is required in this field as well because the only way to educate students in these matters is to offer
them an opportunity to cultivate their own reason. Thus, ideas such as God and the immortality of
the soul–just like the moral law–are purely rational and transcend empirical experience. As such,
they are produced by each individual’s reason, and, therefore, the only way to access them is
through one’s own reason. Just as it is impossible to plant the moral law in someone’s mind, so also
is it impossible with the transcendental ideas. By Kant’s account, the teacher can help the students to
recognize and develop their understanding of these ideas, but that is only possible because they are
already present in their minds.
Finally, Kant distinguishes between rational and empirical or historical education. He juxtaposes
the Socratic method to the“mechanical-catechetical”method, which he argues is an acceptable
mode of education in empirical and historical matters such as revealed religion. The distinction
between“universal”and“revealed”religion tracks Kant’s distinction between the purely rational
and the empirical or historical. Universal religion therefore can only be taught Socratically because
it is purely rational like the moral law on which it hinges, whereas revealed religion can be taught
empirically because it consists of a series of historical facts.
Kant’s second discussion of Socratic method, which is found in the section on“Teaching Ethics”
in the“Doctrine of Method”at the end of theMetaphysics of Morals, uses somewhat different
terminology, but makes similar points to the ones noted in the previous passage. Drawing a dis-
tinction between methods involving lecturing and questioning, he focuses on the latter, which he
refers to (quite Platonically) as“erotetic.”He states:
:::.this eroteticmethodis, in turn, dividedintothemethod of dialogueandthat of catechism,
depending on whether the teacher addresses his questions to the pupil’s reason or just to his
memory. For if the teacher wants to question his pupil’s reason he must do this in a dialogue
in which teacher and pupil question and answer each otherin turn. The teacher, by his
questions, guides his young pupil’s course of thought merely by presenting him with
cases in which his predisposition for certain concepts will develop (the teacher is the midwife
of the pupil’s thoughts). The pupil, who thus sees that he himself can think, responds with
questions of his own about obscurities in the propositions admitted or about his doubts
regarding them, and so provides occasions for theteacherhimself tolearnhow to question
skillfully.^22This passage offers a more detailed image of the Socratic method as a process of questioning and
answering, and again it shows that Kant insists that reason must be educated Socratically, using
once again the image of the midwife.
In the context of a discussion of recollection, it must be noted that Kant distinguishes in this
passage between reason and memory. In making this distinction, Kant is very possibly alluding to
his ongoing understanding of the difference between his position and Plato’s, i.e., that reason
“produces”rather than“remembers”(or discovers) the ideas. Certainly, he is drawing a distinction
similar to the one above between revealed and universal religion, i.e., between historical-empirical
and rational knowledge, and the mode of education appropriate to each.
Still, whereas Kant rejects the traditional idea of Platonic recollection because it rests on an
epistemology and metaphysics he does not accept, it is striking how similar Kant’s commitment to
the reality of the moral law is to a Platonic claim to transcendent knowledge. By Kant’s own
account, the moral law necessarily transcends empirical reality, and yet he is convinced it exists and
is true, even though he is unable to reconcile this view with his own theoretical epistemology. As
suggested above, Kant seems to overcome his own objections to Plato’s idea of recollection in
practice, if not in theory. Thus, it seems that Plato and Kant are both ultimately pointing to the
transcendence or mystery that lies at the center of the process of education. Put another way, both
are pointing out that the person is not exhausted by empirical reality.
The Socratic Method in Plato and Kant 67