Description 

The Socratic method originates in the question-and-answer method of philosophizing that is used by Socrates in Plato’s dialogues. In these dialogues, Socrates often pretended to be ignorant (known as Socratic irony), asked experts questions, and subsequently debunked the statements that the experts thought to be true.

There are various ways to apply the method. The original method followed the following steps according to Vlastos (1983):

1. Socrates’ interlocutor asserts a thesis, for example “Courage is endurance of the soul”.
2. Socrates decides whether the thesis is false and targets for refutation.
3. Socrates secures his interlocutor’s agreement to further premises, for example “Courage is a fine thing” and “Ignorant endurance is not a fine thing”.
4. Socrates then argues, and the interlocutor agrees, these further premises imply the contrary of the original thesis; in this case, it leads to: “courage is not endurance of the soul”.
5. Socrates then claims he has shown his interlocutor’s thesis is false and its negation is true.

There are also other versions of the method, for example Lam (2011) mentions the following four steps:

1. eliciting relevant preconceptions,
2. clarifying preconceptions,
3. testing one’s own hypotheses or encountered propositions,
4. deciding whether to accept the hypotheses or propositions.

Socrates considered himself to be an intellectual midwife in the dialogues. Whereas midwifery helps women give birth, Socrates did not take care of the body, but of the soul. He would help his conversational partners give birth to an idea, instead of a child.

Although it can look like the method can be used to lead people into a predetermined direction, like in the dialogues of Plato, one can also see that Socrates’ goal was often to help people understand the limitations or inconsistencies in their own thinking, rather than imposing his own views on them. The Socratic method, how it is used today, is more a form of dialectical questioning that disinterestedly pursues truth and encourages critical thinking and self-discovery (Oxford Companion, p.837-838). It is a method that stimulates thought and inquiry rather than about guiding someone toward a specific answer.

Although the Socratic method has method in its name, it is more of a philosophical tool. This skill has many practical applications and it is used in a variety of settings. One of the main areas where the Socratic method is applied is education. In various US law schools for example, teachers ask their students questions until either the student gives a wrong answer or reasoning or the teacher is satisfied with the student’s responses. The goal is to develop critical-thinking skills in students and to improve their intellectual thinking about the law.

Another surprising area where the Socratic method is used is (animal rights) street outreach. The goal here is to help people reach the conclusion for themselves that exploiting animals is wrong and veganism is the right way to live. Activists see this as a potentially more effective way to convince people with other views, because they think people are more likely to adopt a belief if they reach that conclusion by themselves, rather than being told what to do. The question might be raised whether this is more similar to the older style of using the Socratic method, since it seems like the activists are leading the conversation partner in a certain direction, and this might be a valid critique. However, activists might respond that the method is only effective if the activists are truly open to people reaching their own conclusions. They will argue that veganism is the natural outcome when applying this method, since they think that all rational arguments used in a conversation will lead to the conclusion they have already reached. Another similarity with Socrates is that these activists hold their conversations in the streets, just like Socrates.

Finally, the Socratic method has also been used in psychotherapy. In various ways, like classical Adlerian psychotherapy, logotherapy, rational emotive behavior therapy, cognitive therapy and reality therapy, the method has been adapted for psychotherapy. It can help people understand, explore emotions, understand outcomes, gain new insights, and explore different options.

Application of the Socratic Method to Migration and Borders

In this next section, I will apply the Socratic method in a conversation with ChatGPT. We will speak about the topic of migration and borders. In the conversation, I will try to use Lam’s approach to the Socratic method.

Philosophy Student (PS): What do you think the role of borders is in migration?

Artificial Intelligence (AI): Borders play a crucial role in migration as they demarcate the legal and territorial boundaries of nations. These borders determine who can enter, stay, or work within a country, and they are subject to immigration policies and laws. Borders influence the ease or difficulty of migration, affecting the lives of migrants, their opportunities, and their legal status. They also represent a point where the interests of a nation’s security, economy, and humanitarian concerns intersect, making border control a complex and often contentious aspect of migration governance.

PS: There are people in need, because they are fleeing from war, are economically deprived, in hunger, or oppressed in other ways that are stopped by borders and as a result they continue to suffer. What do you think about that?

