Why Question?

In Book I of Plato’s Republic, Thrasymachus implies that Socrates is being lazy (or maybe just arrogant) by only asking questions and not giving answers himself. Socrates replies that he has no answers to give, no decisive definition to appease the conversation, but Thrasymachus doesn’t buy it: “…If someone questioned you, you’d be ironical and do anything but answer” (38).

This conversation, the entirety of Book I, is built on little more than questions. Some are larger and broader and need explaining, while others are a simple yes or no. Socrates claims that by giving the group a direct answer, Thrasymachus will be “teaching” them. Through Socrates’s interrogation, however, it seems that Thrsymachus is the one who needed teaching.

His argument is broken down entirely, each piece analyzed and given stipulations and qualifiers. While we discussed his argument further in class, it seems that the group in the book, like us, came to no real conclusions other than being just can be (but not always is) more profitable than being unjust. Socrates admits it himself, “Hence the result of the discussion, as far as I’m concerned, is that I know nothing…” (57). This, in a way, proves Thrasymachus correct in that Socrates never gives a direct answer.

Regardless, I feel the negative connotations Thrasymachus places on this characteristic are uncalled for. Both in the text and in class, it was agreed that some of the best leaders (and I consider teachers leaders) are those who do not want to lead. By not wanting to give the answers, Socrates encourages his students to find their own; therefore he leads them to the answers. This method makes him the greatest type of teacher: he teaches how to think, not what to think, which correlates very well with the Rhodes’s curriculum.

Playing with our larger theme, is Socrates’s questioning method just? Following Thrasymachus’s definition, justice is the advantage of the stronger (and it does seem that Socrates is the stronger participant in the discussion), it is undoubtedly just, even though it seems aggressive.

I wish someone would just ask me a series of questions, even aggressive questioning, then tell me what I believe. That would be so easy. For those who don’t know exactly what they believe, like me, Socrates’s methods are more than just; they’re beneficial, which completely nullifies the logic behind Thrasymachus’s negative judgment of Socrates.

And philosophy is nothing without logic.

Welcome!

Welcome to the blog-home for Dr. J's Fall 2011 Social and Political Philosophy course! This site will serve as a forum for students to discuss the material we cover in class, as well as a place to raise questions we may not have addressed in class or to make connections between our material and current real-world events. Each week, students will be divided into two groups, with half of the class designated as "Authors" and the other half designated as "Commenters." In any given week, "Authors" will post a short essay (minimum 400 words) related to the course material before Friday at 5pm. "Commenters" will respond to at least two of that week's Author-posts before the beginning of Monday's seminar. Students are encouraged to post or comment beyond the requirements stated here, as frequent and quality blog activity will be rewarded in the final grade.

Blog-writing differs from the writing you might do for "traditional" papers in some ways, but not in others. Here are some things to think about as you compose your posts and comments:

FOR AUTHORS:

• Do not wait until the last minute to write your post! Students should think of the blog as a community exercise. In this community, Authors are responsible for generating that week's discussion and Commenters are responsible for continuing and elaborating upon it. In order for the Commenters to be able to provide the best commentary they can, it is necessary that Authors do not wait until the last minute to post entries in any given week. Like traditional papers, it is almost always obvious when a student has elected to write his or her blog-posts at the last minute, as they end up being either overly simple, poorly conceived or poorly edited. Your contribution to the blog discussion is important, so take care to show the respect to your classmates that you would expect them to show you.
  
• Be concise, but also precise. The greatest challenge of blog-writing is to communicate complex ideas in a minimal amount of words. It is important that you keep your posts short, in keeping with the blog format, but also that you do not sacrifice the clarity or completeness of your ideas for the sake of brevity.
• Be focused. If you find that your blog-entry is too long, it is likely because you have chosen too large a topic for one post. (Consider splitting up long entries into two or more posts.) It should be eminently clear, on the first reading, what your blog post is explaining/asking/arguing. Use the Post Title to clearly state the subject of your entry.
• Choose a topic that will prompt discussion. The measure of a good blog post is how much commentary it can generate. To that end, do not use your blog posts for simple exegesis or to revisit questions already settled in class. Good discussion-generators often include bold claims about, or original interpretations of, our classroom texts. Connecting the course material to current events or controversies is also a good way to generate discussion. Pay special attention to in-class conversations, as many of the issues that generate discussion in class will also do so on the blog.
• Proofread. Proofread. PROOFREAD. As a rule, blog-writing is (slightly) less formal than the writing you might do for a paper you hand in to your professor. For example, you may write in the first person, and a more "conversational" style is usually acceptable. However, ANY writing with glaring punctuation, spelling or grammatical mistakes not only will be difficult to read and understand, but also will greatly diminish the credibility of its Author. It is NOT ADVISABLE to "copy and paste" the text of your post into blog's "new post" box, as you will inevitably end up with a format that is difficult to read. Be sure to familiarize yourself with the formatting buttons above, and always preview your post before publishing it.
  
• Make use of the "extras" provided by new technology. When you write a traditional paper for class, you don't have many of the opportunities that blog-writing affords. Take advantage of the technologies available here to insert images, embed video or employ hyperlinks to other relevant materials.
  
• Respond to your commenters. Authors should stay abreast of all the comementary their posts generate. If you are asked for clarification by a commenter, or if one of your claims is challenged, it is the Author's responsibility to respond.
  

FOR COMMENTERS:

• Read carefully BEFORE you comment. The biggest and most frequent error made by commenters is also the most easily avoidable, namely, misreading or misunderstanding the original post. Don't make that error!
• Simple agreement or disagreement is not sufficient. Sometimes it will be the case that you fully agree or disagree with an Author's post. However, a comment that simply states "I agree" or "I disagree" will not count for credit. You MUST provide detailed reasons for your agreement or disagreement in your comment.
• Evidence works both ways. Often, the source of disagreement between an Author and a Commenter will involve a textual interpretation. If an Author claims in his or her post that "Advocates of the death penalty are obviously operating within a Kantian moral framework," the Author should have also provided a page citation from Kant supporting that claim. If you (as a Commenter) disagree, it is your responsibility to cite a passage from Kant that provides evidence for your disagreement. For disagreements that are not text-based-- for example, disagreements about statistical claims, historical claims, claims about current events, or any other evidentiary matters-- hyperlinks are your friend.
  
• Dr J's Rule #7. Be sure to read Rule #7 under "Dr. J's Rules" on your syllabus. There are no exceptions to this rule. Even on the blog.

Although this blog is viewable by anyone on the Web, participants have been restricted to member of the PHIL 150 class only. This means that only members of your class can post or comment on this blog. However, anyone can read it, so students are reminded to take special care to support the claims that they make, to edit their posts and comments judiciously, and to generally represent themselves in conversation as they would in public. If you are new to blogging, you can visit the sites for other Rhodes course blogs listed in the column to your right.

I look forward to seeing your conversation develop over the course of this semester!
--Dr. J