Crissco
Master Don Juan
http://www.fastseduction.com/discussion/fs?action=9&boardid=2&read=107016&fid=23
Reading over a FS again, this thread got me thinking, a lot. I think we can use the Socratic Method and apply it to seduction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method
Elenchus (Ancient Greek: ἔλεγχος elengkhos "argument of disproof or refutation; cross-examining, testing, scrutiny esp. for purposes of refutation" is the central technique of the Socratic method. The Latin form elenchus (plural elenchi ) is used in English as the technical philosophical term.
"If you ask a question or series of questions in which your respondent can readily agree, then ask a concluding question based on those agreements, you will receive a desirable response"
-Socrates' interlocutor asserts a thesis, for example "Courage is endurance of the soul", which Socrates considers false and targets for refutation.
-Socrates secures his interlocutor's agreement to further premises, for example "Courage is a fine thing" and "Ignorant endurance is not a fine thing".
-Socrates then argues, and the interlocutor agrees, that these further premises imply the contrary of the original thesis, in this case it leads to: "courage is not endurance of the soul".
-Socrates then claims that he has shown that his interlocutor's thesis is false and that its negation is true
This is basically the method in a nutshell. A teacher, student example.
-The teacher and student agree on the topic of instruction.
-The student agrees to attempt to answer questions from the teacher.
-The teacher and student are willing to accept any correctly-reasoned answer. That is, the reasoning process must be considered more important than pre-conceived facts or beliefs.
-The teacher's questions should expose errors in the students' reasoning or beliefs, then formulate questions that the students cannot answer except by a correct reasoning process.
-The teacher has prior knowledge about the classical fallacies (errors) in reasoning.
-Where the teacher makes an error of logic or fact, it is acceptable for a student to draw attention to the error.
I can defiantly see where this can work. Im always one to argue my point and try to convince you I am right, wether your a man or women usually by using questions and examples.. Ex -Ok, why do u think this?..etc, what if we change this around and do this..etc.. especially when I know im right and there wrong. If im understanding this correctly the Socratic Method has to do with using questions to prove your point (In a nutshell)
Every time I get into a discussion with a girl and really get into it a prove her wrong, every time I got those "doggy" dinner bowl look eyes and she was more attracted to me then she was before. To me this is def possible.
Whats everyones thought on this?
Reading over a FS again, this thread got me thinking, a lot. I think we can use the Socratic Method and apply it to seduction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method
Elenchus (Ancient Greek: ἔλεγχος elengkhos "argument of disproof or refutation; cross-examining, testing, scrutiny esp. for purposes of refutation" is the central technique of the Socratic method. The Latin form elenchus (plural elenchi ) is used in English as the technical philosophical term.
"If you ask a question or series of questions in which your respondent can readily agree, then ask a concluding question based on those agreements, you will receive a desirable response"
-Socrates' interlocutor asserts a thesis, for example "Courage is endurance of the soul", which Socrates considers false and targets for refutation.
-Socrates secures his interlocutor's agreement to further premises, for example "Courage is a fine thing" and "Ignorant endurance is not a fine thing".
-Socrates then argues, and the interlocutor agrees, that these further premises imply the contrary of the original thesis, in this case it leads to: "courage is not endurance of the soul".
-Socrates then claims that he has shown that his interlocutor's thesis is false and that its negation is true
This is basically the method in a nutshell. A teacher, student example.
-The teacher and student agree on the topic of instruction.
-The student agrees to attempt to answer questions from the teacher.
-The teacher and student are willing to accept any correctly-reasoned answer. That is, the reasoning process must be considered more important than pre-conceived facts or beliefs.
-The teacher's questions should expose errors in the students' reasoning or beliefs, then formulate questions that the students cannot answer except by a correct reasoning process.
-The teacher has prior knowledge about the classical fallacies (errors) in reasoning.
-Where the teacher makes an error of logic or fact, it is acceptable for a student to draw attention to the error.
I can defiantly see where this can work. Im always one to argue my point and try to convince you I am right, wether your a man or women usually by using questions and examples.. Ex -Ok, why do u think this?..etc, what if we change this around and do this..etc.. especially when I know im right and there wrong. If im understanding this correctly the Socratic Method has to do with using questions to prove your point (In a nutshell)
Every time I get into a discussion with a girl and really get into it a prove her wrong, every time I got those "doggy" dinner bowl look eyes and she was more attracted to me then she was before. To me this is def possible.
Whats everyones thought on this?
