Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Socrates Way of Questioning
While reading the first book of The Republic, I found it very interesting how Socrates speaks to his acquaintances. He seems to look for "precision", something which is later noted by Thrasymachus. However, the organization of thought and the breaking down of an original definition or belief is done similarly to the modern lawyer, in my perspective. He asks questions that appear almost rhetorical to him. They seem to be about things that he may already know the answers to. For example, when referring to justice, Socrates continually asks Polemarchus if justice is useful in certain aspects, such as agriculture or shoemaking. He asks him repetitively, almost as if Polemarchus is being examined. Does anyone agree with this interpretation? If not, what do you perceive this form of questioning as?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that Scorates's way of questioning is that of a lawyer. It is very logical and analytical. But, I don't think he asks questions he knows the answers to. I think he still questions, because he hasn't found the answers. But, if he does know the answers, then he probably questions, because he wants others to explore ideas and find the answer themselves by way of critical thinking.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jessica in that the way he's questioning what he does isn't necessarily rhetorical but something in which he wishes to gain more insight. Even if he does know the answer, he wishes for others to find it themselves and through this process he might gain something more out of it, making him all the wiser.
ReplyDeleteOne thing about Socrates' line of questioning that I both love and find annoying is that he asks questions that are unrelated to the subject at hand, yet he claims to be relevant in proving his point. For example, towards the end of Book 1, Socrates begins to close the argument against Thrasymachus. He tries to explain to Thrasymachus that the justice is the virtue of the soul. To get to this point, he argues that each thing that has work also has an assigned virtue. When deprived of their virtue, things work badly. He creates examples for Thrasymachus that allow him to "include everything else in the same argument" (353d).
ReplyDeleteI think it's clever and cunning that Socrates is able to make statements that his opponents will agree with, and then connect that statement to his argument.
I agree with the fact that Socrates asks questions that he doesn't know the answer to. But to me, it almost seams like he doesn't expect others to have answers either. I think he poses them in a rhetorical way but each time is surprised to get an answer. I think he continues to ask so many questions because in a way he is interrogating the people he's talking to, because he wants to know what makes them have an answer to the question he's asking.
ReplyDeleteI feel like you are right in your interpretation that Socrates already knows the answers to the questions he asks. He seems to know where the line of questioning is going and what he wants to prove. Then he uses this to prove his own point, in almost an arrogant way. Despite this, his questions are so precise and he is always able to come back to his point, which really demonstrates his thoughtfulness and ability to think on his feet.
ReplyDeleteI think Socrates' form of communicating his philosophy with others is through his form of questioning- most of Plato's books are in dialogue form, in which one person brings up his ideas and another one responds with a critique or an alternation. This form of questioning another's thoughts is the only way to thoroughly allow an audience to understand his train of thought ad how he approaches at the ideas that he does. In asking questions that he doesn't necessarily know the answers to, he inspires his readers and audience to think on their own.
ReplyDeleteAmy Shih
I also think it is a way for Plato to show his perception of Socrates as well. I agree he is very thorough in the way that he questions and directs the conversation. I believe he is able to use his acquaintances as a tool for them to understand his thought process and to prove how their answers are usually incorrect. I do agree, Jessica, that there are things he may not have answers to; however, he already seems certain that what others are purposing about specific topics is false. Thus, we must assume that he does know where the questions are leading.
ReplyDeleteI feel that rather than knowing what's right, Socrates is able to detect what's wrong in the theories/ideas of those who have conversations with him, and uses logic to prove them wrong. Then, through a series of more questions and answers, he arrives at an answer that he himself is unsure of until he tests it out himself. I agree that one reason why he may use the question and answer format rather than a speech is to help those who are listening understand his logic and arrive at the same conclusion.
ReplyDeleteI, too, thought that the way he interrogated everyone was similar to a lawyer, as he didn't assert anything nor deny it either. The way Socrates poses his questions is very strategic and the fact that he says he knows nothing is also very sneaky, because in a way, it's true. There's no complete assurance about matters such as justice since, as we see in Plato's Republic, the notion of justice varies from situation to situation. Similarly, the meaning of morals (as we talked in class) differs as we could be referring it to religion or just in an ethical way. I think the fact that Socrates was asking all his questions in a "suspicious" way made Polemarchus and Thrasymachus even more prone to fall for his tricks as they felt compelled to answer "yes" or "no", because each argument could essentially be argued against or for.
ReplyDelete