to be aware when one takes an inconsistent position and one becomes aware of this as a result of
elenticexamination.^27 The same reason that Socrates cannot be seen as a teacher informs the
conclusion that Plato is not the teacher of the reader of a dialog. Plato, like Socrates, employs a
series of devices to make the reader aware of her own ignorance. This does not mean thatelenchus
is destructive.
As shown in theSophist(230b–d), the purpose of refutationis not to destroy the respondent or the
positions taken by the respondent. While the respondent needs to be made aware that she does not,
in fact, possess knowledge, this serves as a springboard toward knowledge. After feeling shame and
getting mad at one’s self, the respondent begins to undergo a transformation. Having lost the
inflated and rigid beliefs that previously prevented the respondent from seeking the truth, Socrates
argues that this person is not only more pleasant, but that she will enjoy the more lasting effect of
being capable of learning. In this context, the purpose of refutation and the responsibility of
Socrates and Plato is to enable the respondent/reader to say what she was trying to say all along.
By allowing the respondent to“certify the truth of what is said,elenticeducation assumes the
respondent’s opinions have some value. They are the views of a person who has a partial grasp of
the truth but is having trouble seeing it clearly.”^28 This, in turn, explains why Socrates is described
as a midwife of the intellect, which turns out to be an appropriate comparison given the under-
standing ofelenchusprovided here: 1) the respondent/reader gives birth to the idea; 2) Socrates/
Plato only facilitate delivery of knowledge; and 3) the respondent/reader is given every possible
motive to inquire.^29
Socratic Form is Dialog
Plato writes in the dialog format for two reasons. First,elenchusis a method that lends itself to the
dialog because it requires that at least two voices are heard. The two-voice requirement is important
as“it is not enough to have a thesis, antithesis, and explanation: there must be people willing to
defend them.”^30 Second, a distinction between a dialog and a sermon or treatise can be drawn.
Whereas the latter are essentially prolonged speeches, a dialog is a directed conversation. As such,
dialog opens the possibility of connecting form and content and engaging the reader in the same
way a piece of literature does. In contrast, a sermon or treatise approaches the topic of virtue“in the
same way we traditionally understand how a student approaches a teacher–with the latter
imparting wisdom to the former.”^31 Thus, where the dialog identifies the student as its primary
concern and employs the best means possible to engage the student, the sermon or treatise focuses
on the transfer of knowledge that is accepted not because of its truth, but because of the authority of
the one providing the information.
The Platonic dialog itself is a form of art where written conversation is transformed into real
conversation. As a pedagogical form, the dialog“must sound like actual talk; otherwise, it does not
fulfill its task of being model and guide.”^32 As real conversation, readers of a Platonic dialog should
employ the same tools and information used daily to distill the meaning of actual conversations.
Readers are required to“grasp the character, wishes, opinions, and prospects”of the figures in the
dialog and to“attend to the flow of the conversation, to moments of anger, befuddlement, and
silence, to changes from one interlocutor to another, and to Socrates’comments when he is
narrating a dialog.”^33
Additionally, readers should be aware of Plato’s use of literary devices such as irony, flattery,
satire, parody, myth, and mockery. These devices are not simply employed for their literary value,
but serve the purpose of fostering the conceptual breakthrough which Socrates wants the
respondent to achieve and Plato wants the reader to achieve.^34 Like the respondent, the reader is
shown the effect an argument has on the person to whom it is addressed. It is the intention of
Socrates as an interlocutor and Plato as the author to force the respondent/reader to confess their
ignorance. In doing so, the roots of one’s dogmatism are cut and one leaves behind one’s prejudices
The Courage of the Socratic Method 97