Socrates Method

If you trust Plato’s notes, Socrates turned to this kind of discussion after Herafont, who was a friend of Socrates in his youth, visited the Delphic Pythia , who confirmed that there is no person in the world wiser than Socrates.

Socrates was puzzled by the high esteem he received from the Delphic soothsayer: he did not consider himself wise, but he could not admit that God lied, because it "did not bother him."

After much hesitation and reflection, Socrates decides to verify the truth of the prophecy. He resorts to an experiment consisting in a comparative analysis of himself and other people who are considered wise or are masters of their craft. Basically, he applied his method to ideas that did not have a specific definition, for example, to the basic moral principles of that time: piety, wisdom, courage, justice, restraint. Such a test reveals the implicit moral beliefs of the interlocutor, bringing inconsistency and inconsistency in his beliefs.

Socrates enters into a conversation with various prominent people of Athens, poets, artisans, about which we are told by the early dialogues of Plato, for example, Eutifron, in which Socrates raises moral issues and epistemological problems.

As a result of the experiment, Socrates reduced the prophecy of the prophetess to the following: “ In fact, God turns out to be wise, and with this saying he wants to say that human wisdom is worth little or nothing at all, and it seems that he doesn’t have It’s precisely Socrates who uses my name as an example, it’s all the same as if he said that of you, oh people, the wisest one who, like Socrates, knows that nothing is truly worth his wisdom. “In other words, the Pythia called Socrates the wisest of men, because he possesses the knowledge of his ignorance, that is,“ knows that he knows nothing ”- while the rest, unaware of their ignorance, consider themselves wise. After which Socrates decided to bring this knowledge to the people: “Well, as far as I am concerned, even now, going around different places, I seek out and inquire according to the word of God whether some of the citizens or strangers seem wise to me, and, as soon as “I don’t think it, I hasten to support God and show this man that he is not wise.”

By the 5th century BC there were 2 types of philosophers: philosophers and those who taught philosophy and rhetoric. Socrates belonged to the first, sophists to the second. The “ dialectical art ” of the sophists was the art of persuading, the art of argument, the art of argumentation, aimed only at winning the argument, and nothing else. The goal of Socrates has always been truth , and not the desire to win the dispute at all costs (right or wrong), as was customary among the sophists, who would rather not clarify, but rather obscure the subject of discussion, discussion, debate. The method by which Socrates showed the truth was called the method of Socrates.

Elenchus (other Greek test ) is the main technique of the Socrates method. In Plato's early dialogues, elenchus is Socrates' technique for exploring, for example, the essence or defining moral aspects such as justice or dignity. In the dialogue it was necessary to establish the universal moral basis of individual, private virtues.

The main components of the "Socratic" method:

• “Irony” and “mayevtica” - in form,
• “ Induction ” and “ definition ” - according to the content.

The irony of Socrates is a hidden mockery of the self-confidence of those who consider themselves "knowledgeable." Pretending to be a simpleton, Socrates asked a person a question on the topic in which he was knowledgeable. Socrates asked pre-thoughtful questions that gradually led the interlocutor to a standstill, until he, the interlocutor, finally became confused in his judgments. Thus, Socrates deprived the arrogance of a "knowledgeable" interlocutor, revealing contradictions in his judgments and inconsistencies between the initial premises and final conclusions.

After passing through this part of the dialogue, the interlocutor freed himself from his self-confidence and was ready to work together to seek the truth. And now, “Irony” was followed by “Mayevtika” - “the art of helping knowledge be born”. Socrates believed that the knowledge is already contained in the heads of the students, and the teacher’s task was only to extract this knowledge to the surface, bringing it to the consciousness of the person, which he did by asking leading questions or finding contradictions in the new statements of the interlocutor.

The entire content of the dialogue can be attributed to a kind of “induction” and “definition”.

The induction on Socrates consists in the fact that he never reaches the truth, but the movement to it takes place by the method of guidance. Guidance was achieved by climbing from private to general in the course of the conversation, which can be observed in the dialogue about the concept of “injustice” of Socrates and Eutidem.

