On Socratic
Conferences:
The questions we ask
so that they may learn
“I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only make them
think.”
-Socrates
I could say a great many things about
Socrates. However, I have a distinct feeling that many of those things would
risk me getting fired, since I would feel obligated to curse occasionally in
order to properly express my thoughts on the matter. I do have a respect for
Socrates—especially after reading Plato’s account of his trial. I just
recognize that, if asked to list a given number of Socrates’ personality
traits, some variant of the word arrogance—or at the very least one with
similar implications—would need to be included to properly characterize him.
But he was also brilliant. Not necessarily
right, but brilliant nonetheless. According to him, he didn’t believe that to
be true—even though one of his friends had gone to the Oracle at Delphi and
been told that Socrates was the smartest man alive. Socrates then insisted on
proving this by traveling around Athens and asking those who were revered as
highly intelligent questions in order to prove that they knew something he did
not. All he ended up finding was that he, at the very least, knew that he did
not know anything.
And thus the Socratic Method was born.
Of course, the purpose is significantly
different when the Socratic Method is applied to the Writing Center. The point
is not to demonstrate to the writer that they are idiots. There are advantages
to showing writers that their perceptions of their writing do not match their actual
writing abilities, but there are more amiable ways to do that than making them
look like idiots. Rather, the purpose of the Socratic Method is to force
individuals to think critically about what they are writing by asking them
questions about it. They will develop their ideas further, be challenged and
asked to explain what they know, and in doing so will clarify for themselves
the topic of discussion. And, for writers who are scared and frustrated by
writing and intimidated by the blank screen in front of them, expressing their
ideas verbally overcomes any issues they have in putting their ideas into
writing. People tend to be far more accustomed to speaking than writing, and therefore
they waste fewer mental processes in using that form of communication—though
there are occasionally strange individuals like myself who go through points
where they are better able to communicate ideas through writing than speech for
the same reason.
The Socratic Method, as applicable to the
Writing Center, does possess several other modifications from Socrates’
application. Most prominently, the Socratic Method does not require one to bear
certain resemblances to the nether regions of donkeys in order to be
utilized—or at least so I’m told. I cannot make definitive statements about
that, as through my application of the Socratic Method I have been told by
several individuals—by one in particular on multiple occasions—that I can be
very frustrating at times because I keep asking questions they can’t answer.
They then later insist that their paper improved and that, aggravating as I may
have been during a conference, I helped them significantly. I hope that they
were not trying to spare my feelings in that.
However, the Socratic Method is almost an
inescapable part of being a consultant because it is devoted to asking
questions. “Why” happens to be a good staple, but repeatedly asking that makes
one sound like an inquisitive child, who very quickly becomes frustrating
because they don’t grasp the concept that no one exactly knows why everything
happens. It’s a good mental exercise of course, but eventually it just starts
to make your brain hurt, and consultants need to avoid frightening off writers.
Admittedly, the Socratic Method is not always the best at preventing writers
from becoming frustrated. While it can help build confidence if the writers are
able to answer the questions effectively and develop their ideas, enough
questions which they cannot answer to their own satisfaction leads to aggravation.
Thus, a large degree of its success relies on proper application.
The Socratic Method does, however, have numerous
advantages. Foremost, it does not require knowledge of the subject matter in
order to be effective. Knowledge of that subject matter is still advantageous,
but that’s a topic for a different post. This does not mean that one can know
nothing and still apply the Socratic Method. One simply needs to know how to
ask the right questions and be able to follow the logical train of thought the writer
possesses so that, through inquiry, the consultant can challenge the writer’s
understanding of their subject matter and force them to defend and develop
their own ideas. Thankfully, that is a very specific skillset that is easier to
practice and apply than individual knowledge of the writer’s topic—especially
since the writer is the one who needs to be the authority on the subject
matter, not the consultant.
Yet, I would be doing a disservice if I did
not point out the greatest flaw in this method of conferencing: in its pure
form, one cannot make definitive statements about whether something is right,
wrong, intelligent, stupid, or apply any other sort of value judgment directly
to the process. There is something to be said for not making value judgments—the
intention of the Writing Center is to have peers rather than authorities and
above all it helps prevent consultants from making mistakes—and I know there
are several notable members of our writing center who would insist that is a
good thing. I am not one of them. Once again though, that is a topic for
another time.
-Patrick Johnson