Key Elements of the Socratic Method

  • It’s obvious to anyone who has read at least one dialogue that Socrates begins with questions.
    • He treats questions not as a challenge, but as an act of friendship.
    • If you treasure friendship, ask hard questions and help the person whom you are asking either refute the claim or go deeper.
    • It requires courage to act and forfeit any claim to expertise. But let’s not forget that by displaying courage, we frame it as a form of knowledge, and by doing so, know even less.
  • So, back to Socrates. The entrance point to any dialogue is a question and an answer.
    • Questions are of different kinds: open and directed, the type when he asks if his partner agrees with him or not.
    • Hence, instead of a lecture, we have a conversation that is difficult to call an argument because Socrates obtains his partner’s consent at every turn of the conversation.
    • After Socrates has set the stage and created conditions for productive inquiry, he turns his attention to the consistency of his partners and their claims.
      • He probes the consistency of a claim by the device known as the elenchus.
      • His partner makes a claim, and Socrates leads the conversation in such a manner that his partner agrees to something else, inconsistent with the initial claim.
      • He creates a situation which requires either refinement of the claim or outright abandonment.
      • Socrates doesn’t state in this situation that the partner is wrong; the partner himself comes to this conclusion.
      • He starts simply, with the question: “Can we agree that the following idea is true?” and when the partner agrees, after enough probing, that the previous claim wasn’t quite right, they together look for another approach.
    • The next stage tests the principle behind what a partner is saying.
      • After that, he looks for something that doesn’t align with the principle, or sometimes covers something that it shouldn’t.
    • The fourth stage is where examples are used as a battering ram to drive Socrates’ reasoning. The examples usually include everyday situations.
      • And in some instances, they illustrate conceptual points that weren’t seen before.
      • Analogies are also a great way to demonstrate how things are familiar and how they aren’t.
      • He tries by any means at his disposal to address bigger issues with specific cases that are easy to imagine, like the Feynman technique.
    • Lastly, Socrates often concludes dialogues, claiming that he is not an expert but an actual amateur, creating a state of impasse, leaving his partner without an answer but with plenty to digest.

BIO

Keywords:

Related:

Reference: