Socratic dialogue on murder:
Me: I’ve been thinking a lot about justice recently Socrates, and I just don’t get why euthanasia for inmates is a just penalty for a crime, even if that crime is murder. Is murder not wrong?
Socrates: Hmmm… yes, I would agree that murder is wrong, would you agree that there is no greater evil which man could perform?
Me: Umm… I guess I would agree.
Socrates: Well then, if murder is the greatest evil, would you also agree that every human has the right to live no matter how great or how small?
Me: Yes, all humans should not have the right to live taken away from them.
Socrates: Therefore should murder be justified on a case-by-case basis?
Me: No, what is wrong is wrong no matter the circumstance.
Socrates: Is rape also evil?
Me: Of course rape is evil.
Socrates: Should not a woman be given the choice to abort a fetus conceived through rape or incest, both of which are considered to be evil acts?
Me: Well, it depends on how old the fetus is, and other factors.
Socrates: Ahh, it seems that murder can be circumstantial indeed.
This was really hard for me! I feel like a pretty logical person, but it was difficult to create a Socratic method in trying to argue with myself, or set myself up for contradiction. I didn’t really enjoy writing this, nor do I think I did a particularly good job of creating a Socratic Dialogue. I guess this forces me to take on a variety of perspective and to use language and logic to convince through argument. On the other hand, I just felt really uncomfortable writing it, and I felt pretty lost in writing it. I often had to reconsider what I was trying to prove and how I was going to prove it. In some ways that was a creative thinking process (at least up front, in trying to figure out the ways in which I could take a murder argument). In the end, I used critical thinking to settle on an argument that was somewhat familiar to me, but I think this would have come out very differently had I worked in a group on this sort of dialogue.