!

One reason for nicety is that many adults think of children as fragile and vulnerable creatures. Therefore, we must handle them with delicate care. However, one could easily argue that here the adults are simply projecting their own fragility and vulnerability on to the children, who are in fact not as limp as the adults are often thinking. This misapprehension is common in today's Norwegian society, but I hope to see some change in P4C practice in the near future. At least we will do what we can to meet this cultural challenge.

3. To what extent has P4C/PwC been successful in Norway?

Well, so far it has at least been successful in creating a general awareness of philosophy for children as a viable option in many different contexts with children. Thus, there have been P4C/PwC experiments carried out in numerous schools and kindergartens, and we, the Children and Youth Philosophers, have arranged philosophy clubs and philosophy summer camps for children. Many of these experiments and events have received a fair amount of media attention.

However, to measure the success of these activities is difficult. Children have reported that doing philosophy means a lot to them, e.g. that it gives them an opportunity to express their thoughts in a manner and in a degree not previously possible. Besides, the philosopher quite often baffles the children (in a positive way) by his or hers radical acceptances of any point of view that emanates from the group (provided the child give a reason).

To my knowledge, however, no one has yet carried out a major research study in order to establish the "scientific" validity and quality of P4C/PwC. We hope do to something in this field in the next year, though.

4. Are the children interested in doing P4C/PwC and to what extent do Norwegian leaders attach importance to it?

You mean, do the leaders bother whether children find philosophy fun or not? The question seems to be loaded. It implies that a typical thing for a P4C leader to do would be to carry on with his or her pet project regardless of feedback.

Anyway, as may be deduced from my above comments on "nicety", I do not think this is an issue in Norway. On the contrary, my impression is that educational leaders do consider the response from children in the implementation of new pedagogical schemes. For our own part, we always end each term or event by asking the participants for an evaluation.

That said it would be wrong to conclude that the momentum of the movement lies with the interest of the children. The development in Norway depends on a few dedicated individuals who work around the clock to gain a little new terrain every day.

Besides, there is no denying that children often show fatigue after confrontation with the rigour and consequence of the philosophical dialogue. We simply do not expect to round off each session with nothing but rejoicing, exuberant children! I think we have to live with the fact that true "philosophical enlightenment" is something rather unpredictable that occurs from time to time. I suppose the best we can do is to work steadily, with determination and inspiration, thereby showing the children that we always find inquiry worthwhile.

5. Can you tell us about the achievements of P4C/PwC in Norway? To what extent is it accomplished?

The philosophy for children-movement started to gain momentum in the latter half of the 1990's. At that time, different milieus, both governmental and private, started to pay attention to what looked more and more like a new international trend in education. Here I will mention the two oldest and most important milieus.

The first centres on Beate Børresen, associate professor at the Oslo University College. After having initiated the first major publication in Norwegian on philosophy for children—the book Philosophy in School (Filosofi i skolen), written by Ariane Schjelderup and Øyvind Olsholt, and published in 1999—she designed an adult education course at the OUC—"Philosophy with children"—in close collaboration with the Swedish expatriate Bo Malmhester. The course launched in 2001 and consists of two modules: "Philosophy with children—theory and practice" and "History of philosophy, ethics, and philosophy of science". Each module is one year although students may proceed with both modules simultaneously. Since this is a distance education course, the students, mostly teachers in primary and secondary school, do the greater part of their studying from home using the Internet to gain access to various educational resources at the OUC web. Four weekends a year, students come together at the OUC for workshops.

In 2003 Børresen/Malmhester wrote Let the children philosophize—the philosophical dialogue in school (La barna filosofere—den filosofiske samtale i skolen). This book was the second major philosophy for children-publication in Norwegian. Its main purpose was to aid teachers and other practitioners in the art of facilitating philosophical communities of inquiry with children. The last couple of years, besides running the adult education course at the OUC, Børresen/Malmhester have initiated several P4C-projects in Norwegian primary and secondary schools. The most prestigious project is probably the one at Marienlyst skole (primary school in Oslo) where all the 3rd- and 4th-graders have had philosophy sessions once a week for a year.

The second milieu is one that emerged from the Philosophy Institute at the University of Oslo in the 1990's. The Master students at the time wanted their philosophy degree to add up to something more than just another academic ivory tower education. They wanted to apply their acquired philosophical competence—just like a newly graduated medical student or dentist would be eager to start working in real life. As the years went by, however, the former students branched off into different directions. Many of them ended up pursuing academic carriers after all. Others followed the "narrow paths", and one of those paths was philosophy for children. Two philosophers chose this way back then, and that was Ariane Schjelderup (later to become my wife) and I.

In 2000—after engagements in two kindergartens and at the Museum for Contemporary Art in Oslo, and after having written the very first book in Norwegian on P4C (Filosofi i skolen)—Ariane and I established the company Children and Youth Philosophers (Barne- og ungdomsfilosofene ANS, www.buf.no). Since then we have done various philosophical work with children and with adults (mostly but not exclusively teachers), trying to promote P4C/PwC. Ariane wrote a book about Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle for teen-agers (Filosofi—Sokrates, Platon og Aristoteles). Last year we started a philosophy club in Oslo for children aged 8-12; and this summer we arrange philosophy summer camp for children for the second time.

I would also like to mention that in 2002, we started an ambitious project called Skoletorget (means "school market/square"), which is a web site for Norwegian primary and secondary school offering teaching material in the six basic subjects: Norwegian, English, Social Studies, Religion, Mathematics, and Natural Science. A vast range of philosophical questions and exercises accompanies all teaching material on this site. The idea is to help pupils and teachers to discover philosophy as an integral part of all school subjects. The Skoletorget project is perhaps particularly interesting in view of the latest declarations from the Norwegian Ministry of Education: "The Ministry would also like to stimulate new projects with philosophy as a separate subject in the school, as well as the use of philosophy in other subjects in the entire range of education." (From Parliamentary Proposition, no. 30—"Culture for Learning".)

Independently of the OUC, the Philosophy Institute at the University of Oslo, offered this spring an adult education course in P4C for the first time. The course, Philosophy as method, runs for one semester, and the students read selected philosophical texts and practice community of inquiry with groups of children. We (Children and Youth Philosophers) have been teachers on this course. There is now a new willingness at the University of Oslo to do more research and initiate more activities in this field, so I hope Norway's biggest University may establish itself as an interesting P4C centre in the future.

Finally, I would like to mention the University of Tromsø. Paul Opdal, one of the philosophy professors here, has been a promoter of P4C/PwC for many years. At this University, we also find Steinar Bøyum, a doctoral student in philosophy, soon to finish Norway's first dissertation related to P4C/PwC. His main theme is educational significance of philosophy. Bøyum has also published several articles, for instance in the IAPC journal Thinking (the latest article, Philosophical Experience in Childhood, appears in Volume 17, number 3).