The Socratic Method - How to Always Get Consent

Every person is familiar with the phrase “Truth is born in dispute.” But is this really so? Socrates, the greatest philosopher of all time, was confident that argument does not contribute to finding true knowledge, unlike conversation. Philosophy appeals to concepts: an argument is a desire to defend one’s position, but not in any way to “get through to the truth,” but a conversation is a discussion aimed at identifying the truth.

Most likely, this phrase arose as a result of an incorrect interpretation of his words, as a result of which many people mistakenly began to believe that the dispute could lead to something useful. However, the feeling of one’s own superiority that arises as a consequence of victory will never compare with the variety of feelings that arise as a result of the discovery of truth - which, in fact, is what the great philosopher actually spoke about.

In this article we will briefly outline the main ideas of the philosophy of Socrates and his dialectical method, and then we will tell you in detail about the innovative technology in teaching based on this method - Socratic seminars.

The essence of the Socratic method

Socratic dialogue in psychotherapy is a way of constructing a conversation in which the interlocutor ultimately agrees with what you say. You need to act like this: put the main question in third place, put forward questions for the first two to which the person will definitely answer “yes”. It is important that they are short and not overwhelming or time consuming.

As the name suggests, the Socratic method was created by the famous Greek philosopher. He not only loved to argue. In conversations, he always asked his opponents questions to which only affirmative answers could be given. So Socrates helped to see the full picture, to draw conclusions that were not noticeable at the beginning of the dialogue.

Now the Socratic method looks like this: you divide the idea you want to convey into 3 parts. You present each of them to your interlocutor in the form of a question to which you need to give a short answer. It is often predictable. It turns out that by your actions you seize the initiative and encourage the person to respond the way you need.

One of the modifications of the Socratic method is the principle of three “Yes”. In this case, the opponent also receives 3 questions. But they are not sequential, but randomly collected.

The main advantage of this way of building a dialogue is the prevention of disputes. And they are inevitable if a person does not understand what you want to say. But it’s important not to overdo it here. Remember that you are having a conversation. If you start a monologue, you will not be able to achieve your goal. You can convince your interlocutor with the help of a monologue. But this method is extremely ineffective.

Basic principles of Socratic dialogue

Conducting a conversation using the Socratic method is based on several principles:

The interlocutor should have enough information to answer your question. Be very specific. Don't ask about things that go beyond knowledge.
Direct attention to those details that a person might have overlooked. Give him the opportunity to consider different points of view. Don't insist on any one option.
Use the hourglass principle. Move from abstract things to more concrete ones and vice versa.

At the end of the Socratic conversation, a person will see a complete picture of the current situation. He will not only draw the right conclusions, but will also be able to independently answer the questions you ask. And he will answer the way you need.

Where is the technology used now?

This method can be used in a variety of areas of human activity, in the process of analyzing all kinds of problems and searching for their original causes. Questions allow you to explore the cause-and-effect relationships underlying a particular problem.

Nowadays, Socratic dialogue is often used in sales. It is one of the techniques for manipulating the mind of a potential buyer, who is asked skillfully planned questions in advance. The purpose of such questions is to arouse the client's intention to buy the item.

A positive purpose for using the Socratic technique could be in the areas of education and psychological counseling. In this case, a person comes to understand certain truths that were previously inaccessible to him, but with the awareness of which his life becomes brighter and more versatile.

Three stages of Socratic dialogue

So, the Socratic dialogue consists of 3 parts. Each of them pursues its own goal:

Agreement. The interlocutor no longer wants to contradict you.
Doubt. Be careful about what you think about the topic of conversation.
Argumentation. Taking into account your opponent's arguments, you propose a solution to the situation.

Let's take a closer look at an example. Let’s say your opinion and the person’s opinion are radically different from each other. You are confident that you are right, but all attempts to prove it are met with resistance or complete ignoring. What to do? Use the Socratic method.

Agreement

At this stage, you need to find something in common, something that you can agree on without compromising your point of view. Let your opponent know that you are not putting pressure on him in any way. This approach will help direct the dialogue in a positive direction, and you will be able to at least briefly express your opinion.

You need to make sure that your agreement shows how things really are and is not a formality.

Doubt

Once you have established a friendly atmosphere, move on to looking for weaknesses in the argumentation on the part of the interlocutor. This will help reassure him that pressure is inappropriate.

Military officials say that to win a war you don't have to be 100% superior to the enemy in every way. It is enough to have superiority in just one stage. The same is true in dialogue. According to the Socratic method, there is no need to reject absolutely everything a person says. Doubt any one aspect of his reasoning. One doubt will cause a wave of others. Thanks to this, the interlocutor will be able to critically evaluate his opinion.