AI: I believe that it is indeed a thought-provoking and morally complex issue. The suffering of people who are in need, as you described, and the restrictions imposed by borders create a significant ethical dilemma. However, nations have legitimate concerns related to security and resource allocation, and the need to enforce immigration policies. On the other hand, there’s a moral imperative to provide aid and refuge to those in distress. It calls into question the balance between the sovereignty of nations and the ethical obligation to address human suffering.

PS: Can you tell me why we should prioritize the sovereignty of nations?

AI: An argument for prioritizing the sovereignty of nations is that it is a fundamental principle of international order and governance. Respect for the sovereignty of each nation is a cornerstone of the United Nations and international law. By respecting the borders and sovereignty of nations, we maintain stability and the rule of law in a world of diverse cultures and interests. It allows countries to make decisions about their domestic policies, including immigration, in a manner that suits their unique circumstances and priorities. Upholding national sovereignty can also be seen as a way to prevent undue interference or potential conflicts between nations.

PS: In a world where borders determine which people can pursue happiness and where the limits to their happiness lies, a world where people die from war, hunger and climate change, why is stability and rule of law worth protecting?

AI: Your question raises important ethical concerns. While stability and the rule of law are valuable principles, they must be balanced against the fundamental human rights and well-being of all individuals, regardless of their place of birth. The suffering of those affected by war, hunger, and climate change highlights the urgency of addressing global challenges. In such a world, the moral imperative to alleviate human suffering and protect lives may indeed outweigh the emphasis on stability and the rule of law.

PS: You say that the moral imperative to alleviate human suffering might weigh heavier than stability and the rule of law. Are there other reasons why citizens might feel uncomfortable about migration?

AI: Certainly, for example in the Dutch context, some citizens may feel uncomfortable about migration due to cultural apprehension. They might fear that an influx of migrants could lead to changes in Dutch culture or traditions. This concern may manifest as worries about the preservation of national identity.

PS: You mention that Dutch people might feel that their national identity is threatened. However, would you not say that migrants and a diverse culture are part of the Dutch identity? What is the Dutch national identity according to you and in what way do migrants threaten it if that is already part of the Dutch identity?

AI: The Dutch national identity is a dynamic fusion of values such as tolerance, freedom, and multiculturalism, enriched by a history of global engagement and trade. Migrants and cultural diversity have historically been integral to this identity, shaping Dutch society. While some may perceive increased diversity as a threat, it should be viewed as an opportunity to embrace evolving notions of Dutchness, enriched by the contributions of newcomers. In this light, migration enhances rather than threatens the Dutch national identity, nurturing a more inclusive and dynamic cultural landscape.

Q: ​​I would like to talk about a song that discusses Dutch national identity. Do you know the song by Lange Frans and Baas B called ‘Het Land Van”? Can you apply the song to the topic of migration and borders?

A: Yes, I’m familiar with the song “Het Land Van” by Lange Frans and Baas B. The song, while primarily addressing various aspects of Dutch society and identity, can be applied to the topic of borders in the context of migration.

The lyrics of the song could be seen as a reflection of the changing nature of borders in the modern world. It highlights the complexities and challenges faced by nations, including the Netherlands, in an increasingly interconnected global community. The song may suggest that, while borders exist as political and geographic demarcations, there’s a need to recognize the human aspect of migration and the shared values that transcend national boundaries. It can be used as a catalyst for discussions on the role of borders in contemporary society and the need for compassionate and responsible border policies.

PS: The following question I asked in Dutch, because it posed an interesting question. ‘Grens’ is the Dutch word for border, but the AI translated it as boundary. That gave the AI an interesting insight in how borders function as boundaries in other aspects of life as well so I decided to keep both the question in Dutch and English in there.

PS: (Dutch): Waar ligt de grens van een mens die zijn geluk wil vinden?

Translation (English): Where is the boundary of a person seeking their happiness?

AI: The boundary of a person seeking their happiness often lies in the opportunities and chances they have in life, determined by factors like place of birth, laws, and social circumstances. However, it can also depend on determination, willpower, and the ability to overcome obstacles. It’s a complex balance between external constraints and inner strength.

PS: You are saying that a border is not just a boundary on a map, but that there are also other borders that limit our chances in life, like laws and social circumstances. Do you think that there is then also migration in relation to these other borders?