First, Eutidem establishes a preliminary definition of injustice. "Injustice -. unjust acts (lies, deceit, robbery) - that is, what is bad, ”after which Socrates points out through questions about contradictions in the opponent’s statement“ And what about the enemy’s cunning (deceit) in battle? ” What about war trophies? (robbery)". And such guidance and the formation of definitions takes place throughout the dialogue.

As a result, as a result of a joint search for truth, it all comes down to the definition "Injustice is: a) bad deeds b) in relation to friends, c) that harm them."

In total, five steps of the “Socratic” conversation can be counted:

1. The interlocutor of Socrates affirms the thesis, for example, “Courage is the stamina of the soul,” which Socrates considers false.
2. Socrates, by means of general definitions, indicates to the opponent his contradictory thesis, for example, “Courage is good” and “Perseverance without prudence is bad.”
3. The opponent agrees with the inconsistency of his judgments. And he turns to Socrates for advice.
4. Socrates shows his ignorance in this aspect, thereby putting the opponent in a deadlock ("I know that I know nothing").
5. Further, Socrates, through conversation with leading questions, contributes to the “birth" of a new truth in the opponent.

Such a study can lead to a new, improved statement, which will be investigated again, in this case, “Courage is prudent perseverance.” The exact purpose of the test is the subject of much discussion, in particular whether it is a positive method that leads to knowledge, or a negative one, used only to refute false knowledge.

The reasons for the modern use of this method and its use by Socrates are not always equivalent. Socrates rarely used his method to develop theories, instead using myths to explain them.

For example, in Parmenides, Parmenides shows the use of the Socratic method to identify flaws in the theory of Plato's forms that Socrates represented. Instead of receiving answers, the method is used to refute existing theories, beyond the axioms and postulates that we take for granted.

The Circle of Socrates

The circle of Socrates (also known as the "Socratic" seminar) is a pedagogical approach based on the method of Socrates and is used to better absorb information. This technique involves the study of information through discussion and is based on the fact that the student already has any knowledge on the topic of discussion, and new knowledge is acquired by participating in the discussion. The purpose of this activity is that the participants in the discussion, expressing their opinions, come to a single answer, and not the victory of one person or group in a dispute (confirmation of the superiority of their theory over others).

This method is based on the belief that the participants in the discussion will gain deeper knowledge of the subject with thoughtful reasoning than through ordinary familiarization with the material. Despite the fact that “Socratic” seminars may differ in structure, they usually have the following composition: material that students should familiarize themselves with in advance, and two concentric circles of students: the inner and outer circles. The inner circle is focused on the analysis of the material using the Socrates method, that is, sequential questions and answers. At this time, the participants in the outer circle observe the discussion of the inner circle without entering into it.

When the discussion in the inner circle ends, the participants in the outer circle express an opinion about it. The duration of this process depends on the topic of discussion. The teacher can swap groups at his discretion, or the groups alternate after each discussion. The difference between this way of teaching and the usual method of teaching is the role of the teacher. The role of the teacher in the "Socratic" circle is only that he only directs the discussion in the right direction with the help of leading questions, while he is not a full-fledged participant in the discussion.

Circle Variations

1. Aquarium: Students together with the teacher form two circles: external (observers) and internal (active participants). Members of the inner circle are actively involved in the discussion of the issue proposed by the teacher. The rest of the students observe and speak when someone else's version is of interest to them; they complement, ask questions, specify. In this case, the “observer” should stand next to the active participant, who attracted him with his version. After discussing one problem (question), the participants switch places (those who stood outside the circle sit in a circle). It is advisable that all students be in a circle.
2. Panel method: Students are divided into groups of 6-8 people, which are located in an audience in a circle. The members of each group choose a representative or chairman who will defend their position in the discussion process. Within 15-20 minutes the group discusses the problem and develops a common point of view. Representatives of groups gather in the center of the circle and get the opportunity to express the opinion of the group, defending its position. The rest of the students follow the discussion and how accurately the representative of the group expresses a common position. They cannot express their own opinion, but can only transmit notes during the discussion in which they state their thoughts. Group representatives can take a break to consult with the rest of its members. The panel discussion ends after the allotted time or after a decision is made. After the discussion, group representatives conduct a critical review of the discussion, and decisions are made by all students.

