Socratic Method for Life Coaching

The Socratic method or questioning, is or had the intention of being raised in pedagogy, with the purpose of forging a critical and transformative thinking in the student. It also has a prominent place in psychology, in cognitive-behavioral therapies. In short, it is used as a tool to question the constructs and mental schemes that alienate us from ourselves and our environment, leading us to live in a mental alienation of which we are not aware and we blame the rest of humanity for our perception, as ours as defined by the symbolic sense of living. This method will be used to delve, with Socratic questions, into the conflict and then, in previous videos, focus on beliefs.

Who was Socrates?

We cannot explain what this method consists of without first mentioning the illustrious philosopher creator, with a powerful influence to this day. Considered the wisest man of antiquity for his essential precepts of knowing oneself to be ignorant. Known for the non-acceptance of preconceived facts, guaranteeing a place for DOUBT. Socrates, born in the 469th century B.C. The reflective method that occupies us today is framed as SOCRATIC METHOD, or what is the same: dialogues, inquiry and search for answers in the noble art of discerning the truth. Essential for an approach or first awareness of our inner worlds.

Socratic questioning.

The Socratic Method or Socratic questioning arises from the philosophy of dialectics. Dialectics is conceived as: confrontation of truth. Thus is conjugated: Socratic method as a type of debate, dialogues or rhetorical questions in which the main objective is to discern erroneous points of view and stay only with approaches that help to convince the "opponent" of the true theory.

This concept goes back only to those views and objects of our perception. We cannot establish dialogues to infer whether the sun rises during the day. Only with subjective ideas, exposing them to the reach of people who are willing to collaborate and not intimidate in the effort to put aside the ego. The example would be as follows:

Emma and Teresa are willing to find out who is right about what love is. Emma asks in hypothetical language: can I love, do I know what love is, or do I only know what I have been told? Or do I only know what the movies have shown me? Love is obsession. To which Teresa replies:

• If love is obsession you will never be able to have freedom, because you will be tied to the feeling. Love is obsession to the extent that you do not understand what it is to love yourself and therefore continue to project your shortcomings on the person.
• Emma nods, her approach and therefore her perspective is incorrect. From that moment on, she assumes the truth.

Fallacies.

But do we so easily accept our misperceptions? Most of the time, no. We use certain excuses included in the following "fallacies":

• Circular fallacy: The arguments of ¨defense¨ enter a kind of loop without any new conclusion to contribute. Laundry must be washed daily, because I say so! It has always been done that way.

• Straw man fallacy: It uses an invention of a strong position in front of the other with qualities that we know the other does not have.

• Who is going to know more about women, you who are still single at 30 or me who has been married three times?

• Appeal to authority fallacy: Listen to people's advice but don't assume their criteria as an established norm. How are you going to follow the advice of a person whose world is computers and nothing else in the editing of your historical novel just because you are their number 1 fan?

• Sunk cost fallacy: If you invest time in a project it is because you know it will eventually pay off. If you keep doing it, you will be losing. Knowing how to stop is also knowing how to move forward. If you wanted to experiment on your own to improve your bike and it didn't work. Take it to a specialist or get the part you are looking for. Simple.

How to use the Socratic method?

Clarify: You must know how to summarize, with a logical argumentation the content of their points of view, to know where to attack.

Don't challenge yet: The point of view is a sign of identity. So just ask him to show you what he believes: Why do you think you are useless? What have you experienced that proves it?

Challenge: Now it's time to challenge those convoluted ideas in his thinking, so focus on the logical part he hasn't analyzed.

Are you useless for finishing a 5-year career? Do you not accept the sacrifice you made? Did you know that useless people can't even talk? Where is everything you have achieved in the last few years?

Reformulate the argument: Based on the challenging elements, ask the person to elaborate new arguments. Okay, at that time I was not useless. Now I am.

Keep questioning: Why do you say I am now? In the best case scenario, the person will feel confused by the helplessness of not being able to continue "disrupting" his thoughts. Encourage him/her by telling him/her that this is the way.

Eliminating any vestige of excuses that we tend to create for ourselves will remove the obstacles in the form of "permitted belief".

It is not about asking questions of his statements, just insist on the truthfulness of those chosen words.

The opposite: You will now focus on the opposite beliefs. Have they ever affirmed to you that you are not worthless? If your answer is yes, we can probe further.

In what way have you been told this? How long have you had this thought? Have you acquired it as a habit or habit? If I told you now that you are a valuable person, able to accomplish anything you set your mind to, what would you believe? Give your thoughts some time to spin the answer.

Many times we find the true cause of our ills without thinking about it.

Like when you lose your keys and you find them only when you are looking for another lost object. Doesn't it happen to you?