[HN Gopher] 'The Socratic Method' Review: Let Us Reason Together
___________________________________________________________________
'The Socratic Method' Review: Let Us Reason Together
Author : prostoalex
Score : 53 points
Date : 2022-06-24 22:43 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.wsj.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.wsj.com)
| johnaspden wrote:
| paywall
| blinkingled wrote:
| https://archive.ph/xSbSG
| sys_64738 wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paper_Chase_(film)
| cafard wrote:
| Didn't see the movie: as represented in a book that came out at
| about the same time ( _Harvard 1L_?), the law school version of
| the Socratic method didn 't sound all that Socratic.
| stefantalpalaru wrote:
| nickjj wrote:
| On a related note, I've been a big fan of Socratic questioning[0]
| and have often used it to guide picking between 2 different
| things, such as technologies. It's also a really nice way to
| understand something in a consistent way, even if you're not
| comparing it to something else.
|
| I once wrote a blog post on how to use Socratic questioning to
| learn more about Docker at https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/would-
| socrates-use-docker-tod....
|
| [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_questioning
| mannykannot wrote:
| Taking Socrates as a model of public discourse would not be
| complete without noting that it got him condemned to death. The
| asking of questions is often regarded as hostile by those whose
| worldview or self-interest is threatened by the reasonable
| responses those questions may elicit.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| It's fundamentally embarrassing to be caught with your pants
| down not knowing the sort of basic things the line of
| questioning inevitably leads to. Most of us are intellectually
| sloppy. Few of us will admit to that.
|
| You'll find an army of people willing to defend say human
| rights, but very few of them could convince Socrates why. It's
| not that it's an indefensible position, of course it is, it's
| just that nobody really seems willing to shine light at central
| ideals like that. It's something that's so often taken for
| granted that very few actually bother to learn to motivate it,
| so when questioned, they flounder and fear maybe it can't be
| motivated, and react with aggression and threats instead of
| curiosity.
|
| In the end, the Socratic method is a harsh and bitter medicine
| that not everyone wants to swallow. Everyone likes to call
| themselves a skeptic when it comes to the thinking of others,
| but few wants their own assumptions scrutinized. I think
| walking around like Socrates accosting people with it probably
| will get you in trouble now as it did then.
| andi999 wrote:
| Well, _any_ position becomes indefensible when the socratic
| method is applied to it. So it doesnt seem _too_ useful.
| StanislavPetrov wrote:
| That isn't at all true. Only logically inconsistent
| positions are indefensible when applying the Socratic
| method.
| staticman2 wrote:
| In real life there is no judge who decides what position
| is defensible or indefensible using the socratic method.
|
| Someone accomplished in rheteric can pretty much argue
| anything in a logical manner.
| nine_zeros wrote:
| It's not even about being right or wrong. The person on the
| receiving end of the Socratic method can experience irritation
| and frustration. If you expect them to be collaborative after
| you engaged them in a time consuming, frustrating experience,
| you are in for a surprise.
|
| And if you (the questioner) are actually proven wrong after
| weeks of debate, rest assured you will never get the other
| person to listen to you. Next time, they'll ask you to "write
| up a doc" and prove that you know what the hell you are talking
| about.
| andi999 wrote:
| Are you ever proven wrong as the questioner. The original
| method consist of extending the argument so far that at some
| point some contradiction will show up. Instead of blaming it
| on the extension then one claims victory and that the
| original statement was wrong.
| bowsamic wrote:
| I don't even think it's the ego of the person being questioned,
| Socrates was a major annoyance in the incessant way he asked
| questions. It is quite rude by any measure, as shown by how
| often people get angry at him in those dialogues. However it is
| effective, at least for us to read
| StanislavPetrov wrote:
| >It is quite rude by any measure, as shown by how often
| people get angry at him in those dialogues.
|
| The way I read the dialogues people get angry with Socrates
| not because he is rude, but because his questions force them
| to confront their own hypocrisy and thoughtlessness.
| bowsamic wrote:
| I agree, but he deserved his legendary end. He is a lesson
| in both incessant questioning, and how not to talk to
| people if you want to keep your head. I think I would have
| hit him too
| thirtyfivecent wrote:
| Did someone try to talk to you about semen retention or
| something like this?
| BeetleB wrote:
| > The asking of questions is often regarded as hostile by those
| whose worldview or self-interest is threatened by the
| reasonable responses those questions may elicit
|
| Actually, it's a broader set of people. Most ordinary people
| don't like too many questions under ordinary circumstances.
| Every book on effective communications that I've read said that
| asking leading questions will trigger hostility and even if
| you're asking out of pure curiosity people will misinterpret
| them as leading questions. You have to develop the skill of
| signaling curiosity and asking in a manner that doesn't induce
| hostility.
|
| In my lifetime I've been shouted at multiple times due to using
| the Socratic method. It would always take me by surprise - I
| was always asking in good faith. Only when I read these books
| did I realize that it wasn't the people who were flawed but the
| method.
|
| There Are limited domains where it is effective - like between
| a teacher and a student or between two people engaging in
| rhetorical debate. But in most situations it's a bad idea.
| mistermann wrote:
| Scientists regularly run into complications getting things to
| work but with determination and cleverness can often find a
| way to make it happen - maybe the same is true here.
| DenisM wrote:
| Can you provide an example of such book?
| schoen wrote:
| I've heard that therapists are now taught to limit their use
| of "why [did|do] you..." questions to patients, because
| people are likely to instinctively take those as hostile or
| suspicious. Maybe these questions seem especially personal,
| and especially likely to bear a subtext of "it doesn't seem
| like you had a good reason".
| goto11 wrote:
| Socrates was not executed because he "asked questions". He was
| executed because he opposed the Athenian democracy and was
| considered partly responsible for the brutal oligarchy ("The 30
| tyrants") which was installed after Athens defeat in the
| Peloponnesian war. While Socrates did not directly support the
| tyranny, one of his students was a leading member. This is why
| Socrates was executed for "corrupting the youth" after the
| tyranny was overthrown.
| giantg2 wrote:
| "The asking of questions is often regarded as hostile by those
| whose worldview or self-interest is threatened by the
| reasonable responses those questions may elicit."
|
| I wish I was warned about this in school. My career has been
| condemned.
| whatshisface wrote:
| Cant you just work somewhere else?
| giantg2 wrote:
| Not really, for a variety of reasons.
| amp108 wrote:
| The only place the Socratic Method works is in the fictional
| dialogues of Plato, where Crito or Meno or Phaedrus or whomever
| are set up as obvious straw men, answering "yes" or "no" as Plato
| chooses, to questions most modern readers (and probably more than
| a few of his contemporaries) would answer differently.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-06-26 23:01 UTC)