#35 Megan Laverty | Philosophy of Education and Human Formation
TRANSCRIPT SUMMARY
(This transcript summary was AI-generated and then edited by the podcast hosts for quality assurance)
#35 Megan Laverty | Philosophy of Education and Human Flourishing
- a podcast dialogue with Michael Noah Weiss and Guro Hansen Helskog
INTRODUCTION
Professor Megan Laverty, Professor of Philosophy and Education at Teachers College, Columbia University, joins the ResponsAbility Podcast for a wide-ranging conversation on philosophy, education, and the role of the humanities in contemporary society. Drawing on decades of work in philosophy of education, Philosophy for Children, and the moral philosophy of Iris Murdoch, Laverty presents education not primarily as the transmission of knowledge but as an ongoing process of human formation. Throughout the dialogue, she argues that philosophy is not a luxury reserved for specialists but an essential human practice that helps us cultivate judgment, deepen our understanding of fundamental concepts, and learn to live together in democratic societies.
PHILOSOPHY BEGINS WITH CHILDREN'S QUESTIONS
The conversation opens with Laverty reflecting on her own intellectual journey into Philosophy for Children. Originally trained as a philosopher in Australia, she encountered the educational movement developed by Matthew Lipman and Ann Sharp, which transformed her understanding of both philosophy and education. Rather than viewing philosophy as an abstract academic discipline, she discovered its potential as a dialogical practice rooted in children's own experiences and questions.
Motivated by this insight, Laverty sought opportunities to facilitate philosophical conversations in schools with children of different ages before eventually joining the Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children in the United States. Looking back, she describes this period as formative, not only because she worked closely with Lipman and Sharp, but because it gradually led her from philosophy into philosophy of education. Philosophy became less about mastering arguments and more about creating spaces where inquiry could emerge collectively.
The discussion then turns to Gareth Matthews, whose work has been central to Laverty's scholarship. Although Matthews shared Lipman's conviction that children are capable of profound philosophical thought, his educational approach differed in significant ways. Rather than building a structured philosophy curriculum, Matthews relied heavily on children's literature and spontaneous philosophical puzzles to invite reflection. He viewed children not simply as learners of philosophy but as genuine philosophical interlocutors whose questions could illuminate problems that professional philosophers themselves sometimes overlooked.
Laverty highlights Matthews' remarkable commitment to taking children's thinking seriously. His practice extended beyond classroom conversations: he encouraged children to publish their philosophical reflections and even acknowledged that some of his deepest philosophical insights originated in conversations with young people. In this sense, philosophy was not something adults handed down to children; it became a collaborative search for understanding.
DIALOGUE WITHOUT PREDETERMINED ANSWERS
Reflecting on the differences between Matthews' approach and the Philosophy for Children tradition in which she herself was trained, Laverty draws an important distinction. Matthews typically entered a classroom with a specific philosophical problem in mind—such as Plato's story of the Ring of Gyges—and invited children to explore it together. Although the dialogue remained open, the philosophical question was introduced by the philosopher.
The Philosophy for Children approach, by contrast, begins elsewhere. Here, students first encounter a shared text that reflects situations from their own lives. Rather than being presented with philosophical problems, they formulate the questions themselves. These questions then become the starting point for communal inquiry, often extending across several sessions without any pressure to reach definitive conclusions.
This difference reflects two complementary understandings of philosophy. Matthews emphasizes philosophy's long intellectual tradition and introduces children to enduring philosophical questions. Philosophy for Children places greater emphasis on lived experience, allowing philosophical inquiry to emerge organically from participants' own concerns. For Laverty, both approaches have great value, but she particularly appreciates the openness of philosophical communities of inquiry, where uncertainty is not viewed as a problem to eliminate but as the very condition that makes genuine thinking possible.
LEARNING OUR CONCEPTS
One of the central philosophical themes of the conversation concerns Laverty's longstanding interest in concepts and their role in human development. Responding to questions about her early work on concept learning and her later engagement with Iris Murdoch, she argues that education involves much more than acquiring definitions or information. Human beings inhabit concepts throughout their lives, continually reshaping their meaning through experience and reflection.
