Nyotek, found himself reinscribing the colonizer–colonized dynamic often manifested in relations
between white settlers and native tribes by using the Socratic method in his classroom. Though he
asked the students questions, he did so always looking for particular answers. Moreover, the dialog
always took place in English. Looking back, he realized that
[i]n such a classroom the subaltern may speak, but only insofar as he or she speaks the language
of the colonizer, which is not so much a form of speech as a form of mimicry, even as the
haunting laughter of the loon is not to be confused with the imitative notes of a parrot.^10For this teacher, the Socratic method comprised part of the process of linguistic imperialism. His
questions and ways of phrasing ideas helped to indoctrinate his students into the mindset the white
colonizers wished to impose on these subjugated peoples.
One possible defense of the Socratic method against the linguistic imperialism critique is that
for dialog of any kind to take place, a common language is necessary. It is simply a matter of
necessity and convenience, one might contend, that this language is Greek for Socrates, and
typically English for teachers in the United States. Nothing precludes one from using the
Socratic method in Spanish, Chinese, or any other language. That is, there is nothing inherently
language-bound in the nature of the Socratic method. If there were, it could not be used in
English-speaking classrooms in the contemporary world because the original use of the method
occurred in ancient Greek. Moreover, it is feasible to imagine a bilingual or multilingual con-
versation involving the Socratic method. In short, nothing within the Socratic method itself is
linguistically imperialistic. Any teaching method employed within the dominant culture’s
language could be subject to the same critique–even a method drawn from the most foreign of
cultures to one’sown.
One is justified in wanting a better defense than this, however. Beyond the universality of the
Socratic method in terms of the language(s) in which it can be conducted, it might be noted that,
by insisting interlocutors express their honest opinions, the method–at least when properly
conducted–allows students to control the direction theinquiry takes. This means it is possible for
a student to introduce the class to words from her native language. Throughout the dialogs,
Socrates requests that his interlocutors only put forth their true opinions; at times, he even asks
twice or more if the interlocutor truly holdsthe opinion he has expressed. Though we have no
example of Socrates engaged in dialog with a non-Greek speaking interlocutor, given that
Socrates’questions often involve obtaining from his interlocutor a definition of the term under
consideration, it is not unfathomable that foreign students could respond by redirecting the
inquiry toward an examination of an equivalent word in their native language, or even by
explaining that no such term exists where they come from and thus they do not understand the
importance of the inquiry. One of the defining features of the Socratic method is that it workswith
the opinions of interlocutors. For instance, when Cephalus and Polemarchus in theRepublicput
forth understandings of justice derived from prominent Greek poets, Socrates does not dismiss
them by arguing that the poets are not good sources of authority on what justice is (although
eventually he leads Glaucon and Adeimantus, who are more suspicious of the Greek poets, to
consider this point). Rather, he acknowledges the poets as sources of authority and suggests we
must be careful to make sure we have interpreted them correctly.^11 In other words, he allows the
interlocutors’responses to dictate the general direction of the investigation. This, in large part,
accounts for the difficulty of carrying out a Socratic discourse. As most instruction manuals on
using the Socratic method in class warn, the conversationcanliterallygoanywhere.Onemight
walk in with a series of planned questions, onlyto find that the student responses lead the dis-
cussion down a completely unexpected path.^12 This does not mean the Socratic method is a free-
for-all; a good Socratic teacher is able to think“on the fly”and ask meaningful questions that lead
to deeper understanding and examination. Nonetheless, the heavy emphasis on student input
128 Rebecca LeMoine