Although "the Socratic technique" is usually understood as a mode of pedagogy concerning cross-questioning among instructor and scholar, there has lengthy been debate between students of old philosophy approximately how this technique as attributed to Socrates may be outlined or, certainly, no matter if Socrates may be stated to have used any unmarried, uniform process in any respect specified to his approach of philosophizing. This quantity brings jointly essays via classicists and philosophers analyzing this controversy anew.
The element of departure for plenty of of these engaged within the debate has been the id of Socratic strategy with "the elenchus" as a method of logical argumentation aimed toward refuting an interlocutor, which Gregory Vlastos highlighted in an influential article in 1983. The essays during this quantity glance back at some of the concerns to which Vlastos drew awareness but additionally search to expand the dialogue way past the boundaries of his formula.
Some members query the suitability of the elenchus as a common description of ways Socrates engages his interlocutors; others hint the ancient origins of the categories of argumentation Socrates employs; others discover equipment as well as the elenchus that Socrates makes use of; numerous suggest new methods of wondering Socratic practices. 8 essays specialize in particular dialogues, every one studying why Plato has Socrates use the actual equipment he does within the context outlined by means of the discussion. total, representing a variety of ways in Platonic scholarship, the amount goals to liven up and reorient the controversy over Socratic strategy so one can set a brand new time table for destiny study.
Contributors are Hayden W. Ausland, Hugh H. Benson, Thomas C. Brickhouse, Michelle wood worker, John M. Carvalho, Lloyd P. Gerson, Francisco J. Gonzalez, James H. Lesher, Mark McPherran, Ronald M. Polansky, Gerald A. Press, François Renaud, and W. Thomas Schmid, Nicholas D. Smith, P. Christopher Smith, Harold Tarrant, Joanne B. Waugh, and Charles M. Young.