Lee este blog en español:

Visit the blog of my Philosophy with Preschoolers project:

Read my Picture book reviews blog:

Visit the Wonder Ponder, Visual Philosophy for Children site:
Showing posts with label Social/Political Philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social/Political Philosophy. Show all posts

Sunday, May 6, 2012

Frederick: Community, Work and Poetry

Frederick, by Leo Lionni, 1967
Random House

This text is a reproduction of a module written by Nicole Giambalvo, translated by myself and revised by Mariana Zárate for Teaching Children Philosophy, a project Story Philosophy contributes to through translations and original contributions of picture book based philosophical discussion modules.  

The story
Winter is near and all the field mice are busy preparing and gathering food for the cold months ahead - all except for Frederick. Always the daydreamer, Frederick is preparing a small surprise that will warm the hearts and feed the spirits of his fellow mice when they need it most.

The philosophy in the story
The story Frederick raises philosophical questions regarding the nature of community, the value of work and the nature of poetry (and art in general).  




The Nature of Community
The Nature of Community and the social philosophy that governs community is the first issue we shall address. Frederick's story appears to be sympathetic to Collectivism, a term that describes any moral, political or social outlook that stresses human interdependence and the importance of a collective, rather than the importance of separate individuals. Early socialist and communist philosophers inspired Collectivists, like Hegel and Marx. Collectivists are concerned with community and society and seek to give priority to group goals over individual goals. They believe that a type of “social contract” exists in which the terms of this contract are decided by the “general will” of the people. In the story, Frederick contributed to the mouse community in a different way than the other mice. Yet, did he violate the social contract by not also helping to gather food?

Questions for philosophical discussion regarding the nature of community: 

"I am gathering words. For the winter days are long and many, and we'll run out of things to say ."
  • What makes a community?
  • Try to think of some communities you are a part of. How do you know they are communities?
  • Your school is a community and everybody contributes something to it. The mice have a community, too, and everyone is contributing something. What and how do the mice contribute?
  • Does everybody have to do his or her part in a community?
  • What does Frederick contribute?
  • Frederick is a part of the mouse community. Does Frederick deserve to get some of the food even though he didn’t gather any of it?
  • Do you think it’s fair that he gets some of the food? Why or why not?
The Nature and Value of Work

Frederick also poses questions about the Nature of Work. There are many arguments about what actions are considered to be work, and it is not clear-cut in our society what is considered work and what isn't. In the story, Frederick does not physically work, but still makes a contribution to the mouse family. Is Frederick working? 

Karl Marx's Labor theory of value suggests that the labor one does is only equal to its value in society. Use-value determines the value of goods produced. Marx would view Frederick's contribution as not socially necessary or not valuable or as valuable as the other mice's contribution, since they contributed to the survival of the whole family. If they had not run out of food, Frederick's poetry may not have had any use-value. 

On the otherhand, one might argue that Frederick's contribution was necessary. Perhaps poetry is unique and only valued for as much as one is willing to pay. If Frederick were a famous poet, would his poetry be more valuable? Again, the focus on community and the roles of people in their community are addressed. Part of Marx's socialist theory stated that everyone would have to do some work in order to reap the benefits. Is it fair that Frederick gets to eat the food?

Questions for philosophical discussion regarding the nature of work: 
“I do work,” said Frederick. “I gather sun rays for the cold dark winter days.” 
  • Do you think Frederick is working?
  • When do you feel like you’re working?
  • If you like something is it still work?
  • Do you think going to school is work?
  • Is your favorite subject work? What about your least favorite subject?
  • Does work have to be hard? Why or why not?
  • What is the difference between work and play? Give an example of something you do that you think is work and something you think is play.
  • Do you have to be paid for working? Why or why not?
  • Some people play professional sports and they get paid, are they working?
  • Do only adults work?
  • Does work have to be physical? Why or why not?
  • What can or can’t be work?
  • Is thinking work?

Questions for philosophical discussion regarding the value of work:
"What about your supplies, Frederick?"
  • What makes a type of work important?
  • Do you think Frederick’s work was worth as much as the other mice’s work? Why or why not?
  • If something is not important or not as important does that mean it’s not work?
  • Can they both be equally important, but in different ways? What are the differences?
  • What would have happened to the mice if Frederick hadn’t written poetry?
The Nature and Value of Poetry (and Art)

The social importance of art and the role of the artist in society are other topics addressed in the story. What was Frederick's role? Many poets debate these questions among themselves. Some focus on how much or why a poet is paid to write as essential to knowing the social function of poetry. Others say the content of poetry reflects its specific utility, or that the way a poem makes us feel and connects us to other human beings serves as its social function. Still others argue that poetry's social function is to just be, that one can take what she wants from poetry. Thus, the importance of poetry, or any type of art, in our society is not clear. Frederick's contribution of poetry to the mouse family was useful, but many would argue that food and shelter are more important than art in regards to the family's survival.

