- Elenchus redirects here. For the brachiopod genus, see Elenchus (brachiopod).
Socratic Method (or Method of Elenchus or Socratic Debate) is a dialectic method of inquiry, largely applied to the examination of key moral concepts and first described by
Plato in the Socratic Dialogues. For this,
Socrates is customarily regarded as the father of Western ethics or moral philosophy.
It is a form of philosophical inquiry. It typically involves two speakers at any one time,
with one leading the discussion and the other agreeing to certain assumptions put forward for his acceptance or rejection. The
method is credited to Socrates, who began to engage in such discussion with his fellow
Athenians after a visit to the Oracle of Delphi. Diogenes Laertius, however, wrote that Protagoras invented the
“Socratic” method.[1][2]
The practice involves asking a series of questions surrounding a central issue, and answering questions of the others
involved. Generally this involves the defense of one point of view against another and is oppositional. The best way to 'win' is
to make the opponent contradict themselves in some way that proves the inquirer's own point.
Plato famously formalized the Socratic Elenctic style in prose — presenting Socrates as the curious questioner of some
prominent Athenian interlocutor — in some of his early dialogues, such as Euthyphro or
Ion, and the method is most commonly found within the so-called "Socratic
dialogues", which generally portray Socrates engaging in the method and questioning his fellow citizens about moral and
epistemological issues.
The term Socratic Questioning is used to describe a kind of questioning in which an original question is responded to
as though it were an answer. This in turn forces the first questioner to reformulate a new question in light of the progress of
the discourse.
Method
Elenkhos (Greek: ἔλεγχος, a cross-examination for the purpose of refutation),
more usually spelled 'elenchus',[3] is the central
technique of the Socratic method.
In Plato's early dialogues, the elenchos is the technique Socrates uses to investigate, for example, the nature or definition of ethical concepts such as justice or
virtue. According to one general characterization (Vlastos, 1983), it has the following steps:
- Socrates' interlocutor asserts a thesis, for example 'Courage is endurance of the
soul', which Socrates considers false and targets for refutation.
- Socrates secures his interlocutor's agreement to further premises, for example 'Courage is a fine thing' and 'Ignorant
endurance is not a fine thing'.
- Socrates then argues, and the interlocutor agrees, that these further premises imply the contrary of the original thesis, in
this case it leads to: 'courage is not endurance of the soul'.
- Socrates then claims that he has shown that his interlocutor's thesis is false and that its contrary is true.
One elenctic examination can lead to a new, more refined, examination of the concept being considered, in this case it invites
an examination of the claim: 'Courage is wise endurance of the soul'. Most Socratic inquiries consist of a series of
elenchai and typically end in aporia.
Frede (1992) insists that step #4 above makes nonsense of the aporetic nature of the early dialogues. If any claim has shown
to be true then it can not be the case that the interlocutors are in aporia, a state where they no longer know what to say about
the subject under discussion.
The exact nature of the elenchos is subject to a great deal of debate, in particular concerning whether it is a positive
method, leading to knowledge, or a negative method used solely to refute false claims to knowledge.
The Socratic method is a negative method of hypotheses elimination, in that better hypotheses are found by steadily
identifying and eliminating those which lead to contradictions. The method of Socrates is a search for the underlying hypotheses,
assumptions, or axioms, which may subconsciously shape one's opinion, and to make them the
subject of scrutiny, to determine their consistency with other beliefs. The basic form is a series of questions formulated as tests of logic and fact intended to help a person or
group discover their beliefs about some topic, exploring the definitions or logoi (singular logos), seeking to characterize the general
characteristics shared by various particular instances. To the extent to which this method is designed to bring out definitions
implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding, it was called the method of
maieutics. Aristotle attributed to Socrates the
discovery of the method of definition and induction, which he regarded as the essence of the scientific method. Perhaps oddly,
however, Aristotle also claimed that this method is not suitable for ethics.
Application
Socrates generally applied his method of examination to concepts that seem to lack any concrete definition; e.g., the key
moral concepts at the time, the virtues of piety,
wisdom, temperance,
courage, and justice. Such an examination
challenged the implicit moral beliefs of the interlocutors, bringing out inadequacies and inconsistencies in their beliefs, and
usually resulting in puzzlement known as aporia. In view of such inadequacies, Socrates
himself professed his ignorance, but others still claimed to have knowledge. Socrates believed that his awareness of his
ignorance made him wiser than those who, though ignorant, still claimed knowledge. Although this belief seems paradoxical at
first glance, it in fact allowed Socrates to discover his own errors where others might assume they were correct. This claim was
known by the anecdote of the Delphic oracular pronouncement that Socrates was the wisest of all men. (Or, rather, that no man was
wiser than Socrates.)
Socrates used this claim of wisdom as the basis of his moral exhortation. Accordingly, he claimed that the chief goodness
consists in the caring of the soul concerned with moral truth and moral understanding, that "wealth does not bring goodness, but
goodness brings wealth and every other blessing, both to the individual and to the state", and that "life without examination
[dialogue] is not worth living". It is with this in mind that the Socratic Method is employed.
The motive for the modern usage of this method and Socrates' use are not necessarily equivalent. Socrates rarely used the
method to actually develop consistent theories, instead using myth to explain them. The
Parmenides shows Parmenides using the Socratic method to point out the flaws in the
Platonic theory of the Forms, as presented by Socrates; it is not the only dialogue in which theories normally expounded by
Plato/Socrates are broken down through dialectic. Instead of arriving at answers, the method was used to break down the theories
we hold, to go "beyond" the axioms and postulates we take for granted. Therefore, myth and the Socratic method are not meant by
Plato to be incompatible; they have different purposes, and are often described as the "left hand" and "right hand" paths to the
good and wisdom.
