Chapter 4/7

Socrates would then ask them to explain what they meant by some key word or phrase, particularly when they used the heavy words: justice, love, courage, good, excellence, integrity, or beauty. When they had explained how they were using words or sentences, he then suggested that if this is what they meant, then something else, something they could not accept, would have to be true. By continual questioning, he showed their definitions to be inadequate, incomplete, or even self-contradictory.

Let’s suppose one of us commented on the beauty of a rich red rose on a bush and the other asked what she had meant by beauty. Further suppose the answer was, “Just look at the rich red color, have you ever seen anything more beautiful?”

“Oh, so you mean that the beauty of the rose lies in its redness.”
“Yes, that’s what makes it beautiful.”
“So, if we see a pure yellow rose, we cannot say it is beautiful, because it is not red.”
“No, that’s not what I mean. A yellow rose can be beautiful, as can a pink or a white one.”
“Ah, so do you mean that beauty lies in pure, rich color?”
“Yes, that is exactly what I mean.”
“Look across the street at the young lady on the sidewalk. Don’t you think she is beautiful?”
“She is very beautiful. That is Jessica Taylor, everyone knows how beautiful she is.”
“Does her beauty reside in the color of her skin, or of her hair, her eyes, or her clothing?”
“No, there is more to beauty than color.”
“So, what is this ‘more’ you speak of?”

In such manner Socrates led others to rethink their ideas. His goal was to expose ignorance so that the search for truth could begin. All of this was done through guided, persistent, and purposive conversation. The resolution of the issue at hand always depended on the interaction between the two conversants. Socrates never told others his own ideas, but rather led them to think through their own. Teachers, lawyers, parents, and others have picked up this “Socratic method” and continue to use it to this day. This is Socrates’ use of the DIALECTIC.