- I’m learning how to do the Socratic method
- I’m focusing on learning the elenchus
- So, I thought it’d be good to do a Socratic dialogue with Gemini being Socrates, where I’d pause and try to predict what Gemini Socrates would say next
- The results were very humbling - Gemini Socrates is 100x better at being Socrates than me right now, it’s really good
- I still think there’s a tonne of value in learning to do this myself without AI, e.g. when thinking on the fly, or when talking with friends. But I do feel very humbled!!!
1. Intro
Gemini Socrates
You are weighing two paths: part-time work and full-time work. For a choice to be difficult, it usually means that you see a significant "good" in each path, and perhaps a significant loss.
So, tell me, what is the primary good that you seek from the path of part-time work? What does it offer you?
So, tell me, what is the primary good that you seek from the path of part-time work? What does it offer you?
Alex
I seek to have the time and mental capacity/energy to explore other avenues that I believe could be fruitful and profound. With full time work, there's a sense of giving myself away to someone else's mission, whereas with part-time work, I have time to follow my own path, with the part-time job not becoming my main focus.
There's the sense that a full-time job can kind of "nerd-snipe" me - can become my main focus, and lead me to forget about my personal focuses which may be more important and profound, but easy to forget.
There's the sense that a full-time job can kind of "nerd-snipe" me - can become my main focus, and lead me to forget about my personal focuses which may be more important and profound, but easy to forget.
2. What does “your own mission” mean?
Gemini Socrates
I see. This is a very clear and helpful distinction.
On one hand, you have the full-time path, which you describe as dedicating your energy to "someone else's mission." You fear this might capture your focus and cause you to "forget" what is truly important.
On the other hand, the part-time path offers the chance to follow "your own path," one you believe could be more "fruitful and profound."
This is the point that interests me most. Let us set aside the practical matters of time and energy for a moment and focus on the nature of this path.
You've drawn a distinction between your own path and another's mission. Tell me, what is it that makes a path truly one's own? And what is the nature of the profundity you hope to find there? Is it a kind of knowledge, a type of creation, a state of being, or something else?
On one hand, you have the full-time path, which you describe as dedicating your energy to "someone else's mission." You fear this might capture your focus and cause you to "forget" what is truly important.
On the other hand, the part-time path offers the chance to follow "your own path," one you believe could be more "fruitful and profound."
This is the point that interests me most. Let us set aside the practical matters of time and energy for a moment and focus on the nature of this path.
You've drawn a distinction between your own path and another's mission. Tell me, what is it that makes a path truly one's own? And what is the nature of the profundity you hope to find there? Is it a kind of knowledge, a type of creation, a state of being, or something else?
Cool, ok, so he did do the "find the universal", but about the "your own mission vs someone else's mission" proposition/story/assumption (?). Very nice actually!
Alex
I suppose what it is is that - I have, in the past, worked on things that haven't been directly congruent with my personal "path". For example, I was a data analyst for a few years. Then I got involved in the Effective Altruism space, but not because I was deeply passionate about a particular cause area - mostly because it felt good to know I was having *some* kind of impact, the people were great, etc.
I have a sense that there were fires burning in my own home, and I ignored them in order to have a full-time job, which took up a lot of my energy. So now, I'd like to attend to those fires! For example, I'd love to learn more about people, so I can understand more of why my family act the way they do. And I can see this leading to me becoming a coach, and helping people directly, and this feeling more nourishing to me, as it addresses a core source of pain in my life (not being able to help my family).
So, it feels like there are routes to making money which are also aligned with my own, "non-work-life" mission(s), in summary.
I have a sense that there were fires burning in my own home, and I ignored them in order to have a full-time job, which took up a lot of my energy. So now, I'd like to attend to those fires! For example, I'd love to learn more about people, so I can understand more of why my family act the way they do. And I can see this leading to me becoming a coach, and helping people directly, and this feeling more nourishing to me, as it addresses a core source of pain in my life (not being able to help my family).
So, it feels like there are routes to making money which are also aligned with my own, "non-work-life" mission(s), in summary.
Ok, so this is quite a lot for it to handle, I'm sure there are lots of "unarticulated major premises" here.
So Socrates will want to draw out the most fruitful of these.