Questions for philosophical discussion regarding the nature and value of poetry:
"But Frederick," they said, "you are a poet!"
  • Do you like poetry? How about Frederick’s poem? Why or why not?
  • Why do people write poetry?
  • Is being a poet a job? Why or why not?
  • Is poetry work or play? Why?
  • Do people need poetry? Is it important? Why or why not?
  • Was having poetry as important as having food for the mice? What about for people? Why or why not?
  • Why is it important for people to have art such as paintings, poetry, and music?
This text is a reproduction of a module written by Nicole Giambalvo, translated by myself and revised by Mariana Zárate for Teaching Children Philosophy, a project Story Philosophy contributes to through translations and original contributions of picture book based philosophical discussion modules.
(c) of all the illustrations in this post, Leo Lionni, 1967

The Big Box: Rules and Freedom


The Big Box, by Toni Morrison and Giselle Potter
Hyperion Books, 1999

This text is a reproduction of a module written by Taryn Hargrove, Mary Cowhey and Thomas Wartenberg, and translated by Mariana Zárate and revised by myself for Teaching Children Philosophy, a project Story Philosophy contributes to through translations and original contributions of picture book based philosophical discussion modules.  





















The story
Because they do not abide by the rules written by the adults around them, three children are judged unable to handle their fredom and forced to live in a box with three locks on the door. 

The philosophy in the story
The Big Box is about three very energetic children "who just can't handle their freedom". To make these children abide by the rules, the grown-ups create a world inside a box, a world with toys and games, treats and gifts, and all kinds of stuff they think kids need to be happy and carefree. They are three locks on the door, which opens only one way. 

Life inside the box
The first set of questions is designed to elicit discussion regarding the life in the box. 


Life in the box, depending on how you look at it, may be a happy place for the children. The children can be who they are and have no one judge or punish them. They are free to do what they want in that confined area. On the other hand the box could be an unhappy place for the children. The children are given everything that adults assume would make the children happy. Are the children happy with all the clothes, toys, and candy? What makes us happy? There is a conflict between happiness and what people perceive happiness to be? Some children consider happiness to be freedom of speech and freedom to do what they what. Other children may be happy with materialistic things. 


The questions make us think about what truly makes us happy. If you were put into the box, what would you choose to put in the box with you? Why do the children stay in the box? Some may say they are scared to go out and face the rest of the world. Others may say that they are happy in their own little world.

Questions to prompt philosophical discussion about life in the box

  • What is a one-way door?
  • Does our classroom open two ways or one?
  • What are the locks for?
  • What's good about life in the box?
  • Do kids need toys, snacks, and cool clothes?
  • If they have cool toys, clothes, snacks and other stuff in the box, why aren't they happy?
  • What would we need to give you that would make you happy to live in the box?
  • Why do they stay in the box?
The meaning of rules
The second set of questions explores the meaning of rules. These questions allow us to evaluate whether rules are important in our communities. What would happen if our society did not have rules? Rules are important for structure, organization, and safety in society. Do the rules we have make our communities perfect? Even though we have rules we still have the freedom to make our own decisions.

Questions to prompt philosophical discussion about the meaning of rules

  • Do we need rules in our homes, classroom, school, and community? Why?
  • Who makes the rules?
  • Who has to follow them?
  • What if there were no rules?
  • Would you like to go to a school with no rules?
  • What would be good about it? What might be bad about it?
  • What are some good rules that you like at home or at school?
  • What rules did the kids follow?
  • Did anyone even notice what they did right?
  • What are appropriate consequences for breaking rules?

The concept of freedom
Freedom is the last topic of discussion. We are absolutely sure that there are at least some cases where we make decisions, and that in making them we are free and hence responsible for these decisions. We cannot imagine what it would be like to live in a community in which there is no such thing as responsibility. On the other hand, does freedom actually exist? With a lack of resources are we still free to do what you wish to do? Freedom appears to be impossible in a world where everything runs its ordinary course and no irregularities happen. But why is that so?

Questions to prompt philosophical discussion about the concept of freedom

  • What does that line mean, when the adults say to the kids, "You simple can't handle your freedom."?
  • What if parents decided that their two year old could handle her freedom and just let their baby go free? What would happen?
  • What if the parents decided you could completely handle your freedom and just told you to go free? What would happen?
  • When you are 18 years old, do you think you will be ready to "go free"?
  • When you are free, do you still have to follow some rules?
  • Why do people call the United States of America a free country if there are rules here?
  • If a two year old is not able to handle freedom, what would make someone older ready to handle freedom?
  • What does the older person know or have that the two year old doesn't?
This text is a reproduction of a module written by Taryn Hargrove, Mary Cowhey and Thomas Wartenberg, and translated by Mariana Zárate and revised by myself for Teaching Children Philosophy, a project Story Philosophy contributes to through translations and original contributions of picture book based philosophical discussion modules.  

(c) of all the illustrations in this post, Giselle Potter, 1999