AI: Your observation is astute. Borders, in the broader sense, can encompass not only geographical boundaries but also legal, societal, and economic barriers that limit opportunities and chances in life. Migration, in a more abstract sense, can indeed be related to overcoming these other borders. People often seek to migrate or move within their own countries to escape such limitations or to access better opportunities, be it economic, educational, or social. Therefore, while the term “migration” is commonly associated with crossing international borders, it can also apply to the movement of people within a country or region in response to these other borders or constraints.

PS: What do you think the difference is between migration, in the sense of crossing borders, and migration in terms of opportunities that are economic, educational or social? And what do they have in common?

AI: The difference between migration in the sense of crossing international borders and migration related to economic, educational, or social opportunities primarily lies in the geographical scale and the specific motivations.

Crossing borders typically refers to the movement of people from one country to another, often driven by factors like seeking better economic prospects, asylum from conflict or persecution, or family reunification.

Migration for economic, educational, or social opportunities might not necessarily involve crossing international borders. It can occur within the borders of a country, region, or even a city. People might relocate to access better job opportunities, education, or social amenities within their own country.

What they have in common is the essence of movement and the pursuit of a better life, whether it’s across international borders or within the confines of a nation. Both types of migration involve individuals seeking an improved quality of life, whether through geographic mobility or accessing better opportunities.

PS: Migration within a country is often not really thought about as an issue for the host city, but as a problem for the region people are leaving. With migration that crosses international borders this is viewed the other way around. What do you think about that?

AI: Well, you’ve got a point there. When people move within the country, we tend to see it more as a local issue, something for the region they’re leaving to deal with. But when folks are coming from other countries, we often look at it as a national or even an international matter. It’s kind of like we see it from a different angle depending on whether it’s happening within our borders or at our borders. But at the end of the day, it’s all about people and their lives, so it’s essential to keep a compassionate perspective, no matter where they’re coming from or going to.

PS: Thank you for this interesting conversation ChatGPT.

AI: You’re very welcome, and thank you for engaging in this thoughtful discussion.

I am curious. What are your key takeaways from our conversation about migration and borders? Additionally, how do you perceive the value of using the Socratic method in philosophical discourse with AI, especially in the context of complex ethical topics like migration?

PS: There were two things that stood out for me. The first point was that the AI showed me that borders limit people in their economic, social and educational prospects just like other boundaries like class, race and gender. In both cases migration to a different place is possible with different opportunities.

The second takeaway is that the narrative around migration inside a country is very different from the narrative from country A to country B. I had not really considered that before and it would have been interesting to get an AI perspective on that as well. Thanks again for the conversation!

Evaluation of the Conversation

In this section, I will evaluate the value of using the Socratic method in philosophical discourse with AI and my experience. It was difficult for me to really challenge the AI on certain points (see step 5 Vlastos). Because ChatGPT tried to stay neutral and always showed both sides of the argument, it was difficult for me to really press down on certain points and definitions, even when I wanted to. On the other hand, it was a great way to discover and explore a complex subject. In that sense, it was easier to follow the steps that Lam outlined and to test my own hypotheses to see different points of view that the AI could give.

The Socratic method is typically aimed at sparking insights in the other party, in this case the AI. However, I found that by asking questions and steering the conversation, I was actively gaining insights myself. In trying to challenge the AI with my hypotheses, I first had to think in which direction I wanted the conversation to go. I think that is probably easier when you already know a lot about a certain subject, but in some ways this was maybe just as interesting. Another benefit of having a conversation with AI for a university assignment about migration (or other serious topics) is that you do not have to find somebody that is living that experience with the risk of harming them, although it, of course, also yields different results.

Exercise 1: Choose a topic, a partner to discuss with and follow the steps (Vlastos or Lam) as described in the introduction. You can reverse the roles too, instead of asking the questions, let your conversational partner ask the questions. You can choose a new topic or stick to the same topic.

Exercise 2: Repeat exercise 1 but then with a generative AI like ChatGPT or Bard.

References:

Lam, Faith (2011), The Socratic Method as an Approach to Learning and Its Benefits.

Lange Frans, Bart Zijlstra (2005), ‘Het land van…’

Vlastos, Gregory; Vlastos (1983). “The Socratic Elenchus”. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy. 1: 27–58.