(Socrates): Can you tell me what justice is?
(Respondent): What a dumb question, everyone knows what justice is!
S: Well, I really don’t know what justice is, and even less do I know what you mean by it.
R: Maybe You really want to. So, fairness is something that is equal for everyone, regardless of a person’s reputation, origin, or connections, when you treat the same equally and the unequal unequally.
S: Hmm. Do you have a specific example from your everyday life for that?
I: Well, when I, as a professor, hand out tests, all students write their name on a separate paper because I don’t want to know who wrote which test when grading them. That, for example, I consider fair.
S: What is fair about that?
I: The fact that I treat everyone the same.
S: What if someone cheated and you didn’t notice? Or if someone happened to know the answer to that question and nothing else? Is that fair then?
I: Well, that’s luck or misfortune for that person.
S: So, is it fair to have luck or misfortune?
I: (Silence for a while) No, of course not. I’ve gone in the wrong direction with that, so… (silence again). into the mouth of our interlocutor. According to Plato, this is dialectic: the art of using dialogue to bring opposing opinions closer to the truth. Dialectic does not prevent thoughtless statements and hasty conclusions. Pay attention to how many thoughtless claims come out of our own and other people’s mouths throughout the day. Dialectic is a method of thinking. It follows the rules of logic and forces us to verify and prove the truth of our statements. But the dialectical game of questions has a further crucial benefit: we discover our own knowledge after first realizing our ignorance. Plato was convinced that later in life we will only apply the beliefs and knowledge that we ourselves have painstakingly constructed. He vehemently criticized the sophists of his time, who only transmitted abstract knowledge without any practical relationship. Aren’t the sophists of the twenty-first century doing the same today? Indeed, this is an assertion that should be examined dialectically. Today, parents, teachers, and therapists could sing a song about how difficult it is to make knowledge reach to changes in behavior. How often do we hear ourselves say: “I know, but…!” However, Socrates and Plato are convinced that no one acts poorly or unjustly because they know, but rather because of ignorance.
Therefore, we must not stop at transmitting superficial knowledge. It is about building deep insights through practical dialectics in its three phases.
Accepting our ignorance
The first phase is the warning or acceptance of our ignorance. We thought we knew what justice was and recognized our rigid and wrong ideas, as well as the arrogance with which we expressed them without verification. We believe that we are correcting something, but we are doing it poorly. We believe that we are doing something well, but we are making a mistake. At that moment, there are two possibilities: not admitting the mistake and remaining an arrogant know-it-all, or accepting the mistake and thus developing. Being able to admit a mistake means accepting that something is missing. Understanding that leads to love and the search for what is missing. We must accept, therefore, know that we don’t know something. And that is Sokrates’ great realization. aja: I know that I know nothing. Only then does a serious search for greater and new knowledge begin. For Socrates, ignorance is not when we don’t know something, but when we refuse to admit that we don’t know something. The problem is never in making a mistake, but in not wanting to admit it – and thus not learning anything from it.
Freeing oneself from ignorance
The second phase is cleansing or liberation from ignorance. It is like separating metal from the mother rock. It is necessary to “remove” intellectual and emotional illusions through dialogue. This clears the path to realization.
After numerous attempts to find examples of justice, our dialogue about it could continue as follows:
S: Would you like to think about another example of justice?
I: That leads nowhere, I’ve tried so many times.
S: And you can’t find an example where everything really happens justly?
I: It’s hard for me to admit, but I can’t find one.
S: But you still want everything in life to be just. Why?
I: I think that And if everyone greeted when everything in the world was just.
S: Even those who have been better off than others? So, for example, would you demand that your wife and children be allotted a fair share of incurable diseases, hunger, and poverty?
I: It’s unfair that you’re including my children in this.
S: Why?
I: Because, of course, I don’t want anything bad for them.
S: Let’s assume that you succeed, would that then be fair?
I: Of course not.
S: That means you don’t actually demand justice in the world in all cases?
I: Not in such cases.
S: But who should determine when and for whom the world should be just?
I: I understand that it’s really difficult to define justice and that we humans are not capable of judging what is fair, when, and for whom.
At that moment, a turning point occurs in the respondent. They realize that they must reject what they had previously believed. They free themselves from all wrongly formed opinions and belief habits. Only then are they liberated to access intuition or inner knowledge.
Knowledge – Memory He is born in the third phase, majeutics. This term comes from the Greek word maieutiké which means “the art of giving birth”. In it lies the word maia, “midwife”. Analogous to what a midwife does, Socrates considered himself a midwife of Athens. He tried to bring to light what was hidden in the unconscious or beneath surface knowledge in his interlocutors. Dialectic gives us access to that knowledge which, according to Socrates, we possess from the beginning of the world. But we have forgotten it through the embodiment of the soul in matter. Therefore, every true knowledge is a form of reminiscence, a memory. The consequence of such a way of seeing or grasping truth is immediate action. It is not about saying “I know, but…” but “I understand now”, “I comprehend now”. This is the difference between knowledge and wisdom. I can study or even write hundreds of essays on justice, but only a wise person can act justly. The wise person knows their conscience and lives in accordance with it. They have a clear conscience in the truest sense of the word and therefore possess inner peace. and happiness. Plato’s dialectic is the path to wisdom. The path of proper questioning frees us from ignorance. He who asks reaches wisdom, peace, and happiness.
Dialectic for the new human
Socrates questioned throughout his life. And he lost – his life. His uncomfortable questions challenged Athenian high society. They sought their happiness in ruthless struggles for power and wealth. Personal aspirations were achieved in the public assembly with the help of the highest paid sophists, the “manipulators of the law” of that time. Sophists mastered the art of defeating others in the battle of words. In contrast, Socrates taught the art of conquering oneself. What is the parallel with us today? Whole armies of modern sophists, lobbyists, and lawyers support the rich and powerful in their greed for power and money. A huge advertising machinery instills in people the worry about how to become more beautiful, successful, and happy. The principles have deeply ingrained in our souls: You are someone if you have something! Only the result matters! The one who makes mistakes is gu. hipsters! Men chase records, women starve for the ideal of slimness. But that in itself is not the problem. The problem lies in the fact that these thoughtless criteria unconsciously dictate our daily thoughts and behaviors. Since only a few fulfill these absurd criteria, we are increasingly falling into internal unrest: fear, anger, shame, hatred – all the way to desolation, depression, and the danger of suicide. Where is the Socrates of the 21st century who challenges the powerful with his questions, who challenges us with questions: Who are you? What truly matters in life? What is good and just? Today, two thousand and four hundred years after the birth of dialectics, we must relearn to use this powerful method. Firstly, to acknowledge our own ignorance. Because we fly to the Moon, yet fail to keep the Earth in balance. We transplant hearts, yet do not know how to see and act with our hearts. We drive thousands of kilometers a year, yet we are stuck within ourselves.
Secondly, to return from shallow knowledge to deep understanding. mastery of relationships.
And thirdly, in order to become midwives – a new way of thinking, a new person and a new era.
1 According to Harlich H. Stavemann, Socratic conversation management, Basel 2007.