The logic here feels clear to me. Work less on stuff that isn't particularly aligned/personally useful, improve my life by learning how to put out fires, and then maybe I'll have developed additional skills and have a real zeal for helping others do the same thing, rather than nerd-sniping myself to try to care about EA things.
(1) Appeal to universal (2) How shall we define x? (3) Who is the expert of x? (4) Find agreement
Maybe a (1) move here would be like... "so you're aiming to do the most good?" Or, "in the past, were you intentionally choosing a less 'path-congruent' choice, or were you choosing the best option to you?"
But overall, I feel a bit at a loss. I don't feel confident in how Gemini Socrates will respond.
So Socrates will want to draw out the most fruitful of these.
The logic here feels clear to me. Work less on stuff that isn't particularly aligned/personally useful, improve my life by learning how to put out fires, and then maybe I'll have developed additional skills and have a real zeal for helping others do the same thing, rather than nerd-sniping myself to try to care about EA things.
(1) Appeal to universal (2) How shall we define x? (3) Who is the expert of x? (4) Find agreement
Maybe a (1) move here would be like... "so you're aiming to do the most good?" Or, "in the past, were you intentionally choosing a less 'path-congruent' choice, or were you choosing the best option to you?"
But overall, I feel a bit at a loss. I don't feel confident in how Gemini Socrates will respond.
3. Pay for an expert?
Gemini Socrates
That clarifies matters considerably. Thank you.
You have pointed to a very specific and powerful source for this desire. You speak of "fires burning in your own home," which you ignored while working on other missions, however noble they may have seemed.
You have also given a clear example of one of these fires: understanding your family's behaviour, which you believe could lead to a path as a coach, helping others and healing a source of your own pain.
This seems to be the heart of it. Let us examine this proposition you have laid out: "The best path for me is one that allows me to address the fires in my own home, as this will be both nourishing for me and a potential source of livelihood."
This sounds like a very wise and coherent belief. Now, let me ask a clarifying question to test its foundation.
Consider two hypothetical scenarios:
1. You take the full-time job. It is demanding, and you give yourself fully to "someone else's mission." However, the stability and financial security it provides allows you to pay for excellent therapy, where you make profound progress in understanding yourself and your family. The "fires" are attended to, but via an external, professional route.
2. You take the part-time job. You dedicate your free time to self-study and exploration to understand your family, but the progress is slow and difficult. The path to becoming a coach proves long and uncertain, and the financial pressure creates its own kind of stress, making it harder to focus on the "profound" work.
My question is this: Is the goal to "attend to the fires," by any means necessary? Or is it essential that you attend to them yourself, through your own exploration and on your own path?
You have pointed to a very specific and powerful source for this desire. You speak of "fires burning in your own home," which you ignored while working on other missions, however noble they may have seemed.
You have also given a clear example of one of these fires: understanding your family's behaviour, which you believe could lead to a path as a coach, helping others and healing a source of your own pain.
This seems to be the heart of it. Let us examine this proposition you have laid out: "The best path for me is one that allows me to address the fires in my own home, as this will be both nourishing for me and a potential source of livelihood."
This sounds like a very wise and coherent belief. Now, let me ask a clarifying question to test its foundation.
Consider two hypothetical scenarios:
1. You take the full-time job. It is demanding, and you give yourself fully to "someone else's mission." However, the stability and financial security it provides allows you to pay for excellent therapy, where you make profound progress in understanding yourself and your family. The "fires" are attended to, but via an external, professional route.
2. You take the part-time job. You dedicate your free time to self-study and exploration to understand your family, but the progress is slow and difficult. The path to becoming a coach proves long and uncertain, and the financial pressure creates its own kind of stress, making it harder to focus on the "profound" work.
My question is this: Is the goal to "attend to the fires," by any means necessary? Or is it essential that you attend to them yourself, through your own exploration and on your own path?
Wow, ok, this is awesome. It spotted the inarticulate premise of "I have to do it myself."
Alex
I'm aiming to do it myself, for a few reasons. One is that I have people in my life who I think have a lot of wisdom to offer here. Another is that I think treating the "putting out the fires myself" as a primary project (rather than something that I think about in my weekly therapy session, but whilst also being tired from work) will be more profound. It feels like the "teach a man to fish" thing -- I have to develop these skills myself, by using them. Also I do think that I could enjoy being a coaching and helping other people with the things I've learned.
