Vaniver comments on According to Dale Carnegie, You Can't Win an Argument—and He Has a Point - LessWrong

61 Post author: ChrisHallquist 30 November 2013 06:23AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (77)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Vaniver 30 November 2013 06:10:10PM *  0 points [-]

I find the phrase "Socratic method" problematically ambiguous between Vaniver's usage and Plato's.

I agree that this ambiguity exists, and dislike that it exists. Generally, when there's an ambiguity between ancient use and modern use, I go with the modern use, because moderns read what I write much more than ancients do. The phrase seems to have broadened to "lead by questioning," not necessarily to a contradiction, which even then isn't quite right, because I often want to lead them to a clear description of what they think, not someplace I've decided on. I probably ought to just call it "gentle questioning."

(For example, I think "man" was a beautifully inclusive word- it originally meant "mind," and so meant basically "all sapient beings," and so things like "one giant leap for mankind" also includes any of our robotic descendants, say- but that was at a time when "male adult" was "wer" and "female adult" was "wif," and now that both of those are out of style "man" mostly means "male adult.")

Comment author: TheOtherDave 30 November 2013 06:13:49PM 2 points [-]

Absolutely agreed on all counts, but I find that the ancient (and currently mostly negative) usage of "Socratic method" is still alive enough in my social circle that it's worth taking into consideration.