Socratic Method nothing like law school

by Ray Thompson

One of the hallowed hallmarks of law school is the Socratic Method. For those of you who read Plato’s Socratic Dialogues before beginning our legal education, you may have been surprised, as I was, to learn that Plato’s vision of Socratic teaching bear almost no resemblance to the method employed by law professors.
If you haven’t ever read the Socratic Dialogues, they tend to consist of Socrates asking a pupil a series of yes/no questions. No matter how the pupil answers, Socrates applies the content of that answer to the next question, leading the pupil down a supposedly irrefutable chain of logic, concluding with whatever position Plato happens to believe is true.
One of the flaws of the Dialogues is that the pupil almost invariably agrees with everything Socrates says. It usually goes a little something like this:
SOCRATES: So you believe that ethical standards are relative – determined by the edicts of whomever wields the most power. But let me ask you this… Is it not true that the Gods demand obedience to their commands?
PUPIL: I cannot deny it.
SOCRATES: And is it not true that slaves are morally bound to obey the will of their masters?
PUPIL: You speak truly.
SOCRATES: And is it not self-evident that to preserve society we must respect the natural order of the world?
PUPIL: I must admit that your point is unquestionable.
SOCRATES: So therefore, the will of the stronger is in conflict with the fibre of reality.
PUPIL: Yes, you are correct.
SOCRATES: And it is thus inevitable that one must abandon a relativistic view of ethics, due to its logical contradictions.
PUPIL: I humbly submit to your superior reasoning. The truth of your words speak for themselves.
In law school, the so-called Socratic Method consists of a series of questions designed to humiliate and expose any student who has not completed the assigned reading, and to instill the combative principles of our adversarial legal system.
In this, the Method more closely resembles popular culture’s “The McLaughlin Group” than anything to do with Socrates. Here’s an example of the Method in law school:
PROF: Item One!! Mr. Benson, what is the most important aspect of today’s case?
BENSON: Well I’m not sure, maybe it’s…
PROF: Did you even bother to read the case, Mr. Benson?
BENSON: I think the most important aspect of the case might be…
PROF: Wrong!! Ms. Jenkins, do you know the answer?
JENKINS: Actions in perpetuity are not subject to prima ipso loquitor replevin judgments when…
PROF: Wrong!!
JENKINS: Well, what is the correct answer?
PROF: Who do you think you are? Do you really belong in law school? You don’t deserve to hear my knowledge! That right must be earned! Maybe you should spend more time studying or just drop out. Issue!! Why didn’t the plaintiff bring a suit under Judge Posner’s theory of reducing all aspects of life to units of monetary calculus? Mathews!!
MATHEWS: Well I think…
PROF: Wrong!! You people make me sick! Class is dismissed until you learn to get serious.
Based on my observations, I submit that the term “Socratic Method” no longer be used to describe this style of education. Instead it should be the “McLaughlic Method.”