At this stage, it is important to remember 2 points. Firstly, you should not prove to your opponent that he is fundamentally wrong. Make him come to this conclusion himself. Secondly, try to look at the situation from the other person's point of view. Don't look for what you doubt. Think about what your interlocutor might doubt.

Argumentation

Now it's your turn to voice your point of view. You can give arguments, justify and defend your opinion. By this stage, a person will no longer offer resistance. He will be ready to receive what you say.

If everything is done correctly, then at this stage you will be able to bring those arguments that are suitable specifically for your interlocutor. This means that they will be more effective than general phrases.

Links[edit]

Jarratt, Susan S. Rereading the Sophists: Classical Rhetoric Remade
. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991, p. 83.
Jump up
↑ Sprague 1972, p. 5.
Liddell, Scott and Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon
, 9th edition.
Webster's New World College Dictionary
, 4th edition;
Oxford English Dictionary
.
Gregory Vlastos, "The Socratic Elenchus", Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy I
, Oxford 1983, 27–58.
Michael Frede, "Plato's Arguments and the Form of Dialogue", Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy
, Supplementary Volume 1992, Oxford 1992, 201–19.
Stephen Salkever, "Methods of Interpretation of Plato and His Dialogues" (Bryn Mawr Classical Review)
W. K. C. Guthrie (1968) The Greek Philosophers from Thales to Aristotle
, p. 74, London: Routledge.
^ B s d e g Matt
(2010).
Socratic Circles: Encouraging Critical and Creative Thinking in Middle and High School
. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse.
^ a b
"Socratic Circle" (PDF). Retrieved July 17, 2012.
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m
"Furman: A Socratic Seminar" (PDF). Retrieved July 17, 2012.
Ting Chowning, Jeanne (October 2009). "Socratic Seminars in the Science Classroom." Science teacher
.
National Science Teachers Association. 76
(7): 38.
Gose, Michael (January 2009). “When Socratic Dialogue Fade: Questions and Strategies for Engaging Students.” College education
.
57
(1): 46. DOI: 10.3200/CTCH.57.1.45-50. S2CID 144482413.
^ a b c d
“Paideia Seminar: Active Thinking through the Dialogue Center. 3.4 Planning step 3: Select text". Retrieved July 16, 2012.
^ a b c
Horzempa, Barbara;
Lapidus, Laurie (January 2009). “To find yourself, think for yourself.” Teaching exceptional children
.
41
(3):54–59. DOI: 10.1177/004005990904100306. S2CID 146880761.
^ a b c d
Mangrum, Jennifer (April 2010).
"Sharing Practice through Socratic Seminars." Kappan
.
91
(7): 40–43. DOI: 10.1177/003172171009100708. S2CID 144053420.
^ a b
"Facing History and Ourselves: A Socratic Seminar". Retrieved July 16, 2012.
Gose, Michael (2009). “When the Socratic dialogue fades away; Issues and Strategies for Student Engagement.” College education
.
57
(1): 45–50. DOI: 10.3200/CTCH.57.1.45-50. S2CID 144482413.
Lukas, Elizabeth, Logotherapy Textbook, 2000, p. 86
Overholser 1993, pp. 75–85.
Overholser 1993, pp. 286-293.
Overholser 1993, pp. 283-292.
Delic, Becirovic, Haris, Senad (November 2016). "The Socratic Method as an Approach to Teaching". European researcher from the Russian Federation
- via researchgate.net.
Delic, Becirovic, Haris, Senad (November 2016). "The Socratic Method as an Approach to Teaching". Russian Federation, European Explorer
.
111
: 511–517 - via researchgate.net.

Example of a 3-step dialogue

Imagine a dialogue regarding purchasing a car. Let's say that your interlocutor considers expensive cars to be of better quality. Inexpensive options for him are a source of additional hassle. How to build a conversation?

Agreement. Tell me that cars really can be both cheap and expensive. The same goes for quality. Agree with this statement.
Doubt. Here we can mention the fact that not all expensive cars are suitable for our roads and climatic conditions. And it’s not always possible to buy spare parts for them without problems. In some cases, you have to place an order abroad.
Argumentation. At this stage, it would be appropriate to note that for cheaper and simpler cars it is easier to find the necessary parts. They can be bought at any car dealership. You don’t have to search headlong for them in other cities or countries, and then wait months for delivery.

