Socrates did not particularly care about doing things quickly and this is why, in Plato’s dialogues, we never find arguments based on speed. Socrates would never favour a certain method or approach simply because it delivered faster results.
How come that Socrates was indifferent to time? He lived in a culture that did not regard speed as a major virtue. Except in rare occasions, like for the Greek messenger in the Battle of Marathon, speed played a secondary role in Ancient Greece.
Socrates was primarily concerned with ethical truth. In his view, the pursuit of truth should be a central goal of human life, and everything else should come second. That’s why Plato’s Apology, in section 38a, has Socrates utter the words “the unexamined life is not worth living.”
Nowadays, we do assign a large importance to speed in all areas of life. If we fall sick, we want to recover our health right away. If we invest our savings, we want to earn a quick return. I cannot name a field of human activity where, nowadays, we do not have a strong preference for a fast delivery.
On this basis, I must answer an important question about the Socratic method. Philosophers have praised it for centuries, but is it still advisable today, when we place so much emphasis on speed? Can the Socratic method help us learn and acquire new skills faster?
Yes, especially when using artificial intelligence, I consider it essential to use the Socratic method. Why? Because we need to be able to figure out if artificial intelligence is delivering the correct answers.
The role of critical thinking
Unless we exercise critical thinking, it’s easy to overlook all sorts of errors made by artificial intelligence. The answers we get will appear impeccably written and formatted, but do they make sense?
The Socratic method equips us with the tools to question the veracity and accuracy of information. The purpose of the steps developed by Socrates is to cross-examine the ideas presented to us, and see if they contain discrepancies, gaps, or unjustified assumptions.
In Plato’s dialogues “Euthyphro,” “Phaedrus,” “Theaetetus,” “Gorgias” and “Meno,” we see Socrates at his best, exercising his method of cross-examination, probing for contradictions or weaknesses in the opponent’s arguments. Eventually, he finds a discrepancy in the arguments, and he exploits it masterfully.
I regard this skill as crucial these days, in the era of artificial intelligence, because we shouldn’t accept answers with flawed logic. We shouldn’t assume that a perfectly construed sentence is presenting solid, truthful conclusions.
Knowledge acceleration is the main advantage to be drawn from employing the Socratic method nowadays. It can magnify our gains in terms of knowledge because it enables us to build on firm fundamentals. It helps us establish a sound structure and add to it over time, so that all details are integrated.
Refutation is the central process in the Socratic method. The questioning aims at eliciting long and detailed explanations, so that we can probe them for consistency. That’s a solid strategy for real-life debates and for working with artificial intelligence because it helps us detect poor logic and faulty assumptions.
Socrates and artificial intelligence
When it comes to acquiring knowledge, the speed cannot be increased by blind memorisation or by closing our eyes to any discrepancies; the Socratic method provides a formidable filter for discarding impurities in logic. If we remove the filter, our intellectual engine will be polluted and brought to a standstill.
Speed in thinking only comes from integrated knowledge in which there are no discrepancies, gaps or contradictions. That’s why the use of artificial intelligence without critical thinking is unlikely to improve one’s thinking skills.
Without the Socratic method, artificial intelligence may lead to slower thinking because the user will be unable to filter any errors, imprecisions or contradictions. It’s like building a house on unsound foundations. Sooner or later, it will prove unable to sustain the weight and collapse.
Regrettably, Plato (427-347 BC) never grasped the ominous consequences of uncritical education. He never realised that, if we fail to exercise our questioning abilities, we’ll grow unable to think for ourselves.
If we uncritically accept answers from artificial intelligence, we will reach a point where we are no longer able to set apart a true from a false argument; the lack of critical thinking, that is, the failure to practise the Socratic method, can prove lethal in a crisis situations, when we are pressed to make quick decisions.
Plato’s divergence from Socrates
Plato overlooked this crucial point in his work “Republic.” I am referring to section 518, which addresses the process and the purpose of knowledge acquisition. Plato correctly defined education as “opening the mind’s eye,” but wrongly linked it to societal purposes.
While the Socratic method revolves around the truth, Plato was linking knowledge acquisition to societal goals. Although he aimed at helping students acquire knowledge, he claimed to do so for promoting society’s happiness.
That’s not how the human mind works, I am afraid. Socrates had grasped this point perfectly. He exhorted people to practise his inquiry method for the sake of truth, not because he wanted to promote social happiness.
Truth is just truth, and may help some people get what they want, and prevent other people from moving forward. Like the laws of logic or mathematical principles, Socrates took them as objective, nor as subjective. He wouldn’t have endorsed Plato’s pursuit of knowledge for the sake of social happiness.
The Socratic method helps us acquire knowledge faster due to its alignment with logic and truth. When we ask questions, it is up to us to assess the answers and detect the inconsistencies.
I would not delegate on artificial intelligence the role played by the Socratic method, nor would I recommend pursuing any other goal than truth. In “Republic,” Plato wanted to further the process of knowledge acquisition by giving it an external goal, but instead of speeding it up, he did the contrary.
Fast, accurate thinking is indissolubly linked to the Socratic method. Prisoners living in Plato’s proverbial cave in Book VII of “Republic” will be greatly benefitted by getting outdoors to perceive reality as it is, but they will not be able to acquire any reliable knowledge if their logic is polluted by prejudice.
The Socratic method is the paramount process for purifying our logic, avoiding contradictions, integrating our knowledge, and arriving at sound conclusions. That’s the only reliable way to speed up our thinking.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas in all sorts of situations, I recommend my book “The 10 Principles of Rational Living.”