(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” (Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: inductive reasoning,

philosophy of science
Rules: This game has a sort of complex structure but is actually
very simple to play. It is a competition that requires some
background 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 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 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 information, or by
using their appropriated prop. So, Team Inductive Reasoning uses
that methodology, Team Dice rolls an oversized die (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!). 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 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’ 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 the end, the
team with the most check marks receives some sort of prize.
They’re just presented that way here for clarity. Setting up the
rules, structure, flow, 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?
 Which team won the most times?
 Does anyone find this outcome surprising?
 What can this tell us about inductive reasoning?
 Pros/cons?
 Is it okay for us to use? What about scientists?
 What does this have to do with philosophy?

Potential Modifiers: I suppose it doesn’t have to be horses that APPENDIX:

are racing – you could substitute any number of other things here!
Also, since you’re (kind of) “rigging” the race from the beginning, Rac Race Rac Race Race Rac … Race
you can play with what sort of outcome you’re trying to achieve by e1 2 e3 4 5 e6 n
altering the race winners. I usually have 12-15 races beyond the Hors X X X
initial four that are initially shown to the students, although you e #1
could run more/less than this depending on your classroom Hors X
needs. If you’re really technologically savvy, you could create a e #2
fancy animation after each round to reveal the winner of the next Team -- -- -- --
race. I usually either have the kids produce a drum roll and then I IR
will either announce the winning horse or create a simple Team -- -- -- --
PowerPoint document to click through. Dice
Team -- -- -- --
Important Notes: I usually take suggestions from the kids for Magi
horse names rather than calling them Horse #1 and Horse #2. c
This table is more or less how yours should look before the game
gets underway. Of course you could choose the horse winners
differently – this is only one example of how things could begin.

Your Notes:
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________

“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, or using magazines
and glue if computers are not available. Putting more emphasis on
this facet of the activity could lead to some great 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.
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 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?
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________

5. Do you want pets? How may and what kind?

6. What would you like to do in your free time?

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?

Your Notes:
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________

“The Ring of Gyges”
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: morality, human nature,
egoism and altruism
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:
 Would anyone keep it all to himself/herself?
 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:
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________ 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?
 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?

Dessert!
(Some) Relevant Philosophical Topics: dessert, essential
qualities Your Notes:
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,
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________