20220421140740-problem_solving.org

The Socratic Method: A Practitioner’s Handbook

Chapters 1-5

• TODO: backfill notes

Elements of the Socratic Method

1. proceeds by question and answer
   • some questions are open ended (especially in the beginning)
   • e.g. propose a definition
   • the person being questioned is the partner of the inquirer
2. focus on consistency of statements
   • consistency is probed with the elenchus
   • partner should feel compelled to refine their statements or abandon them
3. questions should aim to identify the principles behind statements
   • then show principle covers things it shouldn’t or omits things it should
4. use concrete examples to drive reasoning
   • use ordinary examples from everyday interactions
   • make headway on hard problems by talking about specific cases
5. don’t claim expertise
   • Socrates constantly confesses his own ignorance
   • dialogues often end at an impasse, without an answer

Takeaways

• denying what someone says is the act of a friend
• the Socratic method should make your more humble and aware of your own ignorance

The Elenchus

Etymology

• means “search”
• testing, refutation, shame, ridicule
  • the latter two should be reserved for introspection

Process

• make a claim
• agree to other propositions (possibly logical conclusion)
• demonstrate inconsistencies
  • something has to give
  • often a modification of the original claim
  • finding these inconsistencies is the point

Consistency and Truth

• elenchus is a tool for finding inconsistencies
  • falsification, tearing down bad claims (negative logic)
• is it possible to build claims using this technique? (positive logic)
  • in science, the strength of our belief in a proposition is proportional to the evidence supporting it and the number of assaults it survives
  • Vlastos’ solution
    • everyone holds at least some true beliefs (axiom)
    • beliefs that survive consistency checks with everything else you believe are likely to be true
    • broad agreement within a belief system
• accumulation of a set of mutually consistent beliefs is a worthy project
  • cumulative consistency
• internal inconsistency between two ideas means one of them has to be wrong
  • persuasiveness
    • if ideas conflict with new data, one might doubt the data
    • if ideas conflict with each other, can’t attack the author

Reliability of Consistency

• is consistency enough? what about being consistent but wrong?
• can a repellent set of ideas be internally consistent?
  • unlikely: bedrock principles will conflict with some other held truth

Shame

• the “pain in the ribs” one feels at embarrassing propositions
• fear of what others will say or think has no place in moral reasoning
  • threat to honest inquiry
• the good kind of shame is that which you’d feel by adopting a morally bad position, forcing you to reconsider your claims or positions
• discomfort from:
  • realizing you don’t know what you’re talking about
  • you were overconfident, too sure of yourself
• teaches humility

Uses

• to poke holes in ideas, showing them to be faulty
• to fend off attacks of ideas by showing holes in their counters
  • indirect support of a claim

Example

• courage is mental persistence
• would you agree courage is admirable? (yes)
• what about unintelligent mental persistence? (e.g stubbornness)
  • isn’t that harmful or dangerous? (yes)
  • are harmful things admirable? (no)
• so this kind of persistence isn’t courage? (no)
• conclusion: original claim or definition needs revision

Systole and Diastole

Defining Terms

• make a claim, state the principle behind the claim
  • show it is either too restrictive or too broad
  • by examining expansion and contraction, we arrive at better approximations
• two skills of the mind are required
  • detecting similarities among things that seem different
  • detecting differences among things that seem similar
• systole: drawing together
  • in book: finding commonality, a general case or principle
• diastole: separation
  • in book: finding distinction, what separates this from that
• note: the examples given to these words are at odds with the medical meanings
  • systole is the contraction of the heart (narrowing)
  • diastole is the expansion or relaxation of the heart
  • my opinion: probably best not to get hung up on these Greek labels
    • better to talk about finding commonality or making distinctions

Know It When You See It (KIWYSI)

• priority of definition: the claim that you can’t know something if you can’t define it precisely
  • known (fairly or not) as the Socratic fallacy
• KIWYSI is legitimate: we can often identify examples before we have a good definition
  • we should understand our knowledge to be provisional
• definitions provide clarity, especially useful for hard or edge cases

Collection and Division

• putting a subject into one of two categories
• subdividing that category into more categories
• diairesis: a form of classification used in ancient (especially Platonic) logic that serves to systematize concepts and come to definitions
  • perhaps not the best way to define something, but can still be useful to compare things and learn about them
  • reflection: might also be useful for finding alternative solutions to problems