Drawing on Murdoch, Laverty suggests that concepts such as courage, friendship, justice, or responsibility are deeply personal. They evolve as individuals encounter new situations, relationships, and moral challenges. The concept of courage held by a young adult, for example, will almost inevitably differ from the understanding developed later in life through experience, loss, responsibility, or care for others.
This ongoing transformation is not merely intellectual. Because concepts shape how we perceive the world, changes in our understanding also transform how we act within it. Developing richer concepts therefore becomes an essential dimension of moral formation. As people deepen their understanding of friendship, courage, or justice, they simultaneously deepen their capacity to recognize these realities in others and to respond more wisely within their own lives.
Rather than presenting concepts as fixed entities waiting to be mastered, Laverty encourages educators to invite learners into an active relationship with them. Students should discover that they themselves participate in shaping the meaning of concepts—not in isolation, but through dialogue with others and through reflection on lived experience. Education, from this perspective, is less about delivering completed knowledge than about initiating lifelong participation in shared human conversations.
THE TRANSFORMATIVE POWER OF PHILOSOPHICAL DIALOGUE
The discussion naturally extends to the role of dialogue itself. Guro Helskog observes that many concepts frequently used in public life—such as democracy or forgiveness—often remain surprisingly superficial until people begin examining them together. Laverty readily agrees.
She suggests that many people assume they already know what familiar concepts mean because they rarely have opportunities to question them. Genuine philosophical dialogue interrupts this assumption. When individuals begin reflecting together, they often discover unexpected differences in how others understand concepts they believed to be universally shared.
This discovery is not merely cognitive; it is transformative. By encountering perspectives different from their own, participants become aware that concepts carry multiple layers of meaning shaped by different experiences and life histories. Such encounters deepen mutual understanding while simultaneously cultivating humility toward one's own assumptions.
For Laverty, this is one of philosophy's greatest educational gifts. It enables people to become both more reflective and more attentive listeners. Philosophy thus strengthens not only individual understanding but also the communicative capacities required for democratic life. Shared language does not erase differences; rather, it provides a common space in which differences can become sources of mutual learning rather than conflict.
WHY THE HUMANITIES MATTER
The conversation then shifts toward one of the most pressing challenges facing contemporary higher education: the growing marginalization of the humanities. Prompted by recent news that the University of Oslo is considering significant reductions in humanities positions, Laverty reflects on similar developments in Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Rather than viewing these developments merely as institutional restructuring, she describes them as a profound cultural loss.
While acknowledging that philosophy, literature, and history contribute to democratic citizenship by cultivating critical thinking and historical awareness, Laverty argues that their deepest significance lies elsewhere. Human beings, she suggests, inhabit their lives through language. The humanities nurture precisely those forms of language that enable people to describe, evaluate, imagine, persuade, and make sense of their experiences. When opportunities for engaging with literature, philosophy, or history disappear, people risk becoming alienated not only from language itself but from their own lives.
The questions fostered by the humanities—What is a good life? What is a human being? What am I called to do?—cannot easily be answered within purely technical or economic frameworks. Although Laverty expresses great appreciation for STEM disciplines and recognizes their indispensable societal contributions, she cautions against allowing instrumental logic to become the sole measure of educational value. Universities educate future workers, but they also educate human beings who must navigate relationships, ethical dilemmas, political responsibilities, and questions of meaning throughout their lives.
For this reason, she argues that advocates of the humanities should resist the temptation to justify their disciplines solely through measurable outcomes such as improved academic performance or employability.
Such arguments, although strategically useful, ultimately overlook what makes the humanities distinctive. Their true contribution lies in nourishing what Laverty calls the human soul—cultivating imagination, communication, self-understanding, and the capacity to reflect on the deepest questions of existence.
PHILOSOPHY IN TIMES OF CRISIS
The discussion naturally extends to the role of philosophy during periods of crisis. Referring to Laverty's recent work on The Wartime Quartet, Guro Helskog asks whether philosophy still has relevance when societies are confronted by war, violence, and uncertainty—situations in which many regard philosophical reflection as a luxury.
Laverty acknowledges the economic realities confronting contemporary students. In many countries, liberal education has become increasingly expensive while offering uncertain career prospects. These pressures are particularly acute for young philosophers seeking academic positions in an era of shrinking humanities departments.
