(some)

philosophy games

jesse walsh

Dear Pre-College Philosophy Colleague,

The contents of this booklet are a relatively random sampling of the games and activities I have used in my middle school
classroom over the past few years. Most of them are completely my own invention, although some draw on popular children’s
games or are modified versions of someone else’s contrivance (notations have been made in the case of the latter). They were
developed specifically for the middle school learners of philosophy at St. Martin de Porres Academy (New Haven, CT), although I
believe they are relevant to students from a wide range of ages and backgrounds.

Disclaimer: These games and activities are designed to provoke philosophical discourse among the students, usually pertaining
to at least some of the indicated pertinent topics. They are not in any way intended to characterize entire philosophical
disciplines and may possibly omit or overlook arguments or aspects of a particular school of thought that someone else may
consider crucial.

Avowal: You hereby have my expressed written consent to reproduce and redistribute this document to any person(s) wishing to
advance the field of pre-college philosophy. Please also feel invited and inspired to modify any of its contents to best suit the
needs of your students.

Happy Philosophizing!

Jesse Walsh
jwalsh13@bu.edu

“Off to the Races” Rules: This game has a sort of complex structure but is actually very
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: inductive reasoning, simple to play. It is a competition that requires some background
philosophy of science knowledge of inductive reasoning, so a bit of teaching and practice with
that will be necessary before you begin. The group should be split into
three teams: Team Inductive Reasoning, Team Dice and Team Magic 8  Which team won the most times?
Ball. Explain to the students that earlier in the day, 2 horses raced
against each other multiple times. You are going to show them the  Does anyone find this outcome surprising?
results (winner) of the first four races, and then they are going to try to
correctly determine who won each of the other races based on that  What can this tell us about inductive reasoning?
information, or by using their appropriated prop. So, Team Inductive
Reasoning uses that methodology, Team Dice rolls an oversized die  Pros/cons?
(Horse #1 – odds, Horse #2 – evens) and Team Magic 8 Ball consults its
plastic fortune teller (remind them they have to ask yes/no questions!).  Is it okay for us to use? What about scientists?
Reproduce the grid (see appendix) on the board and explain to the
children how to read it. Allow them to have 15-20 seconds to determine
 What does this have to do with philosophy?
which horse their group believes will win the next race. Put a check mark
in the appropriate column, and then reveal to them what the ‘actual’
APPENDIX:
outcome was. (Of course, you will have to fabricate the race results
ahead of time, but the kids shouldn’t really be privy to that). Each team
that selected the winning horse also gets a check mark for that race. At Race Race Race Race Race Race … Race
the end, the team with the most check marks receives some sort of prize. 1 2 3 4 5 6 n
Horse X X X
Potential Modifiers: I suppose it doesn’t have to be horses that are #1
racing – you could substitute any number of other things here! Also, Horse X
since you’re (kind of) “rigging” the race from the beginning, you can play #2
with what sort of outcome you’re trying to achieve by altering the race Team -- -- -- --
winners. I usually have 12-15 races beyond the initial four that are initially IR
shown to the students, although you could run more/less than this Team -- -- -- --
depending on your classroom needs. If you’re really technologically Dice
savvy, you could create a fancy animation after each round to reveal the Team -- -- -- --
winner of the next race. I usually either have the kids produce a drum roll Magic
and then I will either announce the winning horse or create a simple
PowerPoint document to click through. This table is more or less how yours should look before the game gets
underway. Of course you could choose the horse winners differently –
Important Notes: I usually take suggestions from the kids for horse this is only one example of how things could begin.
names rather than calling them Horse #1 and Horse #2. They’re just
presented that way here for clarity. Setting up the rules, structure, flow, Your Notes:
etc. for this game takes a little while, but once you begin, the game itself __________________________________________________________
moves very quickly. Despite the fact that you have predetermined the
outcome of the horse races (and thus the responses of Team Inductive ______________________________________________
Reasoning), you can’t yourself know how the results from the other 2 ____________________________________________________
teams will pan out. Therefore, the subsequent discussion/potential
prompts can vary tremendously. ____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
Some Potential Prompts:
 Which horse won the most times? ____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________

