Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

harvardlawreview.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#41

Post by SilasX »

theorique wrote: post #36
SilasX wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Had I just told people "Don't get eliminated in a 5v4! Do you understand?" and they said "Yes!" I wouldn't really know if they understood or not. That seems like less of an issue of using the Socratic method, and more about quantifying the cost of getting killed. "Dying costs your team X" is more helpful than "don't die". The former tells you under which conditions the heuristic "don't die" is no longer applicable,…

The lesson is "quantifying the cost of getting killed". The method by which that lesson is conveyed to the student is the Socratic method. The point is that the Socratic method of asking leading questions and building agreement at each stage was more effective in getting the point across than "do you understand X? OK, good." The student constructs the knowledge him/herself and internalizes it better than otherwise.

Yes, it's better than asking if they understand the assertion of the point, but the parent was giving a misleading comparison to something that stripped out both the Socratic questions and the quantification of the cost.

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#42

Post by dang »

joshuaheard wrote: post #31

[flagged]

Would you please keep the ideological rant aspect out of your comments to HN? It has a reliably degrading effect on discussion, and we're trying for better than that here. Your comment would be both better and shorter with those bits edited out.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#43

Post by CryptoRetired »

dang wrote: post #42
joshuaheard wrote: post #31

[flagged]

Would you please keep the ideological rant aspect out of your comments to HN? It has a reliably degrading effect on discussion, and we're trying for better than that here. Your comment would be both better and shorter with those bits edited out. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Translation: Anything that disagrees with dangs homophobic, neonazi politics is not tolerated on HN. Unless you agree with him, your opinions are ideological rants. If you do agree with him, of course, abuse, name calling, stalking, harassments, threats of violence, violations of the law and hate speech are ok... as dang himself engages in and provides cover for regularly on this site.

Anyone who dares point out this hypocrisy or dares to think for themselves, for that matter, will be censored immediately.

Because like all nazis, dang is an intellectual coward who cannot defend his positions, will not recognize his own hypocrisy and abuse, and thinks that silencing people so that the "HN record" only shows one side makes reality.

Reality is you're an abusive, lying asshole, and hypocrite.

You don't care for diversity, you seek to create a monoculture of group think.

And anyone worth a damn has left his site or been driven off.

Oh and of course I'm shadow banned. This is what I get for coming out as gay and admitting "I'm not aleftist".

Thats all it takes.

Dang you are such a lying piece of shit. Karma is a bitch, fucker.

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#44

Post by CryptoRetired »

dang wrote: post #6
allthenews wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Socratic method is too hard on poor diverse students, hurts their delicate feelings, doesn't actually encourage independent thought, and forces pupils to adopt straight white male culture. We are approaching some kind of weird post-merit dystopia.

That's far from an accurate summary of the article. From the portions I read, it's full of rich information and by no means as one-sided as you claim. Would you please stop posting shallow dismissals and ideological rants to HN? You've been breaking the HN guideline that asks you not to use this site primarily for ideological battle. We ban accounts that do this, regardless of which ideology they're for or against. P…

Translation: Anything that disagrees with dangs homophobic, neonazi politics is not tolerated on HN. Unless you agree with him, your opinions are ideological rants. If you do agree with him, of course, abuse, name calling, stalking, harassments, threats of violence, violations of the law and hate speech are ok... as dang himself engages in and provides cover for regularly on this site.

Anyone who dares point out this hypocrisy or dares to think for themselves, for that matter, will be censored immediately.

Because like all nazis, dang is an intellectual coward who cannot defend his positions, will not recognize his own hypocrisy and abuse, and thinks that silencing people so that the "HN record" only shows one side makes reality.

Reality is you're an abusive, lying asshole, and hypocrite.

You don't care for diversity, you seek to create a monoculture of group think.

And anyone worth a damn has left his site or been driven off.

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#45

Post by dang »

CryptoRetired wrote: post #43
dang wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you please keep the ideological rant aspect out of your comments to HN? It has a reliably degrading effect on discussion, and we're trying for better than that here. Your comment would be both better and shorter with those bits edited out. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Translation: Anything that disagrees with dangs homophobic, neonazi politics is not tolerated on HN. Unless you agree with him, your opinions are ideological rants. If you do agree with him, of course, abuse, name calling, stalking, harassments, threats of violence, violations of the law and hate speech are ok... as dang himself engages in and provides cover for regularly on this site. Anyone who dares point out this…

You weren't banned; your comments were killed by HN's anti-troll software.