Analogy

• analogies aren’t arguments, but can make reasoning more clear
• they can be used to compare abstract ideas to more familiar ones
  • used to show how a claim works
• fill-in-the-blank: start an analogy and let partner finish it
  • can move an conversation forward
• begin with distinctions and examples that are easy and familiar, then try to map onto harder examples
• extended analogies compare two things at length to make an idea more vivid
  • established analogies can also be turned to make a very strong point
• offering choice between analogies can also be powerful
• analogies look like observations, but actually make claims
  • sometimes the best response is to reject the analogy
• epagoge: an argument in which specific examples lead to a general conclusion
  • inductive reasoning

Socratic Rules for Dialogue

Seek Truth

• seek truth rather than merely try to win an argument (dialectic not eristic)
  • dialectic: formal system of reasoning that arrives at the truth by the exchange of logical arguments
  • eristic: given to disputation for its own sake and often employing specious arguments

Examine People As Well As Claims

• examine people (myself and others) not just claims
  • it isn’t easy (or desirable?) to separate people from ideas
  • care of the psyche, mind, intelligence
  • testing consistency is testing the holder of claims as well as compatibility

Judge Arguments on Their Merits

• judge arguments on their merits, not by their author
  • primacy of reason
  • “I shall be very grateful if you refute me and deliver me from my foolishness.”
  • claims are judged strictly by the quality of the reasoning and evidence that supports them

Speak Candidly

• speak candidly: say what you think, not what others may want to hear
• you can’t seek truth if you’d shy away from speaking it
• rather than merely agree if you don’t understand, disagree by default unless you’re sure
  • this way the argument can be refined or approached from a different angle until one is satisfied
  • it’s better to seem slow than to persist in confusion
• also prevents weasly backtracking “well I never really meant that”
  • changing one’s mind in light of persuasion or evidence is fine
• important difference: sometimes the questioner must play “Devil’s advocate” to examine a claim deeply

One-Witness Principle

• numbers count for nothing
• the whole world in favor or against speaks not at all to the veracity of a claim
• Christopher Hitchens: “One person with a right opinion outweighs a majority.”
• interlocutor must be the one to assent
• the crowd is not to be trusted, especially when a horde can be summoned instantly
  • Twitter, anyone?

Principle of Charity

• principle of charity: assume best intentions of the other
• construe their meaning in the most reasonable light
  • assume opponent is smart and well-meaning
• work to represent the position of the partner/opponent in the strongest possible terms
  • steel man vs. straw man
  • improve the other person’s argument if you can
• come up with the strongest objections to your own views
  • run towards the hardest problems, not away from them

Offensiveness

• strive not to give nor to take offense
  • it’s as bad to take offense as to give it
  • takes courage and commitment to seeking truth
  • in any case, “I’m offended” isn’t an argument
• people feel strongly about certain issues
  • politics, religion, etc
  • disagreement when feelings are at stake can be perceived as personal attacks
    • avoid lines of argument that tweak personal sensitivities
    • use examples that don’t strike close to home
    • when people are worried the other side will take offense, they don’t say what they mean
    • honest inquiry is difficult (if not impossible) under these conditions
• be polite
  • choose words carefully and attempt to convey personal respect
  • if the conversation gets heated, nothing wrong with clearing up what you meant
  • A gentleman is someone who gives offense only when he means to.

Ignorance

• Socratic inquiry begins with an awareness of our own ignorance
  • we begin and end in this state
    • along the way, hopefully, there is some progress
    • the difficulty of ascertaining truth should teach us humility
• journey is not from question to answer, but from question to question
• principal project: uproot conceit of certainty in one’s own mind
• Socrates really does have a low opinion of his wisdom
  • he has a lower opinion of the wisdom of others only because they have such a high opinion of their own
• knowing one is ignorant is better than being ignorant of one’s ignorance
  • this double ignorance is termed “stupidity” in Sophist 229cd
  • the remedy is education (perhaps especially philosophy)
• can be used as a tool for exploring ideas that are firmly rooted
  • pretend I know nothing, walk me through this point by point
  • I will ask questions, some may be naive
  • let’s see where the answers go
• intellectual midwifery: eliciting ideas from others

Aporia

• to be at a loss what course to pursue, where to begin to end, what to say
• an irresolvable internal contradiction or logical disjunction
• literally “without a way”; a sense of disorientation and perplexity
• generally arrive here when all prior ideas have been refuted
• common ending for Socratic dialogues once reason has been exhausted
• we are not perplexed about things we know:
  • e.g. I have two eyes
• we are not perplexed by things we know we don’t know
  • e.g. I know nothing of ballet
• we are only perplexed by things we thought we knew, but didn’t
• aporia is a sign that we’ve departed the dreaded state of double ignorance
  • we must be purged of our prejudices before learning can begin
  • can also be powerful motivator, spurring us to think more