“Philosopher Says”
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: free will, morality, intent,
consent

Rules: This game is played with exactly the same rules as “Simon Says”.
The Philosopher (teacher) instructs the students to perform various
tasks/maneuvers by prefacing them with “Philosopher Says”. If the
philosopher does not utter this phrase prior to giving instructions,
students should not perform the given task. If they do, they are “out” and
must sit down. Additionally, if the teacher does say “Philosopher Says”
and the students do not comply, they are also out and must take a seat.
The special thing here is in regard to what students are asked to do.
Generally, the game begins with relatively benign commands (e.g. touch
your head/nose/tummy/whatever, spin in a circle, high five a neighbor,
etc.), then proceeds to moderately uncomfortable or undesirable
commands (e.g. jumping jacks, running laps around the room, pushups,
burpees, etc.). When the students are sufficiently worn out and you
determine it’s time to end the game, a final preposterous command is
given (e.g. go jump out the window, make out with your neighbor, pick
your neighbor’s nose and eat it, etc.). The game will be over at that point
since none of the students will comply (or will be able to comply).

Potential Modifiers: You could change the name if “Philosopher Says”

becomes too cumbersome to repeat over and over again. I think I tested
out “Hobbes Says” one time for this reason, but it didn’t feel right so I
stopped doing it. There are two sorts of final commands you could give,
and if you and your students have the time and stamina, you could try
both! One sort evokes an avoidance response in the students – their
desire to not perform the given task outweighs their desire to participate
in or win the game. The examples listed in the rules above fall into this
category. Alternatively, you could also suggest something they are
physically or logistically incapable of doing at that precise moment (e.g.
grow 3 feet taller, change an infant’s diaper, recite the entire US
Constitution in Swahili, bleed yellow blood, etc.). These sorts of
commands are not necessarily undesirable, but they cannot be
completed within the space-time parameters of the game, thus lending
themselves to a rather different sort of free will discussion. I usually offer
a prize to the winner to keep their motivation up when the pushups enter
into play. Then I typically reward all of them since there is never an
actual winner.
Important Notes: Obviously, a great deal of trust and discretion must be
utilized in choosing appropriate commands for your students. The
windows in our classroom are incredibly difficult for the kids to open,
especially in the colder months of the year. So I don’t have to worry
about students actually attempting to obey this command. If you had a
group of all boys, they’re probably not going to make out with each other,
but a mixed-sex group might react differently – especially if any of them
are already “dating”! Finally, the sort of free will in question here is
primarily focused on individual agency. You can definitely work in a
discussion of the infinite regress that is causal determination, but it’s not
likely to come up on it’s own.
Some Potential Prompts:
 How did this game make you feel?
 Why might you follow some commands, but not others?
 If you really did jump out the window and got hurt, do you think
[the teacher] would be in trouble, or you? Or both?
 Do you always have to follow the directions of authority figures?
How do you know when it’s okay not to?
 What does this game have to do with philosophy?
APPENDIX
I typically preface this game with a free will centered warm up activity to
dig up some central ideas and prime the appropriate portions of their
brains. (Conversely, you could also use the game as a priming activity
and this could be done afterwards). Students are given a stack of index
cards and asked to come up with as many possible reasons as they can
for why they are in that particular classroom at that particular time. Give
them about 5 minutes to complete this, then collect the index cards. On
the board, make 2 columns – “Within Your Control” and “Not Within Your
Control”. Read each card aloud and then have the students decide which
column it belongs in. Despite the fact that middle school students tend to
regularly blame everyone else around them for their own actions, to my
surprise they typically want to put most of the index cards into the “Within
Your Control” column. Be prepared to encourage them to think a little bit
deeper about some of their claims! Aside from the likely very fruitful
conversation that will be sparked by the card-sorting activity, here are
some potential follow up prompts:
 So given what is on the board, how can you know if you are
acting freely?
 Is it fair to hold people responsible for things that might have
been out of their control? (e.g. cult murderer)
 Is it fair to reward people for things that might have been out of
their control?
Your Notes:
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________