Not sure what else to say here. I feel like a simple in-person conversation could clear things up easily. Unfortunately, we're trapped in an internet hall of mirrors and there's no easy way out.

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#46

Post by explainplease »

sctb wrote: post #28
huffmsa wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I read it. I think the Socratic approach is the best way to teach law. The profession requires one to be outwardly strident, speak up and fight for your points lest the opposing counsel win. We have electrician learn by doing electrical work. Doctors do residencies. If you aren't the right personality for the profession, then that's the breaks. And finally, length of ones document is not an indication of quality.…

Next time can we please skip straight to the informative comment? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

His first comment was insightful and made the point with a poignant analogy. It was concise and direct. It was far more valuable than the "informative" one.

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#47

Post by ruytlm »

wahern wrote: post #39
cicero wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you take Socrates at his word, I think he is sincerely trying to find answers. He asks a question that he really wants to know the answer to, but then sees potential flaws in the answer, so he asks more questions to test the strength of the answer. Even though he ends of "knocking out" his interlocutor, I think he would prefer to get an answer that holds up to scrutiny. I think the value of good Socratic questioni…

As applied in law school, the idea is that the professor never answers a question or makes a direct statement of his own. It's difficult to bully someone in that situation. Granted, IME some professors were better than others at abstaining from interjecting their own claims directly. But from a pedagogical perspective I'll take the professor who bullies over having to sit through hours of lectures. At least he has to…

> The Socratic Method requires that each and every student come to class prepared, having at least read all assigned material. "I don't know" isn't an answer; you at least have to be able to say something like, "the material said [insert reference], but I didn't understand how it applies". If you can't do that, you obviously didn't come prepared and some professors will call you out on it. Likewise if you're called in class and can't respond because you've lost the context.

This was the most valuable part for me; it required you to a) have actually done the background material, b) be engaged enough in the classroom to follow the context of the discussion, c) to be able to form an opinion even if you did not have one, and d) to be able to consider the merits of an alternative opinion.

These are fundamental life skills, especially so in the legal profession, and in my opinion form the basis of engaging with other people as people: understand their context, engage with them in discussion, consider what they say, and be willing to share your thoughts.

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#48

Post by dang »

mirimir wrote: post #10
roenxi wrote: post #8

Well, it is nice to see someone going straight for the details. Do we have any context on why this ... short novel :) ... was written? I want to interpret this as a coinciding of two things; the first that the "Socratic Method" as described here would be a powerful method of creating and perpetuating a culture amongst law students trained at Harvard; where their opinions and beliefs are subjected to a very public exa…

IANAL, and so have no opinion on the merits of her article. However, I have concerns about "topics that are 'too hot to handle'" in the sciences. For example, a recent thread[0] about Hill (2017) An elementary mathematical theory for the variability hypothesis.[1,2,3] And by the way, there's lots of great discussion in the comments on the Quillette article.[1] And it's interesting that the deleted NYJM paper is onlin…

Please don't take HN threads off topic into generic ideological tangents. Those are predictable and tedious.

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#49

Post by mirimir »

dang wrote: post #48
mirimir wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, and so have no opinion on the merits of her article. However, I have concerns about "topics that are 'too hot to handle'" in the sciences. For example, a recent thread[0] about Hill (2017) An elementary mathematical theory for the variability hypothesis.[1,2,3] And by the way, there's lots of great discussion in the comments on the Quillette article.[1] And it's interesting that the deleted NYJM paper is onlin…

Please don't take HN threads off topic into generic ideological tangents. Those are predictable and tedious.

Sorry. I let myself get triggered :(

Re: The Socratic Method in an Age of Trauma (2017) [pdf]

#50

Post by joshuaheard »

dang wrote: post #42
joshuaheard wrote: post #31

[flagged]

Would you please keep the ideological rant aspect out of your comments to HN? It has a reliably degrading effect on discussion, and we're trying for better than that here. Your comment would be both better and shorter with those bits edited out. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I appreciate your feedback. The law review article in the original post analyzed the Socratic Method using Intersectionality. Most people aren't familiar with this political ideology, so I critiqued it. I would not describe this as an "ideological rant". As a litigator, my writing style tends to be direct and forceful. But, I have read the guidelines again and will keep your comments in mind for future posts.
Post reply on HN