Why Socratic Dialogue should become our business card | Sira Abenoza | TEDxESADE
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 авг 2024
- Do we really know how to dialogue? Listen to the Founder of the Institute for Socratic Dialogue & Professor at ESADE Business and Law School, explaining how and why to engage in real dialogue.
Sira Abenoza is a professor on Sustainability, Business Ethics and Socratic Dialogue at ESADE Business and Law School, as well as visiting professor at the Jesuit Universities in Central America. She is founder of the Institute for Socratic Dialogue, an organization aimed at spreading true dialogue as a tool for companies to engage with its stakeholders; for governments to promote peace and strengthen democracy; and for NGO and civil organizations to give voice to the voiceless.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at ted.com/tedx
The four principles of Socratic dialogue:
1. Truth is the goal
2. Be willing to be refuted
3. Listen (observe silence)
4. Question
1. The "best-answer" is the Socratic goal. The truth of a matter may not even be knowable.
Observe in silence. We have not mastered achieving the perspective from which authentic observation is even consciously possible, yet.
Ever.
From an authentic perspective of observation, that which is being communicated can become more clearly heard. Remaining mindful however that having been brought up in a world with a reality paradigm that is completely abusively installed to yield a fear-based perception ability, without the capacity for authentic observation, learning how to observe the silence is a first step. But one cannot go into and authentic perspective of observation if one expects to observe silence. For that is not even how to observe silence. A paradox which may only be able to be resolved by trying to and noticing that it is impossible with such pretenses having become manifest into unachievable expectations. (a bad habit of humanities, which has not deserved us well at all outside of being able to utilize it for the incurrence of greater levels of karmic debt.
Yikes!
@@jasonreed1352amazing 😅❤
1 Thessalonians 5:21, "But do test everything - hold onto what is good,"
SOCRATES’ TRIPLE FILTER TEST
Socrates was widely lauded for his wisdom. One day an acquaintance ran up to him excitedly and said, “Socrates, do you know what I just heard about Diogenes?”
“Wait a moment,” Socrates replied. “Before you tell me, I’d like you to pass a little test. It’s called the Triple Filter Test.”
“Triple filter?” asked the acquaintance.
“That’s right,” Socrates continued. “Before you talk to me about Diogenes, let’s take a moment to filter what you’re going to say. The first filter is Truth. Have you made abso- lutely sure that what you are about to tell me is true?”
“No,” the man said. “Actually I just heard about it.”
“All right,” said Socrates. “So you don’t really know if it’s true or not. Now let’s try the second filter, the filter of Goodness. Is what you are about to tell me about Diogenes something good?”
“No, on the contrary...”
“So,” Socrates continued. “You want to tell me something about Diogenes that may be bad, even though you’re not certain it’s true?”
The man shrugged, a little embarrassed.
Socrates continued. “You may still pass the test though, because there is a third filter, the filter of Usefulness. Is what you want to tell me about Diogenes going to be useful to me?”
“No, not really.”
“Well,” concluded Socrates, “if what you want to tell me is neither True nor Good nor even Useful, why tell it to me or anyone at all?”
The man was bewildered and ashamed.
This is an example of why Socrates was a great philosopher and held in such high es- teem. Too bad more people don’t utilize the test today.
Good one
Thanks for this, I never knew of the Triple Filter Test.
Get rid of the goodness filter and you're on the right path.
f@Ken Richard"True? Good? Useful?"? If the answer is "no", "no", "no" , Don't bother me..."
I think one should use this test very carefully in politics.
Firstly, realise that party-politics is NOT the same as politics in the time of Socrates.
Spot on!!! Great points!!
These skills should be taught in the education system... beginning very young and reinforced every year.
MazeKat
: ... should be taught in the education system..."
themselves
Yes, I agree. But all we do is toss children in a classroom and expect them to silently, passively absorb what the teacher is saying. Current education doesn't bring anything out of children. It just tries to cram info inside.
This is one of the best TEDTALKS..Thank you Sira
Dialogue is about sharing different perspectives to broaden understanding, it takes keeping our mind open and curious even when someone saying very contrarian views or expressing feelings that makes one anxious; it does take a different mindset and practice than debate .