Ok, so there are more assumptions and inarticulate premises here.
I should have said that I don't expect to be in "financial hardship"
I think Socrates might spot... "how much time do these people really have to help you?".
I should have said that I don't expect to be in "financial hardship"
I think Socrates might spot... "how much time do these people really have to help you?".
4. So you want to upskill - what if it was heart surgery?
Gemini Socrates
I understand. That makes the distinction much clearer. The goal is not merely the outcome—the "fires being out"—but the process itself. You believe the greater good lies in developing the personal skill of "firefighting," because that skill is what will be truly "profound" and potentially lead to a new vocation.
This is a powerful idea: that the learning is more important than the result. Let us test this principle with an analogy to be certain we understand its foundation.
Imagine you were afflicted with a serious physical ailment, a complex heart condition, for instance. The "fire" is in your own body.
Would the most virtuous and profound path be to dedicate yourself to learning the craft of surgery in order to heal yourself? Or would it be the wiser and more responsible choice to entrust your care to an expert surgeon who has already spent a lifetime mastering that specific skill?
This is a powerful idea: that the learning is more important than the result. Let us test this principle with an analogy to be certain we understand its foundation.
Imagine you were afflicted with a serious physical ailment, a complex heart condition, for instance. The "fire" is in your own body.
Would the most virtuous and profound path be to dedicate yourself to learning the craft of surgery in order to heal yourself? Or would it be the wiser and more responsible choice to entrust your care to an expert surgeon who has already spent a lifetime mastering that specific skill?
Aha, so he's focusing on the premise of "I can do this"/"me upskilling here is wise"
Alex
That's a great analogy, and no, in that case, I would want an expert to help.
I suppose one thing here is that I don't know how much I believe in "experts" in this realm (that is, therapists). I have had some pretty average talk therapists in the past!
No doubt I could find better ones though.
But the more important thing is -- I have a sense that, and it might be quixotic, but -- there's a sense that I may be the only person who can help my family dynamics. So a therapist could help me personally, but I still need to be the one to learn how to improve how the family functions (if that's possible!)
But also - I do have a sense that I'd potentially like to get better at helping people, at upskilling in coaching. So this doesn't feel like it'd fit with the "work full time, and pay for a good therapist" route. Like, I feel like I may want to help people directly
I suppose one thing here is that I don't know how much I believe in "experts" in this realm (that is, therapists). I have had some pretty average talk therapists in the past!
No doubt I could find better ones though.
But the more important thing is -- I have a sense that, and it might be quixotic, but -- there's a sense that I may be the only person who can help my family dynamics. So a therapist could help me personally, but I still need to be the one to learn how to improve how the family functions (if that's possible!)
But also - I do have a sense that I'd potentially like to get better at helping people, at upskilling in coaching. So this doesn't feel like it'd fit with the "work full time, and pay for a good therapist" route. Like, I feel like I may want to help people directly
Again, I'm throwing loads at Socrates here.
I think he's likely to remain with the "wouldn't you want an expert to help" thing.
I think he's likely to remain with the "wouldn't you want an expert to help" thing.
5. What if you trying to be the surgeon lowers the chance of success?
Gemini Socrates
That is a very honest and insightful response. You have conceded the general principle of the analogy but also highlighted several crucial distinctions, which is exactly what this process is for.
Let's set aside your (understandable) skepticism about the quality of therapists for one moment, as that is a practical challenge. I want to focus on the more philosophical point you raised, which feels central to the matter.
You said:
"...there's a sense that I may be the only person who can help my family dynamics... I still need to be the one to learn how to improve how the family functions (if that's possible!)"
This belief, which you rightly identify as possibly "quixotic," seems to be the true engine of your desire for the part-time path. The goal is not just to put out the fires, but for you to become the firefighter. This is also tied to your vocational desire to help people directly as a coach.
Let us examine this. We agreed that in the case of heart surgery, trusting the expert is the wise choice. Why? Presumably, because the expert's lifetime of skill dramatically increases the chance of a successful outcome—the saving of a life. The goal is the health of the patient, not the personal development of a family member who wants to help.
