Why don’t schools teach philosophy as part of Religious Education

[Kdtym10]

Well my DS’s school calls it Life and Morality not RE, but when asked they confirmed it was just religion and no philosophy.

I would think that given say Platonism ‘s (esp later Platonisms) influence on the doctrines of all the Abrahamic faiths it would be useful to learn about this common theme, surely it’s best to teach about common denominators?

Or is there something objectionable in learning about the actual development of religion? To this end, schools very rarely (if ever) touch upon the very early church and the impact of politics on what then becomes the orthodox view. Surely a school should be equipping children with critical analysis skills.

[ErinAoife]

In my kid's school, Re covers all religion. Philosophy should be a subject on its own

[pinkdelight]

I did some philosophy as part of my degree so I get what you're talking about, but the way you're saying it, this doesn't sound like KS1-4 territory.

[Kdtym10]

@ErinAoife

In my kid's school, Re covers all religion. Philosophy should be a subject on its own

Why though, intergration got as part of RE is the whole point.

[wubwubwub]

You know enough about it, you teach your own kid it if you want.

Schools can't teach everything.

[Kdtym10]

@pinkdelight

I did some philosophy as part of my degree so I get what you're talking about, but the way you're saying it, this doesn't sound like KS1-4 territory.

Why not though? My 11 year old gets it. Surely it’s about switching the focus on how it’s taught?

[GoodOldEmmaNess]

I don't understand why philosophy should be taught as part of religious education, rather than as a subject in its own right. Of course early philosophical ideas influenced the course of religious ideas (and vice versa) but, equally, there was the same mutual influence between, say, philosophy and science, or philosophy and sociology, etc.

I think a lot of schools might broach philosophy as part of teaching critical thinking skills. Beyond that, I'm not sure it is helpful or appropriate to teach philosophy at a young age. Much better just to stimulate critical thinking across the curriculum, and leave philosophy to be picked up by young people if and when they are inspired by it. The dreary alternative is a horribly dumbed down and pre-processed schoolchild 'philosophy' that would be an obstruction to later philosophical thought.

[Kdtym10]

@wubwubwub

You know enough about it, you teach your own kid it if you want.

Schools can't teach everything.

I have done thanks. But not all parents can. Why have RE at all? Why have art? Music? Science? If schools can’t teach everything, on what basis do you prioritise? Surely it’s more important to make sure religion is properly understood given the amount of wars, terrorism and hatred it leads to? I would say it definitely needs prioritising.

[NaughtPoppy]

My kid’s school has Philosophy and ethics as the subject, although the GCSE they take us RE.

[AbsentCause]

My DC is doing a GCSE which is half a special study of a specific religion, and half philosophy. So presumably it’s about whether schools choose that particular curriculum option.

[Kdtym10]

@GoodOldEmmaNess

I don't understand why philosophy should be taught as part of religious education, rather than as a subject in its own right. Of course early philosophical ideas influenced the course of religious ideas (and vice versa) but, equally, there was the same mutual influence between, say, philosophy and science, or philosophy and sociology, etc.

I think a lot of schools might broach philosophy as part of teaching critical thinking skills. Beyond that, I'm not sure it is helpful or appropriate to teach philosophy at a young age. Much better just to stimulate critical thinking across the curriculum, and leave philosophy to be picked up by young people if and when they are inspired by it. The dreary alternative is a horribly dumbed down and pre-processed schoolchild 'philosophy' that would be an obstruction to later philosophical thought.

But surely every subject is “dumbed down” For kids. Why bother teaching a “dumbed down” science, history or maths?

I agree philosophy has influenced all areas of thought but we don’t see wars fought over Jane Austin. Surely it’s important to teach RE with its proper background. I would also advocate for more historical context. At the moment RE seems to target differences.

[Kdtym10]

@AbsentCause

My DC is doing a GCSE which is half a special study of a specific religion, and half philosophy. So presumably it’s about whether schools choose that particular curriculum option.

Ah that sounds interesting. How is your FC finding it?

[wubwubwub]

@Kdtym10

I have done thanks. But not all parents can. Why have RE at all? Why have art? Music? Science? If schools can’t teach everything, on what basis do you prioritise? Surely it’s more important to make sure religion is properly understood given the amount of wars, terrorism and hatred it leads to? I would say it definitely needs prioritising.

More important than understanding how the world works and bow to make music, how to encourage creativity?

Nonsense.

Just like they don't teach Chinese and China Studies, despite them being a huge world power changing the shape of our history.... And they don't teach US politics or teach us how to harness wind energy or Latin, so we all have a thorough understanding of language and how it developed...

Some things aren't part of a general education 🤷‍♀️

[Octavia64]

There are options for gcse RE which include philosophy and ethics.

It's up to schools what options they pick.

[AbsentCause]

@Kdtym10 Enjoying the philosophy side more than the special study, which seems to be quite ‘learn these facts’. But not enough to take philosophy A level.