“Deal or No Deal?”
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: utopia, metaphysics,
happiness, “Brain in a vat”

Rules: This activity is actually a very informal debate disguised as a sort-

of game show. To begin, have kids fill out “My Perfect Life” surveys (see
Appendix). When they’re finished, explain “The Deal”, which is
essentially an opportunity to attach your physical body to the experience
machine: I promise you that you could have your perfect life – anything in
the whole world that you wanted but there is a catch. The way you would
achieve this perfect life is by me hooking up a machine to your brain,
forcing it to think you’re actually having all these experiences in “the real
world”. But truly, your body is not going anywhere – it is only your “mind”
that is journeying. In your perfect life, you would never know it was all
being simulated by a machine. If you accept the deal to live your perfect
life, you can never “return” to the world you currently experience. Once
everyone has filled out the survey and understands the deal, offer it to
each student individually. This is best accomplished game show host
style, with as much cheese, pomp, circumstance and “Come on down!”
you can muster. Preferably, read aloud some of each child’s response, or
let them read parts aloud they’d like to share. Present them with the
question, “Deal or no deal?” Students who accept the deal will be placed
together on one team, and those who reject the deal will be another
team. If the teams are very uneven, you can either move a few kids
around, or just join the team with less advantage. Once the teams are
set, each group must come up with three reasons why they think the
opposing team made a bad decision. Arguments are heard from both
sides and then groups must address these points with (three)
counterarguments. A judge (either the teacher or a pre-selected student)
determines which team is more convincing, and they are the winners.
Prizes may be handed out if desired.

Potential Modifiers: The “Perfect Life” survey could be modified to suit

the tastes of your students. If you’re still working on team building skills,
you could have groups self-assign a name and decorate a sign indicating
their choice. Also, depending on how much time you had, you could turn
the “My Perfect Life” portion into a project. Students could make a
collage in PowerPoint by gathering images and things from the internet, 5. Do you want pets? How may and what kind?
or using magazines and glue if computers are not available. Putting more
emphasis on this facet of the activity could lead to some great 6. What would you like to do in your free time?
discussions on concepts like utopias and perfection.

Important Notes: The wily rebel types will try to outsmart this thought
experiment. Explain from the outset there will be no outsmarting the
experience machine, so don’t even try building such anarchy into your
personal utopia! Enthusiasm of the game show host is a huge help in
keeping up the interest and energy in this game. Feel free to dress the
part, borrow a microphone, make some decorations, use a theme song,
etc. Disclaimer: The “My Perfect Life” survey is not meant to circumscribe
the whole of human experience; rather, it’s primary purpose is to get the
kids thinking about some details that would be included in their perfect
lives. There are definitely elements that could be added or subtracted.
7. Where in the world would you want to live? Do you want a house or
apartment? (It’s okay to have homes in more than one place if you
want – it’s your perfect life!)
8. What other kinds of things would you like to own (for example: boat,
cars, helicopters, football teams, stadiums, etc.)?
9. Do you want to have a lot of friends or just a few? How often do you
get to hang out with them?