Now, let us apply this sharp-edged reasoning to your own situation. The desired outcome is "to improve how the family functions." Let us call this the "operation."
You believe you must be the one to learn how to perform this operation. But what if this belief, however noble and well-intentioned, actually lowers the chance of a successful operation? What if, by insisting on learning surgery yourself, you ensure the patient—the family system—never truly heals?
Is it possible that the kindest and most effective way to "help" is not to become the family therapist yourself, but to learn the incredibly difficult and profound skill of supporting your family while an expert guides the process?
Could your unique role—the one only you can play—be that of the wise son who supports the surgeon, rather than the son who picks up the scalpel? And could learning that skill of skillful support be the true foundation for becoming an excellent coach?
Let's set aside your (understandable) skepticism about the quality of therapists for one moment, as that is a practical challenge. I want to focus on the more philosophical point you raised, which feels central to the matter.
You said:
"...there's a sense that I may be the only person who can help my family dynamics... I still need to be the one to learn how to improve how the family functions (if that's possible!)"
This belief, which you rightly identify as possibly "quixotic," seems to be the true engine of your desire for the part-time path. The goal is not just to put out the fires, but for you to become the firefighter. This is also tied to your vocational desire to help people directly as a coach.
Let us examine this. We agreed that in the case of heart surgery, trusting the expert is the wise choice. Why? Presumably, because the expert's lifetime of skill dramatically increases the chance of a successful outcome—the saving of a life. The goal is the health of the patient, not the personal development of a family member who wants to help.
Now, let us apply this sharp-edged reasoning to your own situation. The desired outcome is "to improve how the family functions." Let us call this the "operation."
You believe you must be the one to learn how to perform this operation. But what if this belief, however noble and well-intentioned, actually lowers the chance of a successful operation? What if, by insisting on learning surgery yourself, you ensure the patient—the family system—never truly heals?
Is it possible that the kindest and most effective way to "help" is not to become the family therapist yourself, but to learn the incredibly difficult and profound skill of supporting your family while an expert guides the process?
Could your unique role—the one only you can play—be that of the wise son who supports the surgeon, rather than the son who picks up the scalpel? And could learning that skill of skillful support be the true foundation for becoming an excellent coach?
Wow. This is really, really good!
Alex
This feels correct to me. The wisdom of deferring to an expert, perhaps whilst also learning to be a firefighter or expert myself, but acknowledging that it will be a long time before I am an expert, and it's possibly more likely that I'll cause more harm than good if I pick up the scalpel prematurely, especially from a place of being too opinionated re: the outcome, judgemental, frustrated, etc
6. Conclusion - full-time work + hiring experts as a new option
Gemini Socrates
It seems, then, that our inquiry has been fruitful.
We began with a practical question about how you should spend your time, and through examining it, we arrived at a much deeper question about the nature of help itself.
You started with the belief that the best path was for you to become the primary firefighter for the fires in your home. Now, after testing this belief against the analogy of the surgeon, you have arrived at a more cautious and, as you say, wiser view: that there is great wisdom in deferring to an expert, and that attempting to operate prematurely—especially from a place of frustration or judgment—is likely to cause more harm than good.
This is a profound shift in perspective.
So, let us return to where we began, but from this new vantage point. The ground has been cleared of a major, and perhaps "quixotic," assumption.
Looking at the original choice now—between part-time and full-time work—from this new understanding that your role may be one of skillful support rather than primary intervention, does the dilemma appear any different to you?
We began with a practical question about how you should spend your time, and through examining it, we arrived at a much deeper question about the nature of help itself.
You started with the belief that the best path was for you to become the primary firefighter for the fires in your home. Now, after testing this belief against the analogy of the surgeon, you have arrived at a more cautious and, as you say, wiser view: that there is great wisdom in deferring to an expert, and that attempting to operate prematurely—especially from a place of frustration or judgment—is likely to cause more harm than good.
This is a profound shift in perspective.
So, let us return to where we began, but from this new vantage point. The ground has been cleared of a major, and perhaps "quixotic," assumption.
Looking at the original choice now—between part-time and full-time work—from this new understanding that your role may be one of skillful support rather than primary intervention, does the dilemma appear any different to you?
