Thread: Socratic Method

Originally Posted by becomingagodo

Any questions?[/b]

Nope. I think you answered them.

Nope. I think you answered them.[/b]

Thats not a question.

Originally Posted by becomingagodo

Thats not a question.
[/b]

It's an answer to your question.

It's an answer to your question.[/b]

Yes but it a anwser not a question if you question whether the anwser a question then it a question like is the whole sentence a question back their? Your only allowed to use questioning or you use questioning?

Is their anyone that doesnt suck at the socratic method?

Why?

Why?[/b]

What?

Why?

What is the the postulate of an axiom? LOL.

What is the the postulate of an axiom? LOL.[/b]

Well ask yourself what a postulate?
What are things made out of if their metaphysical?
I would tell you the anwser but it best that you question yourself or if you dont understand the words type them in a dictionnary.

Why don't you look up the definition?

I'm very aware of it's meaning.

It's quite funny if you ask me.

So really! What is the the postulate of an axiom?

So really! What is the the postulate of an axiom?[/b]

But that not the point of the socratic method. Okay since you dont want to think. Well a axiom is a assumption i.e. 1+1=2 now a postulate would be to change it but stay within the realm of the axiom i.e. 2+2=4 would be a postulate of a axiom. I could go into higher number theory were their is no truth between the statement 1=0 and 1=1 because their both axiom. I could go even further to godel who proved that years of mathematical work towards truth was worthless(that was a cold day for consertive mathematicians).

But that not the point of the socratic method. Okay since you dont want to think.[/b]

I thought enough to ask the question; What is the postulate of an axiom?

In order to elucidate, and for the purposes of epistemology, here is a link to wikipedia on the socratic method. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_Method

here is another to dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/

Now you can discover the definition by your self.

You also may want to book mark these sites, so you can research topics of interest, and discover definitions. This my increase you ability to sound like you know what your talking about!

What you are saying is don't ask questions. Figure it out yourself.


Why?

Should you never make any more threads? Do I say yes?

Originally Posted by ataraxis

Should you never make any more threads? Do I say yes?[/b]

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know."

Originally Posted by ataraxis

Should you never make any more threads? Do I say yes?[/b]

Originally Posted by Howetzer

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know."
[/b]

Oh, thanks for clearing that up for me...?

Is the pope actually satan?

Well that isn't a real question, it's a rethoric question... isn't it?

Originally Posted by Howetzer

As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know."
[/b]

Lmfao. That's gotta be one of the best quotes of 2006.
That Rummy was something else, wasn't he?

Originally Posted by becomingagodo

Socratic method is the method the uses questioning.
So what is this method?
Well it is simply this method
Now we got that sorted the method can be use for question that give anwsers. So when you use this method you ask yourself or someone a question. The question has another question intill it get down to more question and you should question to see if it goes down to axiom. Once you get basic assumption like 2+2=4 you go below this to question it truth i.e. can 2+2=6. Once you question it to the bottom you can get the underline assumption and figure out the question which is the question. You can use this method for nearly everything as something. Well 2+2 can equal anything it just depends on axioms question yourself about it.
Any questions?
[/b]

Way to go becomingagodo - now everyone thinks Socrates was a facetious prick. This is not the Socratic method. You are close, but about as close to the Socratic method as smearing blue on the wall is close to painting a Dali.

The Socratic Method in use:
Socrates: "Do you believe in abortion?"
Person: "No, killing is wrong."
S: "So you believe abortion is wrong because killing is wrong?"
P: "Yes"
S: "Do you believe criminals should be killed for commiting murder?"
P: (For the sake of this example, let us say they say...) "Yes"
S: "So you believe killing is right and wrong."

Notice how Socrates does not actually integrate his opinion or thought but focuses entirely on the other persons logical process. He then tries to exemplify their premises by bringing up what seems to be a completely irrelevant topic but uses it in order to learn the persons reasoning behind their opinions or philosophy.

That is the Socratic method. Not just arbitrarily asking questions with a pretentious tone to make it "profound" (ie. "Why..?", "Where is the soul..?"). Those questions are sophomoric, pointless, and useless. I think what you are confusing the Socratic method with someone else.. I can not remember his name now.. it sounded like Democritus though. (*I just did 20 minutes of searching the internet here to look for the name and finally gave up..sorry, I'll ask my professor*)

~

Damn..Thanks, O'nus. You too my utter confusion at what, exactly, this thread was outlining and completely flipped it around. Kudos.

Turns out, I use this method all the time, when trying to find out why people think the things they think.

You know a topic has hit rock bottom when Merlock links to it in IRC.

Originally Posted by O

S: "Do you believe criminals should be killed for commiting murder?"
P: (For the sake of this example, let us say they say...) "Yes"
S: "So you believe killing is right and wrong."
[/b]

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes..." - Obi-wan Kenobi

...Socrates was a Sith! We are all doomed!

But it is not becomingagodo who asked "Why". It was Howetzer. So why do you blame becomingagodo for asking "Why".

Anyway this method of argument is great as a logical, philosophical, and debate tool, but in my experience when you apply it in real life, people get pissed off pretty fast ( See what happened to poor Socrates in the end... ) and often don't listen to the end, so you can't reach the point you wanted to show. Even when you use it in Court, the judge might get impatient and tell you to get to the point already...

[15:20:49] [+Merlock]: I can't blame you, such things are bound to happen after reading this thread: http://www.dreamviews.com/forum/inde...howtopic=42162

Yeah.