It doesn’t matter what variation the teacher chooses. All seminars of this type encourage the collective work of participants with the subsequent formation of a common opinion on the topic of discussion. The emphasis is on critical and creative thinking.

The Socratic Question Method

The circle of Socrates is based on the interaction of students among themselves. Most of this interaction occurs in a question-answer system. The question method is an effective way to explore the depth of thought. Societal issues are used to keep the discussion active. They focus on general ideas, not specific information. Socrates' circle usually begins with a question posed by a teacher or other participant. The teacher asks leading questions, thereby preventing the participants from moving away from the topic of discussion, and also helping when the discussion comes to a standstill. It helps to delve deeper into the problem and develop many different positions on this topic by asking relevant questions. Participants are also responsible for maintaining the discussion in a “Socratic” circle. They carefully listen to what other participants are saying, as this helps them to express their thoughts convincingly, drawing on the opinions of previous speakers.

In the Socratic circle, questions are divided into 3 types:

1. The initial questions that give rise to the discussion at the beginning of the seminar.
2. Guide questions that help deepen and complement the discussion.
3. Final questions that lead participants to a debriefing.

Tips for applying the question method:

• Think in advance of the fundamental issues that will determine the essence and direction of the dialogue
• Follow the answers
• Ask probing questions
• Periodically summarize all of the above, recording key points of the discussion
• Connect as many participants as possible to the discussion
• Allow participants to independently discover new knowledge by answering the raised probing questions.

Psychotherapy

Socratic dialogue is an important element of various personality-oriented psychotherapeutic methods, the task of which is to engage the patient in cooperation and expand the scope of his consciousness. Since the days of Paul Dubois, the Socrates method has been used in psychotherapy to "develop and strengthen the patient’s mind, teach him to look at things correctly, pacify his feelings, changing the ideas that caused them." This method found its greatest application in classical Adlerian therapy, cognitive therapy and reality therapy, in which it is used as a kind of intellectual struggle, during which inconsistent, contradictory and unproven judgments of the patient are corrected. The therapist gradually, step by step, brings the patient to the necessary and planned conclusion. This process is based on logical reasoning, which is the essence of the methodology of Socratic dialogue. During the conversation, the therapist asks the patient questions so that he gives only positive answers, on the basis of which the patient is led to the adoption of a judgment that was not accepted at the beginning of the conversation, was incomprehensible or unknown.

The most developed is the Socratic dialogue in cognitive modality, where it is called the “cornerstone of cognitive therapy" and consists of 4 stages:

1. concrete questions,
2. empathic listening
3. summarizing,
4. analytical questions.

• Mayevtika
• Dialectics
• Sophism
• Stoicism
• Lecture
• Institutional memory
• Memorization
• Rational psychotherapy P. Dubois

• Apology of Socrates // Plato's Creations , trans. Vl. S. Soloviev, M.S. Soloviev and S.N. Trubetskoy. T. 2.M., 1903.
• Eutifron // Translation by S. Ya. Sheinman-Topshtein
• English Socratic Method Article

• Focht B.A. Pedagogical ideas of Socrates // Didact. - M. 1998. - No. 1 (22). - S. 60-64.
• Schulz O. E. The practice of Socratic dialogue in the analysis // Psychotherapy, practical and advisory psychology - the interweaving of fates: Materials of the International Congress. - Kiev. - October 4-7, 2012 // Monthly scientific and practical journal Psychotherapy. - Moscow, 2012. - No. 12. - S. 99-100.