Some Potential Prompts: The students really are the ones who come
up with the prompts here, but you can help steer them while they are Your Notes:
brainstorming arguments. They generally raise questions about:
 The concept of perfect (especially how it might change over time ________________________________________________
even for the same person)
 Reality – what is it? Where is it? ________________________________________________
 Happiness – how is it achieved? Is there anything more ________________________________________________
important in life than this?
 What does this game have to do with philosophy? ________________________________________________

APPENDIX ________________________________________________
“My Perfect Life”
________________________________________________
Name: __________________
________________________________________________
1. Do you want to get married or be single? Any particular person you
want as a spouse? ________________________________________________
________________________________________________
Continued on back 
________________________________________________
2. What kind of job would you want? Or would you rather not have to
work? ________________________________________________
________________________________________________
3. Do you want to be super rich, rich, middle class, or poor?
________________________________________________
4. Do you want children? How many?
 Rules: This game is simultaneously simple and complicated. It is named
both for the dialogue by Plato (The Republic) and the physical circular
park where my kids typically play. First, set up a track or running field
(circular is best, but other shapes are also fine). It should take a student
approximately 30 seconds to run a loop all the way around it one time.
Set up 5 stations relatively close to each other in one area of the field.
Each station will have a stack of cards (enough for each student to get
one) with the same question on it (see Appendix), a writing utensil and
some sort of hard writing surface. Students run one lap around the circle,
then choose a station at which to stop and answer the question on the
card. Students should find an unoccupied station so there are not
multiple kids answering the same question at the same time. Obviously,
if you have more than 5 students in your group, you might not be able to
enforce this unless you set up some sort of queue. Students should not
answer the same question more than once. There are multiple ways to
end this game. I usually time it and they keep playing until the time runs
out, or they finish – whichever comes first.

Potential Modifiers: The size of the running field, the number of

stations, amount of laps they must run in between answering questions.
The content of the cards could easily be altered. The game could end in
the manner mentioned above, or could continue until n number of
students completes it, or n number of cards have been filled out, or until
they’re all too tired to keep going. If desired, prizes could be awarded to
top finishers.

Important Notes: In order to preserve anonymity, students should not

write their names on their cards. This helps to ensure honest answers,
although of course cannot guarantee them. The running in this game is
of course not essential to the philosophy, but it accomplishes several
goals: it helps students burn off energy and get their blood flowing – both
of which contribute to a better post-game discussion; also, because the
game feels like a race, students don’t typically spend too long answering
each card, which can result in more honest answers and prevent the kids
from trying to come up with the most pleasing or acceptable response.

Some Potential Prompts:

