Abstract

This text aims to perform a “fly over” the Philosophy for Children program--created by the philosopher and educator Matthew Lipman-–in order to identify certain philosophical problems that might appear there, one of them being the issue of universality. In response to Lipman’s claims of universality, we try to uncover his underlying ideological position that informs his approach to the concept. To achieve that goal, we return to the program’s beginnings, in order to ask how the idea of Philosophy for Children appeared and how it has developed up to the present moment. We argue that Lipman’s novel proposal to think philosophically with children emerged, in part, as a response to the student movements of 1968--a response, that is, to a specific political context that was marked by strong social and ideological disputes. Finally, we make a comparative analysis of the social and political context that informs Latin American Philosophy, and the extent to which it, also, has been shaped by a pragmatic response to a particular historical moment. The difference between the Anglo-American and the Latin American contexts is here characterized as an obstacle to a certain “universal” logos to which the Lipmanian project is linked. Our analysis is aided by the Discourse of marginalization and barbarism, produced by the Mexican philosopher Leopoldo Zea.