The Socratic method is used to prove to someone that they are wrong, if at all, at least in part, by leading them to agree with statements that contradict their initial assertion. Since Socrates argued that the first step towards knowledge is the recognition of one's ignorance, it is not surprising that his method of discussion, instead of demonstrating his point of view, focuses on proving the opposite of that of his "opponent. ", using a series of questions (list) that lead to the other person's aporia (amazement). This method is taught to law students to help them develop their critical thinking skills, as well as being used in psychotherapy, in manager training and in many normal school classes.
Steps
Step 1. Find the statement that sums up your "opponent" argument
Socrates would obtain such information by asking the other person to define the object or topic in question, for example: "What is justice?" or "What is the truth?" You can use this method with any declarative statement that a person seems confident about, for example, even very trivially: "This table is blue".
Step 2. Examine the implications of the statement
Suppose the assertion is false and find examples where it actually is. Are you able to find a scenario, real or imaginary, in which such a statement is inconsistent or absurd? Summarize this scenario in one question:
- "Is this table always blue for a blind person?"
- If the answer is no, go to the next step.
- If the answer is yes, ask, "What makes the table blue for a blind person and not green, red or yellow? That is, if someone can't see, what makes the table blue?" Such a question might astound many people who look at colors only as they exist in the perception of human experience. In this case, go to the next step.
Step 3. Change the initial statement to include the new exception
Like, "So the table is blue only for those who can see it."
Challenge the new statement with another question. For example: "Now, if the table is in the center of an empty room, where no one can see it, does it still remain blue?" Eventually, you should come up with a statement that the other person agrees with. but at the same time contradicts his initial assertion. In this example, you may end up emphasizing the subjectivity of color perception and arguing (using questions and not affirmations) that color exists only in people's minds as a result of their perception, and that it is not a true characteristic of the table. In other words, the table itself is not blue, but it is your "opponent" perception of it that is blue. If the person in question rejects existentialism as hypothetical truth may still disagree with your final statement.
Advice
- Using the Socratic method does not mean proving people that they are wrong but questioning the assumptions and assumptions. If your goal is to argue effectively, Socrates may offer some advice, however this method is best used for the purpose of questioning even one's own beliefs.
- The key to using the Socratic method is to be humble. Don't assume that you, or anyone else, know a certain thing for sure. Question any assumptions.
- Remember that the purpose of the Socratic method is to examine the different possibilities, asking questions and not giving answers. Socrates was known (and criticized) for asking questions to which he himself often had no answers.
Warnings
- Although Plato often insists that Socrates was unable to provide answers to the questions he poses, just from the writings of Plato (the only way we know of Socrates) it can be assumed that in fact his teacher often asked questions for which he already had answers. Many professors of law and economics are known to use this technique of rhetorical questions in their teachings, as are some religious figures, first of all Jesus of Nazareth.
- Socrates, the inventor and creator of this method, was condemned to drink hemlock for annoying too many people. While it is quite unlikely that an excessive use of the Socratic method of discussion will lead you to the same fate, it is quite possible that few will be more willing to speak to you if you make it a habit to dismantle any declarative statements that reach your ear every time.. Discuss in a warm and friendly way and try not to embarrass or annoy the other person who is participating in the debate.