Yet despite these challenges, Laverty insists that philosophy becomes even more necessary during moments of profound disruption. Looking back at the work of Iris Murdoch, Elizabeth Anscombe, Philippa Foot, and Mary Midgley, she observes that their moral philosophy emerged directly from attempts to make sense of the devastation of the Second World War. Philosophy did not stand outside historical events; it responded to them.
Questions concerning justice, responsibility, human dignity, moral realism, and the possibility of ethical judgment become especially urgent during times of crisis. Philosophy provides conceptual resources that help individuals and societies interpret suffering, evaluate political decisions, and reflect upon the values they wish to defend. Rather than offering simple solutions, it enables thoughtful engagement with situations that resist easy answers.
At the same time, Laverty expresses concern about the current vulnerability of the humanities themselves. Their survival, she argues, requires continued advocacy—not merely for institutional preservation but for the preservation of our shared humanity. In a world increasingly driven by economic calculation, the humanities remind us that not everything of value can be measured.
PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION BEYOND COMPETENCE
In the final thematic section of the conversation, Michael Weiss turns the discussion toward professional education—a topic particularly relevant to the mission of the ResponsAbility Podcast. Universities of professional studies increasingly emphasize measurable competencies, technical expertise, and clearly defined learning outcomes. Yet philosophy begins not with certainty but with perplexity.
Laverty wholeheartedly agrees that professional education must recognize multiple forms of knowledge. Technical competence is indispensable, but it cannot by itself prepare future professionals for the ethical, relational, and existential challenges they will inevitably encounter. Teaching, nursing, medicine, policing, and other professions regularly confront situations that cannot be resolved through procedures or protocols alone.
For this reason, philosophy should not attempt to imitate technical disciplines by promising immediately applicable solutions. Instead, it should remain faithful to its own distinctive contribution: creating spaces for reflection, questioning, dialogue, and thoughtful judgment. These capacities constitute a different but equally necessary form of professional knowledge.
Drawing on her own experience in teacher education, Laverty observes that newly qualified teachers rarely struggle because they lack subject knowledge alone. More often, they encounter questions that are ethical or philosophical in nature: How should fairness be understood when students have conflicting needs? How should teachers interpret their vocation? How do they make sense of unavoidable tensions and imperfect decisions?
Such questions require practical wisdom rather than technical expertise. Philosophy helps future professionals develop the habits of reflection necessary to navigate situations where no algorithm or policy can determine the correct course of action.
Laverty therefore advocates for the humanities as an integral component of all professional education. Whether preparing teachers, nurses, or other practitioners, universities should cultivate not only competence but also the reflective capacities that enable professionals to respond wisely, responsibly, and humanely to the complexities of practice.
EDUCATION AS AN ONGOING CONVERSATION
As the dialogue draws to a close, a coherent vision of education emerges. Throughout the conversation, Laverty consistently returns to dialogue as both a pedagogical method and a way of life. Whether discussing philosophy with children, the development of moral concepts, democratic communication, or professional judgment, she emphasizes that understanding grows through sustained inquiry rather than through the transmission of fixed answers.
Education, from this perspective, becomes a lifelong participation in shared conversations about questions that are never finally settled. Concepts evolve, perspectives deepen, and human beings continue learning through attentive engagement with others and with the world.
The episode concludes on a personal note as Laverty expresses her appreciation for the ResponsAbility Podcast itself. She remarks on the care with which Michael Weiss and Guro Helskog prepare for each conversation and reflects on how meaningful it is, as a scholar in the humanities, to feel genuinely read, heard, and thoughtfully questioned. For researchers whose work often unfolds slowly and quietly, such careful dialogue represents a profound form of intellectual recognition.
In many ways, this closing exchange embodies the very themes explored throughout the episode. The conversation itself becomes an example of philosophy as a shared practice of attentive listening, careful questioning, and mutual learning. Rather than presenting philosophy as a body of abstract theories, the dialogue demonstrates it as a living activity—one capable of nurturing practical wisdom, strengthening democratic dialogue, and supporting the lifelong process of becoming more fully human.