[GoodOldEmmaNess]

"Surely it’s more important to make sure religion is properly understood given the amount of wars, terrorism and hatred it leads to?"

So, it is the history of religion that you want to be taught better, not philosophy? They aren't interchangeable, even though there was obviously some interplay between the two sets of thought.

But surely every subject is “dumbed down” For kids. Why bother teaching a “dumbed down” science, history or maths?

One key difference is that philosophy is partly about the quality of thought and the methods of thought and discourse. In that sense it is a set of skills rather than a body of knowledge. For children, those skills should be taught by means of approaches across the curriculum that foster critical thinking. Specialisation into formal philosphical thoughts and methods comes later, just as maths beyond a certain level comes later (etc). The danger is that the early introduction of formal philosophy would not, in fact, foster the skills that philosophy relies on, and would in fact have the opposite effect.

[GoodOldEmmaNess]

Early approaches to philosophy by children are best kept as a form of playful creative exploration. Which is best done at home or alone, or as an incidental consequence of reading novels, watching films, etc, rather than in the exams factory that our schools have become

[NewYearNewCalendar]

As others have said, schools can teach philosophy from GCSE at least. I did it at a level. Those of us doing it alongside maths found it a lot easier than those doing it alongside history etc! Philosophy is an amazing thing to study for critical thinking skills.

I do agree that understanding religion as a driver in the world is important. It’s what my degree and postgrad was all about. But honestly I don’t think philosophy is a massive part of that. My frustration is that religion gets dumbed down in school - even at a level - to “this is what xyz think” with a very very limited historical, sociological and political context. I’d rather more time be spent on that than on the development of philosophy side.

[Kdtym10]

@GoodOldEmmaNess

"Surely it’s more important to make sure religion is properly understood given the amount of wars, terrorism and hatred it leads to?"

So, it is the history of religion that you want to be taught better, not philosophy? They aren't interchangeable, even though there was obviously some interplay between the two sets of thought.

But surely every subject is “dumbed down” For kids. Why bother teaching a “dumbed down” science, history or maths?

One key difference is that philosophy is partly about the quality of thought and the methods of thought and discourse. In that sense it is a set of skills rather than a body of knowledge. For children, those skills should be taught by means of approaches across the curriculum that foster critical thinking. Specialisation into formal philosphical thoughts and methods comes later, just as maths beyond a certain level comes later (etc). The danger is that the early introduction of formal philosophy would not, in fact, foster the skills that philosophy relies on, and would in fact have the opposite effect.

But herein lies the problem. The siloing of thought and education. No it’s not just the history, well in a way it is, but teaching the history requires a knowledge of philosophy.

Why would the early introduction of philosophy hamper the skills philosophy relies upon. It’s not harmed my 11 year
old.

[Kdtym10]

@NewYearNewCalendar

As others have said, schools can teach philosophy from GCSE at least. I did it at a level. Those of us doing it alongside maths found it a lot easier than those doing it alongside history etc! Philosophy is an amazing thing to study for critical thinking skills.

I do agree that understanding religion as a driver in the world is important. It’s what my degree and postgrad was all about. But honestly I don’t think philosophy is a massive part of that. My frustration is that religion gets dumbed down in school - even at a level - to “this is what xyz think” with a very very limited historical, sociological and political context. I’d rather more time be spent on that than on the development of philosophy side.

I agree there needs to be a wider context used in RE. But interested to hear why you don’t think philosophy is important in that given its unquestionable influence on the development of religions.

[NewYearNewCalendar]

Because philosophy’s impact on religions has primarily been on their thought, rather than practice, and the importance of religion in world history is primarily due to its practice, not thought. In so far as you can separate thought and practice which obviously is not a simple dividing line.

[Kdtym10]

@GoodOldEmmaNess

Early approaches to philosophy by children are best kept as a form of playful creative exploration. Which is best done at home or alone, or as an incidental consequence of reading novels, watching films, etc, rather than in the exams factory that our schools have become

I would argue that you could say that about all subjects schools teach because formal education is now often a bit of a shit show/multiple choice exercise only focused on exams rather than education.

[wigywhoo]

At DS school it's combined and seemed to be mainly philosophy focussed years 7-9. Obviously now combined GCSE option.

[Kdtym10]

@NewYearNewCalendar

Because philosophy’s impact on religions has primarily been on their thought, rather than practice, and the importance of religion in world history is primarily due to its practice, not thought. In so far as you can separate thought and practice which obviously is not a simple dividing line.

So can you explain this further? I’m confused as to where you are drawing the line between thought and practice.

[Kdtym10]

@wigywhoo

At DS school it's combined and seemed to be mainly philosophy focussed years 7-9. Obviously now combined GCSE option.

Great, thanks for sharing. And does your DS think it’s been helpful to combine philosophy and RE?

[twistyizzy]

@Kdtym10 DDs school teaches REP: religion, ethics and philosophy. DD hated religion until she started doing the E+P parts and now can see how they are all linked. It is now one of her favourite subjects.
I agree that religion shouldn't be taught in a silo..