Although
"the Socratic method" is commonly understood as a style of pedagogy
involving cross-questioning between teacher and student, there has
long been debate among scholars of ancient philosophy about how this
method as attributed to Socrates should be defined or, indeed, whether
Socrates can be said to have used any single, uniform method at all
distinctive to his way of philosophizing. This volume brings together
essays by classicists and philosophers examining this controversy
anew.
The point of departure for many of those engaged in the debate
has been the identification of Socratic method with "the elenchus"
as a technique of logical argumentation aimed at refuting an interlocutor,
which Gregory Vlastos highlighted in an influential article in 1983.
The essays in this volume look again at many of the issues to which
Vlastos drew attention but also seek to broaden the discussion well
beyond the limits of his formulation.
Some contributors question the suitability of the elenchus as a
general description of how Socrates engages his interlocutors; others
trace the historical origins of the kinds of argumentation Socrates
employs; others explore methods in addition to the elenchus that
Socrates uses; several propose new ways of thinking about Socratic
practices. Eight essays focus on specific dialogues, each examining
why Plato has Socrates use the particular methods he does in the
context defined by the dialogue. Overall, representing a wide range
of approaches in Platonic scholarship, the volume aims to enliven
and reorient the debate over Socratic method so as to set a new
agenda for future research.
Contributors are Hayden W. Ausland, Hugh H. Benson, Thomas C. Brickhouse,
Michelle Carpenter, John M. Carvalho, Lloyd P. Gerson, Francisco
J. Gonzalez, James H. Lesher, Mark L. McPherran, Ronald M. Polansky,
Francois Renaud, and W. Thomas Schmid, Nicholas D. Smith, P. Christopher
Smith, Harold Tarrant, Joanne B. Waugh, and Charles M. Young.
