What Socrates Can Teach Us about Political Discourse

“Rather than treating the other in a Socratic manner—which is to say, as a partner in the communal quest for truth—the polemicist roundly delegitimizes the other and reduces him to an ‘adversary, an enemy, who is wrong and whose very existence constitutes a threat.'”

What can be learned from Socrates? Can the ancient Athenian philosopher’s practice of dialectic examination inspire new thoughts on issues that relate to our social and political lives? I happen to agree with Fred Dallmayr, Emeritus Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and his observation that our public discourse has devolved into the confrontational and unproductive practice of polemics. Rather than treating the other in a Socratic manner—which is to say, as a partner in the communal quest for truth—the polemicist roundly delegitimizes the other and reduces him to an “adversary, an enemy, who is wrong and whose very existence constitutes a threat.”

Intertwined with an understanding of polemics are the concomitant issues of both factionalism and tribalism in politics. They tend to be expressive of a dogmatic view of (and relationship to) truth. Socrates’s practice of the dialectic—chiefly in the ever-renewed search for knowledge of virtue— is never concerned with defeating or humiliating a fellow truth seeker. Instead, Socrates embraces the goal of changing the interlocutor’s position through communal questioning and critical argumentation. Socrates expresses this notion famously in the Apology, when stressing that the “unexamined life is not worth living.”

Perhaps the most obvious instance of factionalism in the United States currently is the irreparable division between dyed-in-the-wool Republicans and the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Yet, looking deeper, there are internecine divisions within both political parties. The deep division between traditional fiscal conservatism and the “MAGA wing” of the Republican party is a clear example—and even within the MAGA wing there is a split between those devoted to President Donald Trump and those—usually maligned as RINOS (Republican in name only)—who are criticized for their lack of devotion to President Trump. Likewise, glaring divisions also exist on the Left between progressives, or what is often labeled the radical left, and those who are merely wearing the progressive hat while still deeply aligned with corporate America. They are criticized for soliciting funds from wealthy donors to whom they are considered beholden, doing the donors’ political bidding for the right price. For this reason, the issue of ethics is rightfully called into question.