Modern Socratic Dialogue
Based on the ideas of German philosopher Leonard Nelson (1882-1927), and developed by the Philosophical-Political Academy in Germany, the Society for the Furtherance of Critical Philosophy in the UK, and by the Dutch Association for Philosophical Practice, under the name ‘Socratic Dialogue’, Modern Socratic Dialogue is a powerful method for doing philosophy in a group.

Who can participate in a Modern Socratic Dialogue?
All that one needs to participate in a Modern Socratic Dialogue is an interest in deep questions and a willingness to discuss them openly, honestly, and with a respect for rational thought. No experience in philosophy or any other academic discipline is required. Professional groups can use the format to explore or define their values or missions.

What is distinctive about Modern Socratic Dialogue?
While the Modern Socratic Dialogue derives its name from Socrates, it is not an imitation of a Platonic dialogue and it is not simply a teaching strategy using questions and answers. It is a method of painstaking inquiry into the ideas, concepts and values which influence the real decisions we make in everyday life.

A Modern Socratic Dialogue is a collective attempt to find the answer to a fundamental question. The question is the centre of the dialogue, but rather than being discussed in the light of philosophical theory, it is exemplified in a concrete experience of one or more of the participants that is accessible to all other participants. Systematic reflection upon this experience is then the basis of the group’s search for shared judgements about the question.
 
The dialogue aims at consensus. This calls for effort, discipline and perseverance. Everyone’s thoughts need to be clarified in such a manner that participants understand each other fully. The discourse moves slowly and systematically, so that all participants gain insight into the content of the dialogue. Participants can also engage in meta-dialogue, which is about the process and strategies of the dialogue.
 
Each Modern Socratic Dialogue focuses on one topic. Examples of suitable topics include:

  • What is of fundamental importance in life?

  • What can we know?

  • What is human dignity?

  • Are there any fundamental human rights?

  • What can we learn from human suffering?

  • What is interpersonal love?

  • What do we understand by ‘Education’?

  • What (in a caring profession) is ‘caring’?

In professional contexts a group may have a preliminary meeting with the facilitator in order to define a topic most relevant to its own concerns.
 
Although the practice in Europe is mostly to run dialogues over a weekend or even a week, a useful dialogue can be conducted in one day or over several evenings. Dialogue groups should be no larger than ten and no smaller than six.

What can be gained from participating in a Modern Socratic Dialogue?
Modern Socratic Dialogue can be of value to anyone with an interest in philosophical thinking or in clarifying concepts and values, whether mature adults, students of any discipline, professionals in the public or private sectors such as teachers, nurses, managers, or corporate bodies. The benefits are manifest both in individuals and in groups. By drawing upon the experiences and insights of the group, an understanding can be achieved which is deeper and more authentically one’s own than is usually gained from more theoretical approaches. Apart from the pleasure of conceptual understanding for its own sake, such insight can also be of importance in reflecting upon one’s own life, professional practice, and values.

Moreover, the value of the Modern Socratic Dialogue arises as much from its processes as from its outcomes. The painstaking process of inquiry which it engenders develops one’s skills in intellectual discussion and broadens one’s experience of human life. It is an experience of what philosophy at its best can be. This is an especially valuable experience for students of philosophy at all levels, as well as for anyone with an interest in philosophy.
 
In a professional or corporate context, Modern Socratic Dialogue can be of value to individuals in that it leads to reflection upon professional experience and goals and the consolidation of commitment, and it can be of value to both public sector and private sector organisations in that it can lead to a finer definition of institutional missions and to the enhancement of professional collegiality. The exploration of ethical dilemmas in professional contexts is another area in which Modern Socratic Dialogue is especially effective.

Modern Socratic Dialogue as research
Scholarly research into values and concepts often takes the form of questionnaires and surveys, or of focus groups which ask people what their attitudes are to a given issue or what they would do in a given hypothetical scenario. Modern Socratic Dialogue can be used as a form of grounded, qualitative research which explores the implicit and explicit attitudes that people hold more deeply by exploring real judgements and actions.

Who are the facilitators?

Professor Stan van Hooft
Stan van Hooft is a Professor of Philosophy on the Burwood campus of Deakin University with over twenty-five years of teaching experience. He participated in his first Socratic Dialogue in Holland in 1991 and has attended several training seminars in Holland since. He has facilitated numerous Modern Socratic Dialogues in Melbourne with tertiary and secondary students, professional groups, and with groups drawn from the general public.

