Being smart for others - Socratic Questioning

[TBRS1]

Smart people (not people who think they are smart, real smart people) have two main flaws:

1. They are smart.
2. They think about stuff a lot.

These both sound like good things, but if you add them together, they cause a problem - smart people end up being pretty confident about the conclusions they reach.

This makes them hard to talk to.

To illustrate, here's an imaginary conversation between Flat and Round:

Flat: The earth is obviously flat.
Round: No, the earth is obviously round.
End of conversation.

Lousy conversation.

Who is at fault for the lousy conversation? That would be Round.

Why? Very little information has been exchanged - yes/no is a binary question = 1 bit of info.

What if Round asked meaningful questions instead? Imagine this conversation:

Flat: The earth is obviously flat.
Round: When you say "obviously flat," what do you mean?
Flat: If you look at a photo of the earth taken from space, the earth looks like a round, flat pizza.
Round: Yeah, it sure does. But if the earth is flat, what would a person see if they were in an airplane and flew in one direction - say east, for example?
Flat: They would be able to see the edge of the earth, and maybe get a glimpse of earth's underside.
Round: Is that what happens?
Flat: Uhm... No...
Round: Why not?
Flat: Maybe the earth somehow wraps around itself.
Round: If it wraps around itself from side-to-side, and from top-to-bottom, what shape does that make?

This is a much better discussion - specifically because Round has used meaningful questions to lead Flat to realize their own error.

When a person "discovers" their own error they are much more likely to a change their mind than they are if somebody just tells them they are wrong.

This technique of discussion is called "Socratic Questioning."

 

[Judge]

The "Socratic Method" of teaching. Didn't hear of it until I saw a 1973 film that was somewhat dedicated to the process, called "The Paper Chase". Chronicling the life of a Harvard Law student, particularly in one class where Professor Kingsfield ruthlessly applied the Socratic Method to teaching his revered class of contract law. With all the students jockeying to get the highest grade as a "badge of honor" in a future job market.

LOL....that actually gave me nightmares. Where an instructor asks a question, then selects a student to answer it, whether they are prepared to do so or not.

Whew...I don't recall one class in college where that was done. Maybe I was just lucky.

 

[Mary Terry]

The "Socratic Method" of teaching. Didn't hear of it until I saw a 1973 film that was somewhat dedicated to the process, called "The Paper Chase". Chronicling the life of a Harvard Law student, particularly in one class where Professor Kingsfield ruthlessly applied the Socratic Method to teaching his revered class of contract law. With all the students jockeying to get the highest grade as a "badge of honor" in a future job market.

LOL....that actually gave me nightmares. Where an instructor asks a question, then selects a student to answer it, whether they are prepared to do so or not.

Whew...I don't recall one class in college where that was done. Maybe I was just lucky.

The law school I attended used nothing but the Socratic method. Every professor, every class, for 3 years. No professor ever told us "The answer" to anything. It actually is good training for lawyers because there is no one in the real world to tell you what the answer is - you have to do the research to figure it out.

 

[Judge]

The law school I attended used nothing but the Socratic method. Every professor, every class, for 3 years. No professor ever told us "The answer" to anything. It actually is good training for lawyers because there is no one in the real world to tell you what the answer is - you have to do the research to figure it out.

Not at all surprised. Not a pleasant prospect, but I agree it certainly is an effective tool to motivated students. For the rest, God help them.

 

[Neri]

Touching on this, also affiliated with what, here in Australia is called, "critical thinking" was the best thing about my university experience.

 

[TBRS1]

Not at all surprised. Not a pleasant prospect, but I agree it certainly is an effective tool to motivated students. For the rest, God help them.

If you ever read about using Socratic questioning, there is always a warning.

The warning is: The one asking questions must be sincere.

Questions can be asked in such a way that their purpose is to make the one answering look stupid. When this happens, the person was said to be engaging in "Sophistries."

Now-a-days we just call them "belligerent pseudointellectuals," or "total jerks."

That's not what was happening in the video, but it does happen fairly often I.R.L.

 

[Neonatal RRT]

I use this technique in class, as well. At some point, in nearly every discussion or lecture, someone will raise their hand and ask a question that might lead to a wrong answer or even the wrong question. What do you do with these situations? Clearly, this student isn't quite following along with the logic of the lecture, but this is a classroom, where we are all supposed to learn. Ok, so, I will say something like, "Elaborate on this point." or I will ask them to answer a question they can answer about the topic, then I will ask them another, and perhaps another in order to direct them towards answering their own question with their own logic. As someone with autism, and an instructor, I thoroughly enjoy the process, but also like to get a feel for someone's intellect and the ways their mind works. Sure, you run into some low intellect people sometimes, but other times, you run into an "out-of-the-box" thinker that others may laugh at and think stupid, but then when you give this person a chance to elaborate, their mind is quite brilliant.

Even on here, I will get into a discussion with someone, back and forth. At no point will you find me thinking anyone is stupid, but you will find me allowing them to elaborate on their thoughts, and being fair and neutral most of the time. I really enjoy the process of revealing the truth. What I find most often are logical, well-thought answers within the context of a narrow perspective and a tendency towards black and white thinking, and as such, they reveal their cognitive biases.

 

[Judge]

I must say, it seems to me this method would be imperative given the inherent high stakes of medicine in general.

 

[TBRS1]

I must say, it seems to me this method would be imperative given the inherent high stakes of medicine in general.

It is a great way to create a powerful habit of deep analysis, and being able to justify one's conclusions based on definable evidence.

There are some professions where one really wants people who can do that.