The Socratic Method

Introduction

The Socratic Method was developed by Socrates and is used to engage someone over the meaning of some term or idea which lacks concrete definition and then to cross-examine the opponent (Brickhouse Jul 6, 2004 p. 24) until they eventually contradict themselves thus admitting failure in their understanding of the topic. This method had working elements allowing it to flow and prove so effective, which will be described in this essay.

The Socratic Method

Socrates' regular first move when teaching or arguing and the first element I will discuss, was the exhortation Ð''Let us consider the problem together'. In the dialogue Memorabilia, when challenged about his Ð''free' teaching and philosophizing Socrates said to Antiphon "Let's take a closer look, then, at the apparent hardships that you have noticed in my life" (McLeod 2007 p. 42)

He would listen to what the opponent thought rather then telling them what to think. Socrates was very strict in his discussions though and would never let the conversation become directionless, asking the right questions or repeating himself in simpler terms to keep it flowing. Socrates was a brilliant thinker, and insisted on a critical approach to key ethical issues in which he was highly interested. The objective of his enquiries was to establish a sufficient understanding of commonly used terms such as courage, piety, love, beauty and so on which were very old and seemed self explanatory to most people.

Another element relied on the opponent's understanding of a term, which Socrates would lure out of them with clever questioning and treat as a temporary definition. This was then subjected to his analysis and criticism. In some circumstances his analysis was simply to clarify the meaning of the words used. In most cases, however, Socrates developed an argument to show that the opponent's definition led to inconsistent information or unacceptable consequences.

Although not the hardest of battles for Socrates, a perfect example of this is shown In "The Beauty Contest". Socrates and his friends show their ironical views to the common obsession with beautiful appearance by making fun of the master's unattractive exterior. They do so by pitching him against the very handsome Critobulus in a sort of philosophical beauty contest. Socrates cuts straight to the point and asks "Do you think beauty exists in man alone, or in anything else?". Critobulus then answers that he finds beauty in a vast range of things which leads Socrates to say, "And how can all these things be beautiful when they bear no resemblance to each other? ". In Critobulus's definition he takes a functional approach to the term which allows Socrates to mockingly start listing all the beneficial functions of his own face in comparison to Critobulus's. Using his method Socrates eventually picks apart Critobulus and leaves him nowhere else to go within his definition of beauty.

Reading through the dialogues of Socrates we also see elements of Socratic irony. Socrates used this technique as a pose of ignorance assumed in order to entice others into making statements that can then be challenged.

This pose could be used simply as a sentence or as a whole persona. He uses this persona in Plato's Euthyphro, at the end of the dialogue Socrates still remains in ironic character, humbly petitioning Euthyphro "do not think me unworthyÐ'..." (Plato & Jowett 1988 p. 25) to continue his instruction. But we now see the point: "If you had no clear knowledge of piety and impiety, you would never have ventured to prosecute your old father for murderÐ'..."(Plato & Jowett 1988 p. 20) Since it is now obvious that Euthyphro does not have "clear knowledge of piety and impiety," it should be obvious to anyone, even Euthyphro, that he indeed should never have prosecuted his father. Socrates remains in character as Euthyphro's student, but he is here clearly laying out the conclusions that Euthyphro should draw. All Euthyphro needs to do is admit his own ignorance and then connect the dots. But as one Socrates rules will not simply tell him what to do.

Ð''The Delphic Oracle', which proclaimed that Socrates was the wisest of men because he knows that he knows nothing (Dempsey 2003 p. 63), can be responsible for the source of Socratic irony. This oracle has led Socrates to assume his highly ironic position of confessing his own ignorance, and yet showing his peers to be even more ignorant than he, thus great wisdom consists in a humble acknowledgment of ignorance. If we look at the dialogue of Phaedo we see that Socrates says "For at this moment I am sensible that I have not the temper of a philosopher, like a vulgar, I am a partisan" (Gallop 2002 p. 63). This is a complex example of Socratic irony where Socrates refers to himself as a partisan, when in fact he is the opposite and only a partisan to himself.

Although very effective for Socrates the method was generally negative in outcome, he was known for confusing, stinging and stunning his conversation partners into the unpleasant experience of realizing their own ignorance. Socrates being clearly stubborn and determined in his efforts to conquer his opponent also had to accept the circumstances when they would just not break, but took comfort in their self denial. In the case of Euthyphro we see just this; Euthyphro was obviously