Teacher's Guide to "Words"

In this text we see two worlds: the rich world, in which people have money, and the poor world, in which
children grow up with very little money. A street runs between those areas in a city somewhere, and on this
street there is a grill bar, where children from both areas come. Apparently they do not come there to buy
soft drinks simultaneously, but this very day it happens, and the two different groups of children wonder, how
it to live at the other side of the street.
This scene could be compared to culture-differences as they show up in these years, as many countries now
find themselves being multi-ethnic. Thousands of difficulties occur because of this – we do need to take part
in the discussion about the problems – not in a political way, but in a philosophical way, as philosophy being
far more profound than politics.
The text tries to show, that children can build the bridge, because they still are politically and philosophically
innocent. They do not have prejudices and see another child as just another child. They do not see the
difference in the colour of skin as something of extreme importance. They would say, "That's simply the way
it is."




Thus the task for the teacher is to open a dialogue about cultural differences beginning with letting the
students discuss why society seemingly makes a difference between rich and poor. The teacher can expect
political statements. Do listen to them, let the discussion run, and do not interfere, until there is a chance of
lifting the many statements into a philosophical area.

When you reach that point, take a glance on the first small dialogue, that Andreas and Per have about the
deepest of our minds, because that small dialogue made them write this text.


THE HEART OF THE MIND

Andreas believes emotions to be the inner depth of the human mind.
Per seems to mean, that logics is the deepest.

Questions to the class:
What do you think?
Make everybody express themselves and discuss.
Are we born with emotions?
Are they deepened as we grow up?
Could emotions help us build a bridge between the poor and the rich ?
Do emotions unite, as Andreas says?
Are emotions something, that counts for all of us?
Do we share them?

Is there a mental (cognitive) conflict between emotions and logics?
Try to describe it. (use the blackboard)
Try to find situations, where we need logics.
And situations, where we only use our emotional part of the mind?
Is logics something invented by us?



LOGICS AND FEELINGS

You find this topic discussed in the middle of the text, where you find Michelle saying, "Logic is made up
…."
Try to involve your students in her statements. She is expressing thoughts, that all children (and adults) have
without being able to put them into words.

Is logics really something made up?
Make the students discuss and do not interfere with your own opinion.
Are emotions so important, as Michelle seems to mean?
She compares the importance of emotions with the air we breathe.
What do you think?
How would human beings be without emotions?
And: How would we be without logics?
If there is something artificial about logics, what is it?
Is it so, that emotions unite, while logics builds gaps between us?
(Here you might mention the ancient Greek philosophers, who sort of invented logics, and draw a line to
Søren Kierkegaard, who builds his philosophy on Christian emotions)

Let us try to make an image: our mind has two sides: an emotional and a logic side.
Can those two halves communicate?
Do they speak the same language?
Do emotions support the logical statements we make?
Or vice-versa?
Can the logical part of our mind suppress the emotional part?
Do we have this conflict going on inside ourselves all the time?
Do we act emotionally and explain our acts logically?

This IS difficult, but it is really possible to get the children involved and inspired.

Use a tree as an image:
I am taking a walk in the forest and discover a tree standing in the setting sun. And I whisper:
Oh, this is Beauty. It makes me feel happy: that Nature or God could create such a Beauty – it is almost
ununderstandable. I am almost paralysed by this Beauty. In a flash of a moment I feel united with Nature and the
divinity of it.
This is an emotional experience.
But if I am a scientist, I will be interested in how the tree grows, how many seeds it produces. Perhaps I want
to examine the tree genetically to find out what kind of values I can transplant to other trees. I study the tree
botanically.
This is a logical experience.

Which way would you go to find the underlying question:
Why is there something called a tree?
Why is there Life at all?
Emotionally or logically?
Which way would you go to find the enigma of Life?
Discuss.

THINKING

What are the tools of thinking:
Language?
Logics?
Images?
Intuition?
Emotions?
What is thinking? How do you do it?
Make every student try to explain, what thinking is for them.

Remember ( and tell the students):
No inventions have been made by rational thinking only (Arthur Koestler). They have been born through
intuition, sudden and surprising insights, and in dreams.

So:
Is there some thinking going on without words?
Is there a world, which thinking and language cannot reach?
Have a profound debate about this.

PHILOSOPHY

Following the text, philosophy exists, where language stops.
Philosophy works, where science has given up.
As Jim puts it: "It's much deeper – deeper than words can reach. That's what philosophy is."

Try to make the students work with this statement, and try to make them mention areas of Life, where we do
not have answers and knowledge, but where philosophy works.
Write on the board and discuss.
Wittgenstein once wrote, that all philosophical issues are linguistic issues.
This is a logical point of view, which might lead nowhere.

Jim says, "Logics devides, and philosophy unites."
He might be right, because what we really share as human beings, is what we do not know. (Socrates and
Popper)
What we know brings conflicts, wars, killings, discrimination of races.

So you could "quote" The Holy Bible in this way: "In the beginning there were emotions."
Philosophically this text is difficult, but try anyway to guide your students through it and let them have their
debates as profound as they are able to.
That is the goal of philosophy for children.

Per Jespersen

Back