The Socratic method of dialogue is applicable in any field. He will help you emerge victorious from any, even the most uncomfortable or delicate situation.

Conversations with children using the Socratic method

It is noteworthy that the Socratic method is also suitable for conversations with children. It not only helps to convince the child that he is right. This is a great help in helping him learn to think and reason logically.

As stated above, the essence of the method is to ask consistent questions with predictable answers. As a result, the child himself draws the necessary conclusion. Feeling friendliness and kindness on your part, he will be ready to agree to anything.

When conducting a dialogue with children, it is important for you to clearly understand the end goal. You need to approach her with short, simple questions that your little interlocutor can only answer in the affirmative.

Example conversation

For example, we can cite the situation of going to the zoo. The problem is that the child does not want to go to bed, although in order to implement plans tomorrow he needs to get up early. What questions can you ask him?

First, remind you about the trip.
We will only be able to get to the zoo before lunch. Will we have time?
What does it take to be on time?
What needs to be done today so that we can get up on time tomorrow?
If we need to wake up at 7 o'clock, what time is best to go to bed today?
It's already late. Shall we go to bed or cancel the trip?

By answering these simple questions, the child will understand what and how he needs to do. The main thing is not to order and threaten, but to reason and give reasons.

Correct graph of confidence in your knowledge

This graph shows the dependence of confidence on one's own knowledge. It is similar to the graph from the Dunning-Kruger effect, but there will be differences.

Let us assume that confidence in knowledge is equal to the ratio of the volume of one’s own knowledge to the volume of knowledge of the second circle (K1/K2). Both parameters change over time.

Lines on the graph:

The blue line shows confidence in your own knowledge.
The red line shows the size of the second circle of knowledge.
The green line shows the difference between the amount of knowledge of the second circle and the amount of one’s own knowledge (K2-K1). You can look at the table with data and graph here.

How to train the Socratic method

Learning Socratic conversation doesn't take long. In this process, it is important to highlight and adhere to a number of simple rules.

Think through the logic

Your main task is to convey an important idea to your interlocutor. But sometimes it happens that you yourself do not fully understand it. In order to correct the situation, write it down on paper. Then indicate the most important thing. If possible, illustrate what you want to say. This will enliven your thought and make it more vivid.

Formulate your points

Translate the words into questions that the interlocutor can answer with the word “yes.” Think about whether they will help him see the right direction? Will he be able to answer in the affirmative?

Where to start a dialogue

If the interlocutor is not in the mood for a conversation, it is unlikely that your attempts to prove something to him will be crowned with success. Therefore, try to interest them from the first words. Make the person want to listen.

Take the initiative

There is no need to wait until the interlocutor starts saying something or objecting to you. Ask prepared questions. In order not to hesitate, train in this matter. Several times a day, ask questions that your interlocutor will answer in the affirmative in any case.

Problems and disadvantages[edit]

Scientists such as Peter Bogosian suggest that while this method improves creative and critical thinking, it has a downside. He argues that teachers using this method wait for students to make mistakes, thereby creating a kind of negative feeling in the classroom, exposing the student to possible ridicule and humiliation. [23]

Some have refuted this idea, saying that the humiliation and ridicule are not due to the method, but to the student's lack of knowledge. Boghossian notes that while questions may be puzzling, they are not intended to be that way, in fact such questions provoke students and can be countered by using counterexamples. [24]

Confession

Socrates was someone who believed what he said, thereby attracting more and more followers.

He could sometimes be too straightforward and harsh in his statements. He publicly condemned his fellow citizens for their vices. Of course, this behavior contributed to the emergence of enemies.

One of the insulted was the wealthy and influential democrat Anit. Wounded pride prompted him to take revenge. He filed a complaint in court. Socrates was charged with “corrupting youth and denying the state religion.”

Socrates bravely stood before the court. The philosopher’s magnificent speech is reproduced in Plato’s first philosophical work, “Apology of Socrates” (“Defense of Socrates”). However, the judges were unmoved. He only added fuel to the fire by bitterly joking: “According to my merits, instead of any punishment, I would have appointed myself a dinner in Prytaneia” (Luxurious feasts were held there in honor of especially important citizens).

The enraged judges offered a choice: death by poison or exile. He believed that by running away, he would betray all his ideals. That's why I chose death. On the day of his execution, Socrates immediately drained the cup of hemlock, a deadly poison.

Soon the people of Athens realized their mistake and repented of their deeds. Mourning was declared, and those who slandered Socrates were executed. The Athenians wanted to atone for their guilt; they erected a bronze statue in honor of the deceased philosopher.