Very profound! It's a matter of better listening to each other
What a beautiful person, love her...
I am a coach now, and I promised that I been practicing all the socratic concepts that she mentions and those ideas have been beneficial for me and this talk is really awesome.
Of all the Ted talks I have listened to, this is the best so far. Because, it hits upon some basic fundamental precepts that are absolutely necessary in order to build a correct understanding of absolutely anything. Without a proper foundation one builds upon the shifting sands of time, which results in entropy. Most students of philosophy don't understand that Western philosophy didn't BEGIN with Socrates; it actually CULMINATED with Socrates! And I authored a book that explains how I know this to be true....with help from Socrates!
I thought she'd teach how to dialogue but this talk of why to dialogue has been equally useful. thank you
TED is for idiots.
The point of dialogue is to reach a common end to counter ways of thinking, which means compromising a belief or conviction that one holds. The main beliefs among us are Spiritual and those convictions aren't usually compromised.
I'm impressed, by how she seemed very engaging, by simply using some hand gestures to complement her monologue on why we should engage in Socratic dialogue more often.
I think after hearing this presentation and scrolling thorough the comments listening to people inputs on the matter. This is what you call dialogue rather you agree to disagree. Amazing!
Great concluding call to action. Do I? Do I want to make the world a better place? Do you?
very profound idea explained simply..thanks
Top contender as one of the best Ted Talks Ive ever watched. I've thought a lot about all the major points she spoke about and everything just clicked in my head. So glad I watched this.
Dialoguing: purposeful, guided, and constructive.
Great and inspired talk - should be mandatory listening for all
Really inspiring. Thanks a lot Sira for sharing this. Very good food for thought! :)
This was really a awesome session, you are that new born to teach the new born something new and make the world better place
Still very relevant now. Probably more so. Great topic. Great presentation.
YES!, programmed to compete, however how much competition do you see in nature? Dialog unites and reunites, so Socrates was stopped from freely giving the people the metaphysical tools to unite. As they will at some point, find themselves and their true relationships within a unified whole. Language IS magic.
She is AMAZING
Some very good advice, nicely presented, by a person who cares. Well done!
Great talk! Food for thought for sure!
Excellent Ted Talk, many thanks!
Few people even understand the difference between Discussion, Debate and Dialogue
Absolutely love this. But why are the philosophers not gonna be powerful? Smoeone should do a atalk about how it is exactly philosophers who should have the power. Plato said it himself with the idea of the philosopher-king, and this world much needs them.
Philosophers are best when they're exploring questions not giving answers. I think there's something inherently problematic for people who are in a position to be giving answers. I suppose arrogance creeps in.
I think in the end she lost the main idea of this presentation. The idea that we forgot (or never knew) how to correctly speak with each other is interesting. Especially, I like her comparison between the style of thinking of business people and philosophers. Nowadays, the winner is who speaks louder and more confident. It remembers me a situation 2500 years ago in Greece, when sophists manipulated people by the knowledge of rhetoric and arguing. Socrates was agains sophists' methods. He supported a dialog as the tool to find a real truth. That's when and how a DEMOCRACY was born!
Socrates was a critic of democracy. It wouldn't make sense that it was born from him. If anything, democracy was born from Cleisthenes.
@@gamerdio2503 I don't know exactly what happened in that situation, but speaking more broadly, a person can't control what others do with their ideas, so it's possible for Socratic ideas to have substantially influenced democracy, even though he was a strong critic.
Socrates was not an advocate of democracy.
Thank you very much.
Outstanding!!!
Why has this great talk had only 4,621 views nearly a year after it was posted?
If it helps at all, I'm sharing this to a group called Namaste Now on facebook. we are in the season of peace right now. Day 39 is about dialogue. thanks for reminding me to like the video. I often forget.
We have just shared it with our "Centre for Authentic Dialogue" Facebook group: facebook.com/groups/1660004567615315/
because while it is informative, it is slow and plodding. she is taking far too much time to express her point. though, she does get around to doing so
Transliteration- English isn’t her first language. I’m sure she’s thinking in a certain culture which is where a lot of the delay comes from.
