La délibération philosophique à travers les différences: Repenser la communauté d'enquête philosophique en Philosophie pour Enfants (PPE) pour une enquête de groupe pluraliste

In this paper, I address the challenge of fostering philosophical deliberation in increasingly pluralistic societies and argues that traditional Western philosophical norms in Philosophy for Children (P4C) risks enforcing sameness and excluding diverse voices through what Chetty terms the “Gated Community of Inquiry.” While the Community of Philosophical Inquiry (CPI) aims for democratic dialogue, its reliance on ideal norms like “reasonableness” can marginalize and silence certain positions and utterances. As a result, I explore Mouffe’s agonism and Guattari’s Transversality as possible alternative framework for structuring group philosophical inquiry. I conclude that while the Agonistic CPI embraces power, conflict, and dissensus, it still reifies exclusion and hegemonic dynamics. Instead, I advocate for a transversal CPI, which breaks from both vertical hierarchies and horizontal purity to cultivate errant, co-emergent thinking across boundaries. Ultimately, I conclude that the Transversal CPI is a more robust framework for pluralistic education because of its ability to affirm plurality without collapsing it into sameness or antagonism.