Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Socratic Method



My, these old guys sure do get testy at times!
I found in Crown books, the other day, a humongus volume entitled
<Greek Philosophers> by C. C. W. Taylor. The part on Socrates summarized
the work of a number of authors (about 7 as I recall), one of whom was
Vlastos. In other words, there are a number of "experts" on old Socrates.
It was not my impression, after a hasty skimming, that there is much
controversy among the experts, but I was not sufficiently interested to
either read very carefully or to buy the book.
I have always tried to dissuade my students from appealing to
authority as a persuasive way of making a point.
Regards, happy holidays, and a fun New Year to all - especially
Dick. I like the idea underlying his labs no matter what he calls them.
Jack


On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Richard Hake wrote:

Please pardon this intra-disciplinary cross post to:

Phys-L <http://lists.nau.edu/archives/phys-l.html>,

PhysLrnR <http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/physlrnr.html>,

Physhare <http://lists.psu.edu/archives/physhare.html>,

AP-Physics
<http://lyris.collegeboard.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?site=collegeboard&enter=ap-physics>

In his Phys-L post of 15 Dec 2002 21:06:53-0600 titled "Re: Socratic
Method" Jack Uretsky replied to Hake (2002) as follows:

1. The "The Paper Chase" did not portray my law school experience,
and is irrelevant to this discussion.

2. It was a long time ago that we discussed this, but I remember
looking into the Vlastos references and concluding that he had not
found significant historical references to Socrates other than what
is in Plato.

3. The approved way to cite work that is not immediately in evidence
is to summarize the significant parts of the work. If Dick Hake
knows of significant discoveries about Socrates let him summarize the
discoveries and the sources used in making those discoveries. To the
best of my knowledge Plato is the sole significant source on Socrates
existence and teaching techniques. So, come on, Dick, enlighten us!

4. If Dick thinks his technique differs from that of the traditional
Socrates in Plato, he should, IMO, consider giving it another name.

Responding point by point to the above:

1. I neither stated nor implied that "The Paper Chase" had anything
to do with Jack's law school experience. Jack's experience is
irrelevant to the fact that many people erroneously believe that the
"The Paper Chase" defined the "Socratic Method."

2. IMHO, before making off-the-cuff statements, Jack should review
the relevant literature. Among Valatos's significant historical
references to Socrates are Aristophenes, Xenophon, and Aristotle. The
pages of Vlastos (1991) on which these references appear are given in
the "Index of passages cited on pages 320-327 of Vlastos (1991).

3a. Jack says "If Dick Hake knows of significant discoveries about
Socrates let him summarize the discoveries and the sources used in
making those discoveries."

Vlastos devoted his life to a search for the HISTORICAL Socrates. In
his culminating work (Vlastos 1991) argues convincingly (to me if not
to Jack) that the Socrates of Plato's early dialogues IS (with
exception of the Meno - see Chapter 4) the HISTORICAL Socrates: while
the very different Socrates of Plato's middle and latter dialogues is
Plato's alter ego.

3b. Jack writes: "To the best of my knowledge Plato is the sole
significant source on Socrates existence and teaching techniques."

Doubtless true, but of dubious relevance to an understanding of
Socrates, since the best of Jack's knowledge in this domain may be
somewhat less than that of Vlastos.

4. Jack writes: "If Dick thinks his technique differs from that of
the traditional Socrates in Plato, he should, IMO, consider giving it
another name."

Vlastos (1990) wrote to me "Though Socrates was not engaged in
physical inquiry, your program is entirely in his spirit."

So I shall defer to Vlastos and retain the title "Socratic Dialogue
Inducing Labs," absent evidence that Jack knows more about Socrates
than Vlastos. Of Vlastos the Princeton University Press
<http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/5595.html> wrote:

"Gregory Vlastos (1907-1991) was one of the twentieth century's most
influential scholars of ancient philosophy. Over a span of more than
fifty years, he published essays and book reviews that established
his place as a leading authority on early Greek philosophy. The two
volumes that comprise "Studies in Greek Philosophy" include nearly
forty contributions by this acknowledged master of the philosophical
essay. Many of these pieces are now considered to be classics in the
field. Perhaps more than any other modern scholar, Gregory Vlastos
was responsible for raising standards of research, analysis, and
exposition in classical philosophy to new levels of excellence. His
essays have served as paradigms of scholarship for several
generations. Available for the first time in a comprehensive
collection, these contributions reveal the author's ability to
combine the skills of a philosopher, philologist, and historian of
ideas in addressing some of the most difficult problems of ancient
philosophy."

I can't recall seeing similar testimony to Jack's classical scholarship.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
<rrhake@earthlink.net>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>


REFERENCES
Hake, R.R. 2002. Phys-L/PhysLrnR/Physhare/AP-Physics post of 13 Dec
2002 13:33:26-0800; online at
<http://lists.nau.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0212&L=phys-l&F=&S=&P=32346>.

Vlastos, G. 1990. Private communication to R.R. Hake, September 17.

Vlastos, G. 1991. "Socrates, Ironist and Moral Philosopher" (Cornell
Univ. Press, 1991), esp. Chap. 2, "Socrates contra Socrates in
Plato." See also Vlastos (1994).

Vlastos, G. 1994. "Socratic Studies" Cambridge University Press.


--
"What did Barrow's lectures contain? Bourbaki writes with some
scorn that in his book in a hundred pages of the text there are about 180
drawings. (Concerning Bourbaki's books it can be said that in a thousand
pages there is not one drawing, and it is not at all clear which is
worse.)"
V. I. Arnol'd in
Huygens & Barrow, Newton & Hooke