John S Wren because if you go and listen to other speakers on this subject they go straight to the point. it’s minute 10:35 and she is still going around the bush and talking about the bush but never cut it.
this is a good talk about listening to each other to get a good understanding of the matter , she is making a point o if if someone says something and you just dont pay close attention for whatever the reason, we cannit say that a real dialogue took place, also if a politician gives an speech l mean a goid politician he does not need alot the audience to interact with him because he already has a plan or agenda or a written speech ,so he wll talk but not to debate or clarfy his ideas but just to let others what he will do on behave of a group, in here he does not need to dialogue ,a socratic dialogue comes ib handy when you have to interact but she git to make her point
We are inculcated by the culture into which we are born. We are not a tabula rasa, beyond the first moment of consciousness. To shed a frame of reference, we have to consciously or subconsciously adapt to another. How can we truly evaluate a frame of reference, being a part of a different one or, having accepted a new one, truly evaluate the old one?To evaluate is to judge. To view is to judge. What is truth? What is happiness? It depends upon your frame of reference.That is why, we are told that it was Socrates' contention, to have a dialog, you must define your terms.
People cannot think quick enough to do what you are asking. I often hear something that sounds like it crushes my logic but when I take a few minutes and think it all through I realize the other persons argument may have sounded great but that it does not actually follow. So people typically come prepared to defend their beliefs unless it gets absolutely crushed because chances are even if the opponent wins the argument they did not truly win on paper if we were to compare logic. A lot of people use analogous reasoning to trick people. I do think we need to challenge our beliefs but I don't know if public dialogue is the place to do that just for the integrity of the actual argument because the better one may not actually convince people. Great speaker though
I think since you're talking about arguments, you're missing her points. Of course people come prepared in arguments, because they want to win. They wouldn't care if you have little time to think of a come back, and use tricks on you because they want to win, because they are seeing this as an argument, as a debate.
What Sira tried to bring across was, however, to NOT debate, but to discuss, to have a dialogue, meaning listen genuinely, asking relevant, non-tricking questions to bring the ideas out of the other person; hence, meaning giving the other person enough time to think and verbalize their ideas accurately. It's a mutual building up of ideas. And of course, this effort to engage in slow, deliberate discussion, has to come from both parties. SO if you're seeing that the other person tries to steer the dialogue into a debate, you can actually use Sira's advice to steer them back to the right lane. Make them understand that you want a dialogue, not a debate. It's a matter of perspectives.
Quach Van Thanh Mai like a 2 or 3 hour long form podcast conversation on interesting views points or topics, rather than a bitesize news interview.
I debate with myself all the time. The problem isn’t with debate the problem is debate or arguing to “win” rather than to try to understand.
Wonderful talk. Thank you.
Gracias!!!
Very good TeldTalk, thanks Sira
very relevant for today
WAH Wah wah.....
✋Sometimes prejudice and judgement can be a good thing.
Those two alone can even save your life in certain circumstances ☝️
Can you name an example? Im interested.
Dan Piano yes it is true we must judge to make correct decisions, but pre judging when you are already opposed to a person, place or thing could prevent right and just judgement...
@@leonscholz5709 you see a man at the pub who you think is "creepy looking" so you don't engage in eye contact with him. 15 minutes later he has started a fight with another man with "Who are you looking at?!".
Great talk.
❤❤well done
I think she means "I did not go deaf" (not "I did not go blind") near the beginning.
We must take a "pause" in life. But we must "applause" to live. Is the tree with motion or is it paused? Our minds analysis a tree upright and green. But if you cut it in half, " what do you see?"
I suggest the tv show Mindhunter. The show uses this type of dialog a lot I believe.
It’s always great to be reminded the need for civil interaction and how to do it. I feel like she has the wrong idea about or definition of debate. It’s not about fighting or even winning. It’s about getting to the truth and usually it’s done between people who are educated on a subject, have a case so to speak, and provide value in presenting their Positions. There’s a lot of valuable critical thinking strategies and brain power that goes into debating. So again it depends on definitions, but if she’s getting at that you shouldn’t debate unless you’re prepared, then OK, I would agree with that.
