Ask a Philosopher: I often get questions in emails about my blog or books. I have been replying to these on email but decided I might also start posting answers as part of a series “ask a philosopher.” Who wouldn’t want to ask a philosopher something?
Question: What is the Socratic Method? Doesn’t it mean always doubt everything nonstop? Or, never stop making noises that sound a little like questions?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/11/theater/socrates-democracy-public-theater.html
Reply: I am covering this with my students and then saw this article above posted by a former professor of mine. Would you have wanted to be around Socrates? I admire him and often speak highly of him but sometimes I hear others say he would have been a pain in the neck. Perhaps I relate to that as a philosopher.
The Socratic Method involves asking basic questions about what is being assumed in a discussion. This can also be called rational presuppositionalism. It is the use of reason to uncover presuppositions and test them for meaning. It is not the denial of the possibility of knowledge or the conditions for thought.
The Socratic Method involves questioning. But not simply questioning. Sometimes people think if they are still making noises then they are asking coherent questions. It involves asking basic questions like “what is wisdom” and “what is good.” These are basic because they are assumed by those that Socrates asks. These persons assume they are wise or that they are good. Therefore, they must know what it is to be wise and good and Socrates also wants to know and asks. I don’t think we need to read a cynical motive into this although many who claim to imitate Socrates are doing so for ulterior motives.
So Socrates asks basic questions that are assumed or presupposed by those he is questioning. But he also presupposes that knowledge is possible which is why he is on this mission. Socrates is not a Pyrrhonian skeptic. Pyrrho said that we cannot know and so withheld both assent and dissent. He neither affirmed nor denied. He wouldn’t agree that “a is a” and he wouldn’t deny that “a is a.” Pyrrho himself didn’t write anything but we remember him from other philosophers like Sextus Empiricus. These skeptics might spend their time showing that others do not know because they themselves do not believe knowledge (as Socrates understood it) is possible.
I worry that Socrates might get conflated with skeptics like Pyrrho or Sextus Empiricus. Socrates asked basic questions and in doing this revealed that others do not know what they assume about basic things. But Socrates did believe knowledge is possible and even thought he had come to know some things through this process. Pyrrho did not believe knowledge is possible and instead withheld belief. Socrates questioned the nature of knowledge but presupposed that humans can know as part of this process.
The Socratic Method involves asking basic questions about what is being assumed in a discussion. This can also be called rational presuppositionalism. It is the use of reason to uncover presuppositions and test them for meaning.