Thinkers’ Games – Deep Structure & Four Examples

Games are a popular aspect of P4C and are especially useful in the early sessions with a new group.
Though they look very different, in many of the games players follow the same deep structure.

Think about a question that has competing reasonable answers.

 To begin with, you may find it easier to get dialogue flowing with questions that are a matter
of taste (of the “would you rather” type).
 Thinking time is crucial – or the children may “sheep” instead of thinking for themselves.

Commit publicly to an answer by moving yourself or some objects (e.g. A4 sheets).

 This is a very important step. It forces a choice – or perhaps a decision to be
indecisive, and gets everyone engaged.
 It enables you to bring shyer children into the dialogue. Once a child has committed
to an opinion, it’s much less abrupt to ask, “So John, why did you think it could never
be right to...” rather than, “So John, what do you think?”
 If someone feels they can’t decide, they can decisively indicate their indecision by
standing in between two options, or arrange cards on top of each other. I never offer
this option to begin with, as it’s better for participants to decide for themselves that
their thinking doesn’t fit a pattern that’s been offered.

Justify your answer with your best reasons – in response to facilitator or peer questions.
 As a facilitator, it’s easy to see differences of opinion, so that you can ask questions
that are likely to lead to dialogue and disagreement. “Green group, you’ve rated that
as much more evil than the yellows did. Why was that?”
 When you can see someone has thought differently to you, it’s natural to be curious
as to why. If you can see they have agreed, you want to know if their reasons are the
same as yours or different. There are more potential starting points for dialogue
than with a single thread of speech.
 Taking physical positions to reflect mental positions leads to a little more
partisanship than just answering a question, and injects energy into dialogue.

Reflect on what you have heard and show if you have changed your mind.
 Always give people the opportunity to show they have changed their minds.
 This stage is often omitted or underexploited.
 You can note questions that arise out of the dialogue to use later or as examples of
philosophical questions.
 It’s powerful for a child to see others moving across a circle, or standing by a
different choice, in response to the reasons they have given. It also reinforces that
it’s fine to change your mind when someone gives you a good reason to do so.
 Sometimes, dialogue will take off from a disagreement or question at this stage. Be
opportunistic about it.
Philosopher’s Fruit Salad (example – PFS Traditional and Playful Questions)
Short, closed questions. If your answer is “yes”, swap places with someone else in the circle.

 You can try a whole series of questions and focus on ones that divide opinion.
 You can ask a series of connected questions, and focus on what makes a change in
the answer from one question to the next, e.g. “Can it sometimes be right to kill a
person? Can it sometimes be right to kill a child?”
 Make sure you ask for reasons from a mix of “yeses” and “nos”.
 If, in reflecting on the answers, someone asks a question, you can then use that
question for another round of the game, encouraging the asking of questions.

Vote with Your Feet (example – VWYF Would You Rather)

Ask a question. Place the possible answers, each on a separate sheet of paper, on the floor. Go and
stand by the one you think is the best answer.

 Thinking time is crucial to avoid children “sheeping” instead of thinking for themselves.
 You can use images for non-readers.

Concept Lines (example – CL Naughtyometer)

Take a concept, such as “beauty”, “friendship” or an axis such as “good-evil”, “real-unreal” and
create statements or scenarios that can be ranked by “most...least”, “most important ingredient
of...”, “best example...”, “from x to y” etc. Each group (probably no more than 6 pupils) has their
own set of cards, preferably in distinct colours.

 Big is beautiful. Use full, A4 sized paper for each example. Having something to look at helps
everyone keep the thread of the argument.
 Including pairs of statements that differ only in one important aspect e.g. doing vs. letting
something happen can bring out precise contrasts.
 Get groups to ask each other questions about why they arranged things differently, so that
you are starting with dialogue.
 Keep text to the minimum.

Question Zoo (example – QZ Rich and Poor)

Questions, each on a separate sheet of paper, are spread out around the room. Go and stand by the
question that interests you most, and discuss your answer to it with others who have also chosen
it/think of your best reasons for your answer.