Alex
I would definitely say that I don't feel like I've landed on a definitive answer yet, but the "work full time and get expert support" option now does feel like a possibility, and it's one I hadn't considered before.
I was definitely blended with a familiar feeling of "this has to happen ASAP! I have to treat this as a full-time project and devote myself to it!"
And it also feels true that the "I will work on this solo, in my spare time, without much monetary resource to assist me" could actually be the slow route, vs e.g. "I will get a well-paying job and be able to pay for excellent support (and training, e.g. I'd love to do the Aletheia coaching course...)"
I was definitely blended with a familiar feeling of "this has to happen ASAP! I have to treat this as a full-time project and devote myself to it!"
And it also feels true that the "I will work on this solo, in my spare time, without much monetary resource to assist me" could actually be the slow route, vs e.g. "I will get a well-paying job and be able to pay for excellent support (and training, e.g. I'd love to do the Aletheia coaching course...)"
Gemini Socrates
It seems our dialogue has reached its natural and fruitful conclusion. The goal of the elenchus is not to provide a definitive answer, but to clear away the unexamined beliefs that block the path to wisdom. And from what you've written, it appears you have cleared a significant amount of ground.
The three insights you've landed on are powerful:
1. A New Path Has Opened: The binary choice you started with has dissolved. The "work full time and get expert support" option is no longer an impossibility but a serious contender.
2. You've Gained Perspective on Urgency: You have successfully "unblended" from the familiar feeling that "this has to happen ASAP!" You are now able to see that feeling of urgency as a psychological pattern, rather than an objective truth to be obeyed. This is a profound shift from being driven by a feeling to being able to observe it.
3. You've Discovered the "Slow Route Paradox": You've realised that the path that felt most direct and dedicated—the solo, under-resourced project—could ironically be the slowest and least effective. This is a classic discovery that comes from moving past a romantic notion to a more pragmatic one.
It is fascinating, and perhaps not at all a coincidence, that your journey has led you to name the "Aletheia" coaching course. We began this conversation by discussing the Socratic elenchus as a tool for logical clarity. We then explored Heidegger's Aletheia as a different kind of truth—an "un-concealment" that comes from a deeper engagement with being.
It seems you are now holding both of these ideas in your hands. You have used the logical, structured method to break down a false certainty, and in doing so, have created the space to consider a path—a specific, named path—that is literally about that deeper, more phenomenological way of being.
The question is no longer a simple "either/or." It has become a far more sophisticated inquiry into the wisest and most effective means to achieve your desired ends. The ground on which you walk is not yet a finished road, but it is certainly much clearer.
The three insights you've landed on are powerful:
1. A New Path Has Opened: The binary choice you started with has dissolved. The "work full time and get expert support" option is no longer an impossibility but a serious contender.
2. You've Gained Perspective on Urgency: You have successfully "unblended" from the familiar feeling that "this has to happen ASAP!" You are now able to see that feeling of urgency as a psychological pattern, rather than an objective truth to be obeyed. This is a profound shift from being driven by a feeling to being able to observe it.
3. You've Discovered the "Slow Route Paradox": You've realised that the path that felt most direct and dedicated—the solo, under-resourced project—could ironically be the slowest and least effective. This is a classic discovery that comes from moving past a romantic notion to a more pragmatic one.
It is fascinating, and perhaps not at all a coincidence, that your journey has led you to name the "Aletheia" coaching course. We began this conversation by discussing the Socratic elenchus as a tool for logical clarity. We then explored Heidegger's Aletheia as a different kind of truth—an "un-concealment" that comes from a deeper engagement with being.
It seems you are now holding both of these ideas in your hands. You have used the logical, structured method to break down a false certainty, and in doing so, have created the space to consider a path—a specific, named path—that is literally about that deeper, more phenomenological way of being.
The question is no longer a simple "either/or." It has become a far more sophisticated inquiry into the wisest and most effective means to achieve your desired ends. The ground on which you walk is not yet a finished road, but it is certainly much clearer.
(1) Appeal to universal (2) How shall we define x? (3) Who is the expert of x? (4) Find agreement
Option 1: "I see. So you are interested in maximising your freedom?" (1)
Option 2: "So you are looking to do the most good?" (1, appeal to universal)