We require more development of the skills to dialogue, which involve creating confidence, being active listening and being a functional conversationalist. Thanks Sira Abenoza for enriching the conversational ideas, I would love your opinion about the book ZAPES PARA DIALOGAR, of which I am the author. Congratulations.
i liked the intentional silence in the beginning. It was like gauging the audience.
great!
Collaboration better be our goal.
How many guys googled SOCRATES METHOD after reading a chapter in the famous book “How to Win Friends and Influence People”
Thought this was going to describe using the Socratic method....
It did. 1) Ask questions, 2) listen to the answers that you get, and 3) contemplate the perspective from which those answers come...with an open mind.
Nice Discussion
So how does this talk stack up to what is happening on collage campuses , where free speech is being condemned , and no one is allowed to talk to anyone , and the only dialogue is shouting down any speaker with a different opinion. This TedTalk would be labeled "Hate Speach" at most American collages
You probably don't get to say what would and wouldn't fly at a college when you can spell neither "college" nor "speech."
While you’re making a good grammar correction, the main idea or critique is interesting and you didn’t attend to it. It’s an accurate critique of some of the college’s nowadays where people are against free speech under the premise of protecting the weak and the abused. It seems to me thaf we should protect dialogue and free speech above all else. It might arguably be our most important right. (English is not my native language and I’m typing from my phone so, sorry for grammar or syntaxis mistakes)
It doesn't deserve being attended to. Sort of like I'm not going to pay any attention to a billboard that presents an insightful critique of Hegelian phenomenology if it consistently misspells "Hegel."
@@Carloss86py as a native speaker of English, I applaud you for your mastery of our language.
@@johndavid4007 well, now the argument has been put forth sans grammatical errors. Will you address it?
6:48
🕊
👏👏👏👏
Does trust develop in proportion to wisdom?
I'm not wise enough to answer that but it's a geat question! I suppose you have to be receptive to gain wisdom, which involves a trust of sorts? I also reckon that kindness & compassion grow in relation to wisdom through learning to understand others' experiences & viewpoints. What do you think?
Wisdom increases discernment and sensitivity. When to trust. When to be wary.
best
Not sure why this is a Ted Talk. William Isaacs and the Organizational Learning Center slew this dragon decades ago.
Obviously not...
Isnt doing business often unethical in nature? And wouldnt someone focused on optimization of profit not only not care but actively be unethical to reach their goals? (I.e. nestle and the stuff theyre doing all the time)
Student: Teacher if a tree falls and there is no one there to hear it does it make a noise??
Teacher: Have you heard such a tree make a noise??
Student: No!!
Teacher: Why not!!
Student: I wasn’t there to hear it!!
Teacher: What does that tell you??
Student: That there is no way of telling wether or not it made a noise??
Teacher: Yes!!
Teacher: What else does it tell you??
Student: That I should ask another question??
Teacher: Wrong!! That you should stop coming here to waste my time!!!!!!
We have never learned how to dialogue in our education system.
Never heard the term "dialogue" used as a verb....
In spanish, the word "dialogar" means "to converse", but comes from "diálogo" which means dialogue so its just a common mistake from spanish speakers to say "to dialogue".
@@GabrielMora16 Ah I see, interesting thx.
62,000 views.... people have other worries, unfortunately.
jewish mind, i like it..
God bless you
I thought she was talking about Dial Up.
Socrates is kinda weird talking to strangers on the streets.
Not really, we are all human beings and he’s just having a conversation with them , what’s weird about that? 🙃
luce irigaray
Hot
It does a poor job at explaining the Socratic method. All she needed to do was to show some examples
She did a great job of explaining the Socratic method: 1) Ask questions, 2) listen to the answers that you get, and 3) contemplate the perspective from which those answers come...with an open mind.
Great topic...but homegirl could have prepped a smidge more.
i didn't like this talk sorry being honest this is wasting time
She’s awkward
Nice judging. Her point. 🙄