 Allows you to use questions from concept stretchers/concept colliders (see p4c.com) or
discussion plans from the Lipman manuals in a freer fashion.
 Gets dialogue going between those who choose the same question.
 Develops the habit of choosing interesting questions.
 Allows children who are in the mood to do so to choose more complex questions.
Sort Yourselves Out (example – SYO What Do You Know Most Certainly)
For up to five groups of 6-10 players. Similar to a concept line, but rather than laying cards
out on the floor, each player holds a card with a statement or example on it, and they must
arrange themselves, holding their cards, in a rank order – in the case of the example given,
from the statements they can be most certain about to those that are most doubtful. All
sorts of orderings are possible – most to least important quality in a friend, most to least
beautiful... depending on the concept you are exploring.

 The main advantage of a “human concept line” is that it forces everyone to be

involved: nobody can sit back while others take a lead in ordering the cards, as they
can in a concept line constructed on the floor.
 It leads on well from a warm-up game in which players arrange themselves by some
other order. As one of the icebreakers in my workshops I get participants to arrange
themselves in first name order first, then in order of birthday - but in silence so they
have to use sign language!
 One disadvantage is that it can be harder for participants to really see what all the
options are and locate themselves accordingly. One way round this is if you are
working with one smallish group is to use a “clock-face” arrangement so that most
and least join up to form a circle, rather than being strung out in a line.

Which and Why (example – WAW Various Subjects + WAW big letters)
This is a variant on “Vote With Your Feet” which doesn’t require you to print a new set of card each
time. Instead, just print the letters a to d onto A4 paper and display the different options on a PPT.
Players stand by the option of their choice. Thinking time is crucial to avoid children “sheeping”
instead of thinking for themselves.

 If you want to use this activity in a traditionally arranged classroom without rearranging the
furniture, you could stick the letters on the walls and have players point to their choice.
 The inclusion of a “something else” option allows for creativity in responses.

Dividing Line (example – DL Ethics Committee)

Create a line with, for example, masking tape stuck to the floor. Each group has a set of cards that
they must arrange as “Yes or No” answers in response to a question – in the example, “Would you
allow these experiments to happen?”

 Good for exploring concepts that have to issue in a practical, real-world decision, as the
dividing line forces a decision.
 Groups can indicate borderline cases versus more straightforward judgements by placing the
“Yes – but only just” cases closest to the dividing line.
 Having the same dividing line for all groups makes agreements and disagreements easy to
spot and physically draws the whole group together in curiosity around the cards, providing
good conditions for dialogue.
 Get groups to ask each other questions about why they arranged things differently, so that
you are starting with dialogue.
In or Out (example – IOO What Do You Need to Be Happy)
Each group has a selection of cards with pictures or statements (in the example, pictures of such
things as friends, holidays, school, TV). For each group, have a circle made out of rope or string, or a
large piece of paper. The group have to decide which cards are in the set under discussion (in the
example, “things you need to be happy”) and which are outside it, and place them within or outside
the circle accordingly.

 Allows players to indicate that some “ingredients” are more central than others.
 Allows disagreement within the group to be indicated easily by placing cards on the edge of
the “in” area.
 Allows cards to be grouped to reflect connections to eachother as well as to the sentral
concept.
 As a follow-up activity, you could just give them the cards and the circle and ask them to
come up with criteria for their own set.
 You could look at the interaction between two concepts and work on Venn diagrams at the
same time, e.g. things you can buy, things you need to be happy – Is it true that the best
things in life are free?

Final thoughts on using Thinkers’ Games

There are, I’m sure, many other variations on these games. Anything that physically represents the
results of thinking about a contestable question will work in much the same way.

 Avoid the living death of group after group “reporting back” their thinking by reiterating
what the rest can see for themselves. Even if your colleagues were reporting back on their
shocking tales of adultery, it would still be rather repetitive after the fourth group. Instead of
reporting their answers, get groups to ask each other questions, which is the beginning of
real dialogue rather than presentation.
 If players need to “break the rules” to reflect their thinking, e.g. putting a card out in the
corridor to register their disgust, that can be interesting – but let it come from them.
 Be alert to opportunities for dialogue to take off from disagreements and questions.
 If someone raises a question you don’t explore there and then, record and display it.
 Sometimes, you may just want a quick activity to get a group in the mood for philosophy, or
to change the pace in an ordinary lesson – but the true value of activities like these is when
you give proper time for people to air their reasons, reflect on each other’s views and
change their minds if they want to.

Lastly, for me there’s no question of games being “just for fun” as if fun and serious thinking were
opposed in some way. Humour and play are some of the most creative things people do, and they
invite people’s real selves into the room, rather than their classroom personae.

© Jason Buckley 2010 www.outspark.org.uk