He is a member of the British Society for Consultant Philosophers, the Victorian Association for Philosophy in Schools, the Australian Association for Professional and Applied Ethics, and the Australian Bioethics Association. He is the author of Caring: An Essay in the Philosophy of Ethics, (Niwot, University Press of Colorado, 1995) and numerous journal articles on moral philosophy, business and nursing ethics, and philosophical psychology.

He is also a co-author of Facts and Values: An Introduction to Critical Thinking for Nurses, (Sydney, MacLennan and Petty, 1995). His Life, Death and Subjectivity: Moral Sources for Bioethics was published by Rodopi (Amsterdam) in 2004. Stan published two further books in 2006: Caring about Health, (Aldershot, Ashgate), and Understanding Virtue Ethics, (Chesham, Acumen Publishers). Acumen Publishers published his Cosmopolitanism: A Philosophy for Global Ethics in July, 2009. His current research centres on Global Ethics and Political Philosophy, the concept of caring in contemporary moral theory, and the role of hope in politics and religion. His new book on “Hope” was published by Acumen in 2011.

Peter Rzechorzek
Peter Rzechorzek, Bsurv DipEd MEd MA has lectured in Philosophy and in Education at Deakin University and at RMIT University for the best part of 20 years.  He has given workshops in philosophy and philosophical dialogue to a range of schools including Geelong Grammar, Xavier and Carey Grammar. Peter has consulted to the corporate sector on Negotiation theory and game design; his clients included NAB, VicRoads, BHP and the SECV.


How do I participate in a modern Socratic Dialogue?

Procedures

Modern Socratic Dialogue uses the following procedures:

  1. A well formulated, general question, or a statement, is set by the facilitator (sometimes in consultation with participants) before the discussion commences.

  2. The first step is to collect concrete examples experienced by participants in which the given topic plays a key role.

  3. One example is chosen by the group which will usually be the basis of the analysis and argumentation throughout the dialogue.

  4. Crucial statements made by participants are written down on a flip chart or board, so that all can have an overview and be clear about the sequence of the discourse.


Criteria for suitable examples

  1. The example should be an incident derived from the participant’s own experience; hypothetical or ‘generalised’ examples (‘quite often it happens to me that  . . . ‘) are not suitable. The incident or event should involve a judgement relating to the topic.

  2. Examples should not be very complicated ones; simple ones are often the best. Where a sequence of events has been presented, it would be best for the group to concentrate on one aspect of one event.

  3. The example has to be relevant for the topic of the dialogue and of interest to the other participants. Furthermore, all participants must be able to put themselves into the shoes of the person giving the example.

  4. The example should deal with an experience that has already come to an end. If the participant is still immersed in the experience it is not suitable. For example, if decisions are still to be taken, there is a risk that group members might be judgmental or offer advice; and if there is still an emotional involvement, the discussion might re-open emotional wounds.

  5. The participant giving the example has to be willing to present it fully and provide all the relevant actual information and answer questions so that the other participants are able to understand the example and its relevance to the central question.

  6. Positive examples: ie, examples that affirm the question or statement, are preferred.


Rules for Participants in a Modern Socratic Dialogue

There are nine basic rules for participants in Modern Socratic Dialogue:
 

  1. Each participant’s contribution is based upon what s/he has experienced, not upon what s/he has read or heard.

  2. The thinking and questioning is honest. This means that all and only genuine doubts about what has been said should be expressed.

  3. It is the responsibility of all participants to express their thoughts as clearly and concisely as possible, so that everyone is able to build on the ideas contributed by others earlier in the dialogue.

  4. Participants should not concentrate exclusively on their own thoughts but should make every effort to understand those of other participants. To assist with this, the facilitator may ask one participant to express in their own words what another participant has said.

  5. Anyone who has lost sight of the question or of the thread of the discussion should seek the help of others to clarify where the group stands.

  6. Abstract statements should be grounded in concrete experience or in the example which is central to the discussion in order to illuminate such statements. Avoid hypothetical statements or conjectures.

  7. Inquiry into relevant questions continues as long as participants either hold conflicting views or have not yet reached clarity.

  8. It is important and rewarding to participate in the whole of a dialogue even if there is disagreement. Everyone should endeavour to contribute regularly and not to cease participating before consensus is reached.

  9. Be brief.

Role of the Facilitator

The facilitator’s only task is to ensure that everyone follows the process. He or she does not introduce any content into the discussion.


Where can I get more information?

If you would like information about forthcoming Modern Socratic Dialogues, or if you would like to have a dialogue conducted in your organisation or for your students, contact ACP by email through the CONTACT US page.