1. Debrief Card #1:
“The Ring of Gyges”
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: morality, human nature,  Would anyone keep it all to himself/herself?
egoism and altruism
 What if I gave it to you outside of class? Like, no one would
have found out if you didn’t share?
  Why would you make these choices? What’s different
between asking in front of other students and asking when
you’re alone?
 What would happen if you didn’t share any? Would there be
consequences?
 If there were no consequences, how would this change
things?
2. Debrief Card #2:
 Would you tell anyone if you won $1 million in the lottery?
Who/Why/why not?
 What would happen if you didn’t share any? Would there be
consequences?
 If there were no consequences, how would this change
things?
 Do you think some people behave the “right” way just
because they’re afraid of punishment? And if there were no
punishment they would behave badly?
3. Debrief Card #3:
 Does it feel good to do favors for other people?
 Is that the reason you think we do them?
 Does it still feel good even when no one knows you were the
one who did it?
 Would that change whether you answered the same again
next time?
Continued on back 
4. Debrief Card #4:
 Good things? Evil things?
 Without the fear of getting caught, would you behave
differently than you would in everyday life?
 Do you think most people would?
5. Debrief Card #5:
 What did you say? Who would you kill? Why?
 Would you still try to have the same person killed if there
was no guarantee of safety from consequences?
 If there were no law proclaiming it is illegal to commit
murder, would you be more or less likely to kill someone
else? Do you think murder rates overall would increase,
decrease, or stay the same?
6. Conclusion
 Are people “good” because of fear of other people
seeing them misbehave? Or would we still be good if we
were invisible?
 Are people “good” because the law/rules tell them how
to be good? If there were no laws/rules, would things be
different?
APPENDIX
Card #1:
The teacher gives you 20 pieces of candy to distribute to Philosophy
Club members however you want. How many would you give to each
person (including yourself)? Make sure it adds up to 20!
Ja’Sean –
Maleek –
Aveanna –
Asa –
Pierce –
Card #2:
Imagine you have the temporary ability to be invisible. Everything you
touch is also invisible. List 3 things you would use your powers for:
1.
2.
3.
Card #3:
You just won $1 million in the lottery. What do you do with your
winnings? (Circle ONE of the four answers for EACH option.)
-Keep it/spend it all on yourself (circle one): all most some none
-Donate it to charity (circle one): all most some none
-Give to family (circle one): all most some none
-Give to friends (circle one): all most some none
Card #4:
Suppose you were given a one time opportunity to have one person of
your choice killed with a guarantee that you’d never get caught. Would
you take it?
Card #5:
Suppose you had the opportunity to do someone else a huge favor, but
you would never get credit for it. Would you do it anyway?
Your Notes:
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
“The Candy Game”
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: fairness, equality,
consequentialism, utilitarianism, hedonism, cooperation& mutual aid
Rules: Children sit in a circle around a table or on the floor. Each child
receives ten pieces of candy from the teacher. A bowl is placed in the
center of the group. The teacher predetermines an amount of “buyback”
candy. 60% of the total is a decent default option, although this amount
could be tweaked in numerous ways. There are 2 rounds, so each
student gets a single turn in each round. During his/her turn, a student
may choose to either (1) do nothing or (2) put any number of pieces of
candy in the buyback bowl. By the end of the two rounds, the
predetermined buyback number given by the teacher must be achieved.
If it is, each student may keep any remaining pieces of candy he/she
has. If it is not, all students must return all remaining candy back to the
teacher.
Potential Modifiers: Altering the number of buyback pieces, depending
on what outcome you wish to see/what sort of conversation you hope to
spark (e.g. asking for 29 or 31 pieces rather than 30 changes even
divisibility in a group of 5; asking for 75% will result in dramatically
different behaviors than asking for just 25%, etc.); Altering the types of
candy given to each child (e.g. designating one kid with the “dud” cup of
candy that has a more undesirable collection; giving the kid with the
braces only chewy candy, etc.).
Important Notes: Students may not trade candy before/during the
game, but are welcome to make deals with each other for what might
happen afterwards. This game can be played multiple times with the
same group of kids and different outcomes/discussions can follow.
Because of its repeatability, it’s important that the teacher doesn’t cave in
and throw a few extra pieces to kids who gave a lot away during the
game to “even things out” because it changes the stakes the next time.
They will remember!
Some Potential Prompts:
 Was it a fair game? Why or why not?
 Are fairness and equality the same thing? In this case? In all cases?
 What factors did you base your decision on? Which are the most
important? Why?
 Would you do anything different if we played again?
 What does this game have to do with philosophy?

