The Discussion Board (DB) is part of the core of online learning. Classroom discussion in an online environment requires the active participation of students and the instructor to create robust interaction and dialogue. Every student is expected to create an original response to the open-ended DB question as well as engage in dialogue by responding to posts created by others throughout the week. At the end of each unit, DB participation will be assessed based on both level of engagement and the quality of the contribution to the discussion.

At a minimum, each student will be expected to post an original and thoughtful response to the DB question and contribute to the weekly dialogue by responding to at least two other posts from students. The first contribution must be posted before midnight (Central Time) on Wednesday of each week. Two additional responses are required after Wednesday of each week. Students are highly encouraged to engage on the Discussion Board early and often, as that is the primary way the university tracks class attendance and participation.

The purpose of the Discussion Board is to allow students to learn through sharing ideas and experiences as they relate to course content and the DB question. Because it is not possible to engage in two-way dialogue after a conversation has ended, no posts to the DB will be accepted after the end of each week.

The ancient Greek philosopher Socrates is known for a technique called the Socratic Method, in which the teacher leads the student through a process of questioning to come to a logically valid conclusion.

Born in 469 B.C., Socrates is considered one of the founding fathers of Western philosophy—even though he left no writings behind and very little is known about him. Everything that is known of his teachings is found in the works of his students, like Plato. Much of Plato’s writings are dialogues between Socrates and his students. In these dialogues, the method that Socrates used to help his students discover truths can be observed. This almost always consists of the following:

• Defining and redefining key terms
  • Socrates believed that a main problem with humans is that they are often unclear about the definitions of words. Confused words lead to confused ideas and confused arguments. Therefore, clear, precise, and meaningful terms are needed to build a sound argument.
• Using questions to guide the student into discovering his or her own logical inconsistencies so that the truth is uncovered
  • Through these questions, claims are continually refined and logical problems are addressed and resolved until an ultimate conclusion is reached.

Consider the following excerpt from Plato’s Meno, in which Socrates guides his student (Meno) to the conclusion that all evil is a form of ignorance (Soccio, 1995):

Socrates: …Do not all men…desire the good?
Meno: I think not.
Socrates: There are some who desire evil?
Meno: Yes.
Socrates: Do you mean that they think the evils which they desire, to be good; or do they know that they are evil and yet desire them?
Meno: Both, I think.
Socrates: And do you really imagine, Meno, that a man knows evils to be evils and desires them notwithstanding?
Meno: Certainly I do.
Socrates: And desire is [for] possession?
Meno: Yes, [for] possession…
Socrates: Well, and do those who, as they say, desire evils, and think that evils are hurtful to the possessor of them, know that they will be hurt by them?
Meno: They must know it.
Socrates: And must they not suppose that those who are hurt are miserable in proportion to the hurt which is inflicted upon them?
Meno: How can it be otherwise?
Socrates: But are not the miserable ill-fated?
Meno: Yes, indeed.
Socrates: And does any one desire to be miserable and ill-fated?
Meno: I should say not, Socrates.
Socrates: But if there is no one who desires to be miserable, there no one, Meno, who desires evil; for what is misery but the desire and possession of evil?
Meno: That appears to be the truth, Socrates, and I admit that nobody desires evil.

Take a moment to reflect on this passage, and then write 2–3 paragraphs in response to the following questions:

• What do you think of Socrates’ conclusion that no person knowingly does evil, and therefore, all evil is ignorance? Do you agree or disagree, and why? If you disagree, please identify at least 1 logical fallacy.
• If people accepted that all evil is ignorance, what implications would that have on the justice system? How would prison sentencing or the death penalty be affected?

In your own words, please post a response to the Discussion Board and comment on other postings. You will be graded on the quality of your postings.

For assistance with your assignment, please use your text, Web resources, and all course materials.

Reference

Soccio, D. J. (1995). Archetypes of wisdom. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.