Law school
- See also: Casebook method
The Socratic method is widely used in contemporary legal education by many law schools in
the United States. In a typical class setting, the professor asks a question and calls on
a student who may or may not have volunteered an answer. The professor either then continues to ask the student questions or
moves on to another student.
The employment of the Socratic method has some uniform features but can also be heavily influenced by the temperament of the
teacher. The method begins by calling on a student at random, and asking about a central argument put forth by one of the judges
(typically on the side of the majority) in an assigned case. The first step is to ask the student to paraphrase the argument, in
order to ensure that the student has read and has a basic understanding of the case. (Students who have not read the case, for
whatever reason, must take the opportunity to "pass," which most professors allow as a matter of course a few times per term.)
Assuming the student has read the case and can articulate the court's argument, the teacher then asks whether the student agrees
with the argument. The teacher then typically plays Devil's advocate, trying to force
the student to defend his or her position by rebutting arguments against it.
These subsequent questions can take a few forms. Sometimes they seek to challenge the assumptions upon which the student based
the previous answer until it breaks. Further questions can also be designed to move a student toward greater specificity, either
in understanding a rule of law or a particular case. The teacher may attempt to propose a hypothetical situation in which the
student's assertion would seem to demand an exception. Finally professors use the Socratic method to allow students to come to
legal principles on their own through carefully worded questions that spur a particular train
of thought.
One hallmark of Socratic questioning is that typically there is more than one "correct" answer, and more often, no clear
answer at all. The primary goal of the Socratic method in law schools is not to answer usually unanswerable questions, but to
explore the contours of often difficult legal issues and to teach students the critical thinking skills they will need as
lawyers. This is often done by altering the facts of a particular case to tease out how the result might be different. This
method encourages students to go beyond memorizing the facts of a case and instead focus on application of legal rules to
fungible fact patterns. As the assigned texts are typically case law, the Socratic method, if properly used, can display that
judges' decisions are usually conscientiously made but are based on certain premises, belief, and conclusions that are the
subject of legitimate argument.
Sometimes, the class ends with a quick discussion of doctrinal foundations (legal rules) to anchor the students in
contemporary legal understanding of an issue. In other classes the class simply ends and students are forced to figure out for
themselves the legal rules or principles that were at issue. For this method to work, the students are expected to be prepared
for class in advance by reading the assigned materials (case opinions, notes, law review articles, etc.) and by familiarizing
themselves with the general outlines of the subject matter.
Psychotherapy
The Socratic method has been adapted for psychotherapy, most prominently in Classical Adlerian psychotherapy and Cognitive
therapy. It can be used to clarify meaning, feeling, and consequences, as well as to gradually unfold insight, or explore
alternative actions.
Lesson plan elements for teachers in classrooms
A skillful teacher can teach students to think for themselves using this method. This is the only classic method of teaching
that was designed to create genuinely autonomous thinkers. There are some crucial lesson
plan elements to this form of teaching:
- The teacher and student must agree on the topic of instruction.
- The student must agree to attempt to answer questions from the teacher.
- The teacher and student must be willing to accept any correctly-reasoned answer. That is, the reasoning process must be
considered more important than pre-conceived facts or beliefs.
- The teacher's questions must expose errors in the students' reasoning or beliefs. That is,
the teacher must reason more quickly and correctly than the student, and discover errors in the students' reasoning, and then
formulate a question that the students cannot answer except by a correct reasoning process. To perform this service, the teacher
must be very quick-thinking about the classic errors in reasoning.
- If the teacher makes an error of logic or fact, it is acceptable for a student to correct the teacher.
Since a discussion is not a dialogue, it is not a proper medium for the Socratic method. However, it is helpful — if second
best — if the teacher is able to lead a group of students in a discussion. This is not always possible in situations that require
the teacher to evaluate students, but it is preferable pedagogically, because it encourages the
students to reason rather than appeal to authority.
More loosely, one can label any process of thorough-going questioning in a dialogue as an instance of the Socratic method.
See also
References
- ^ Jarratt, Susan C. Rereading the Sophists: Classical Rhetoric
Refigured. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991., p 83.
- ^ Sprague, Rosamond Kent, The Older Sophists, Hackett Publishing
Company (ISBN 0-87220-556-8)., p. 5
- ^ Webster's New World College Dictionary, 4th Edition
- Vlastos, Gregory (1983) ‘The Socratic Elenchus’, in Oxford Studies in Ancient
Philosophy 1: 27–58.
- Benson, Hugh (2000) Socratic Wisdom (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
- Jarratt, Susan C. Rereading the Sophists: Classical Rhetoric Refigured. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois
University Press, 1991.
- Sprague, Rosamond Kent, The Older Sophists, Hackett Publishing Company ISBN 0-87220-556-8
External links
- Robinson, Richard, Plato's Earlier Dialectic, 2nd edition (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1953).
- Philosopher.org - 'Tips on Starting
your own Socrates Cafe', Christopher Phillips, Cecilia Phillips
- UChicago.edu - 'The
Socratic Method', Elizabeth Garrett (1998)
- Alfred Adler
Institute of Northwestern Washington 'Adler and Socrates: Similarities and Differences', Henry Stein
- SocraticMethod.net - A Socratic Method
Research Portal
- Teaching by Asking Instead of by
Telling, and example from Rick Garlikov
- Project Gutenberg: Works by
Plato
- Project Gutenberg: Works by
Xenophon (includes some Socratic works)
- Project Gutenberg: Works by
Cicero (includes some works in the "Socratic dialogue" format)
- The Socratic Club
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)