Your Notes:
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
______________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
“Hangwoman”
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: feminism, oppression, social
experimentation
Rules: This is straight up hangman with a twist. Choose any old words
for the kids to guess (although obscure philosophy words/philosophers
whom they do not know of are best). Instead of having teams, or
individuals against each other, tell them it is all of them vs. you (the
teacher). Start with anyone, then go around the room until everyone gets
a turn, repeating in the same order until the game is finished. When boys
guess a letter, be honest about whether it is correct or incorrect. If
correct, fill in the letters normally. If incorrect, start building the hangman
but do not write incorrect letters up on the board. When a girl guesses a
letter, tell her she is incorrect no matter what. Continue to build the
hangman.
Potential Modifiers: None that I have ever tried, but I suppose they
exist. You could get one of the boys “in” on it ahead of time to see if he
can steer the dynamics in an interesting way. Sometimes a (candy)
reward is offered to the winner of each round to keep motivation high.
Important Notes: The teacher must be able to keep a straight face to
pull this game off successfully. The kids will realize there is cheating
going on pretty early into the game, and if the teacher lets on that they’re
right, the game won’t get to proceed to an interesting place. I have
played this game both with fantastic success and quasi-failure. When
successful, the boys will actually figure out what’s going on and implicitly
“help” the teacher – telling the girls they are crazy and wrong – that they
never said the letter “S”. Keep this game moving at a quick pace – don’t
let them focus too much on the cheating that’s happening.
Some Potential Prompts:
 (To the girls) How did this game make you feel? Why?
 (To the boys) How did this game make you feel? Why?
 Did anyone want to give up at any point? Why?
 What might eventually happen if we continued to play this game
over and over again for the rest of your time at SMPA?
 What if you had to play it for the rest of your life? What strategies
would you utilize in teaching your children how to play the game
someday?
 Can you relate [the kinds of outcomes in the game] to anything
you have seen at home or read about at school?
 What does this game have to do with philosophy?
Your Notes:
__________________________________________________________
______________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
“The Race Race”
*Note: portions of this game were adapted from an activity previously
described by Ben Wasserman (CUNY) at the 2011 Engaging Philosophy
Conference at Mt. Holyoke College.
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: affirmative action, race,
gender, capitalism
Rules: Line the kids up to have a footrace. Race #1: Straight up on your
mark, get set, go. Keep track of who comes in first, second, third, etc.
Races #2-n: Modify the race to try to get everyone to cross the finish line
at the same time. You can provide obstacles for the faster kids (run
backwards, with eyes closed, crabwalk, etc.) or just give the slower ones
a head start (by time or by distance, or both). Play until they’re all too out
of breath to squirm around (during discussion). Follow with a discussion
on affirmative action. Depending on the group, this may require some
teaching, but they’ll want to sit still, so this is okay.
Potential Modifiers: Ways to slow down some kids, speed up others. Be
obvious about focusing “helping” on girls or students of color that are
slower.
Important Notes: The kids actually really enjoy this game, but it can get
a little touchy if you are uncomfortable with issues of race. Most children
are naturally competitive enough to want to win without external
motivation, but candy or other prizes could be offered to the winner(s).
Some Potential Prompts:
 What do you think I was trying to do in the races? What was my
goal?
 Why would I want to achieve that result?
 Is this a good thing, or a bad thing?
 Does everyone deserve a turn to win? Do people always get
what they deserve?
 What kinds of things help a person become fast and win a race
like this? (list them on the board, then discuss which we’re sort of
stuck with from birth/circumstance/etc. and which can be
modified over time – this will actually become more of a Venn
Diagram if the kids are open-minded, which is also an interesting
discussion)
 What does this game have to do with philosophy?
Your Notes:
__________________________________________________________
______________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________  Do you think desserts are the same around the world? What
kinds of things do you think an American dessert would have in
____________________________________________________
common with a Chinese dessert?

Your Notes:

Dessert! __________________________________________________________
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: dessert, essential qualities ______________________________________________

Rules: At the end of each term, my students always ask if we can have a
party. This activity/discussion was my compromise on giving them a sort
of relaxing, celebratory class while not simultaneously losing an entire
week of philosophical discourse. The dessert/food is distributed first, and
then discussion happens while the students are snacking.
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________

Potential Modifiers: You could either tackle the whole of desserts at the
same time, or choose a singular theme (e.g. cookies, cakes, chips, etc.).
Alternatively, you could also scrap the whole dessert idea altogether and
use a completely different sort of food product (or toy product, or
whatever).
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________

Important Notes: This will quickly become the favorite philosophy ____________________________________________________
“game” ever – students will make requests for it frequently!

Some Potential Prompts:

 What is dessert? What kinds of qualities does something need to
have in order to be considered a dessert?

 When must something be eaten in order for it to be considered a

dessert?

 Is dessert a good thing or a bad thing?

 Can something that is considered unhealthy/bad nonetheless be

beneficial/good?

 Why do we have dessert?