Socrates put great emphasis on dialectic and argument. In 80 percent of the dialogues in which he was involved (as written down by Plato), there is no constructive outcome at all. Socrates saw his role as simply pointing out what was ‘wrong’.

– Six Thinking Hats

If a crew took to vilifying their steersman, or the patients their doctor, is there any other they would listen to instead; and how would such another be able to ensure the safety of the sailors, or the health of the sick?

– Meditations, Book 6

In class, the teacher asks for our views. I wonder if I should go first. If I go first, I get to say what is most obvious and in which case, I won’t have to be seen thinking too hard with everyone waiting to hear what I have to say. Maybe I could offer the most important point and in which case, I would have scored.

If I go second, I miss those chances. Since the teacher is likely to give all of us a chance to speak, the one who goes first would likely not have been given the time to say everything there is to say on the question. I might still be able to contribute some point in short order, maybe even one relating a significant aspect of what is being discussed. If I go third, fourth or fifth, what else could I add which hasn’t already been said and still sound intelligent?

Maybe I worry too much. After all, when has the teacher ever put anyone down for saying anything during a discussion? My friends though, are a different matter. What if I say something and the others retort? What if they scoff?

Maybe I shall protect myself by not saying what I really am thinking or not thinking. In fact, I will not even begin with “I think…”. Maybe I will refer instead to what no one else is likely to disagree with, some expert or the other, maybe.

However, the teacher does say from time to time that we should develop our own views. If I were to say, “I think…” should I be agreeable? If I simply agreed with what someone before me had said, would that count as my own view? Would I have contributed anything meaningful to the discussion? Would I have fulfilled my purpose as a member of the group?

Every time someone disagrees, the teacher’s face lights up. The conversation is extended and the time is filled with voices. Words like ‘perspective’ and ‘true’ and ‘excellent’ are bestowed on the ones who disagree. Someone was called ‘brilliant’ and ‘brave’. There was even once the teacher said something and someone actually disagreed. He had the look people have, when they have made some great discovery, on his face. All of us were quite curious as to how the teacher would react. Interestingly, the teacher broke into a wide grin and this time a word which I had never heard before was used. “Touché”. It must have meant something quite grand because the lad started walking like how I imagine a knight might walk.

After that, it became quite fashionable to disagree with the teacher routinely. Everyone wanted ‘touché’. That appeared to be the fastest way to be knighted. Once you are knighted, the others are more likely to agree with what you say and of course, you get to walk like a knight. Discussion time became disagreement time.

Still I wonder. If the only way to be praised is to disagree, wouldn’t the meaning of ‘disagreeable’ be turned on its head? I always thought it was not good to be disagreeable. By disagreeing, I would be showing how someone else had not considered some important point. Wouldn’t that person be smarting? If I disagreed by default, wouldn’t I be disagreeable?

Also, this does not seem very practical. The number of views on a question is unlikely to be as many as the number of us engaged on it. So, a good number of us are unlikely to stand out and some of us do not wish to stand out in this way. This cannot be why the teacher asked us to discuss.

What then is the purpose of discussion? What is a viewpoint if it isn’t a counterpoint? Are there words other than, ‘but’, ‘although’, ‘however’ and ‘no’ which are valuable in a conversation?

A classmate went first and the discussion is underway. “I think we should…” A few of us look at her and some of us shift nervously in our seats. The teacher looks at her encouragingly.

In my class, there are posters displayed above the whiteboard. One reads, ‘Constructive Conversations’. Another reads ‘Critical Thinking’. The one closest to me says, ‘Creative Thinking – Think out of the Box’. I squint but I can’t seem to make out the fine print on the others.

My mind wanders. I ponder the word ‘creative’. It comes from the word, ‘create’. Isn’t ‘create’ another word for ‘construct’? Does ‘creative thinking’ lead to ‘constructive conversations?’ How do I fit in the word, ‘critical’? I remember hearing that critical thinking does not mean criticising all the time. Even a critic says nice things from time to time. Whoever invented the term critical thinking must not have thought about how the word is related to criticism and critical.

My eyes return to the poster nearest to me. Discussions are meant to free us to express ourselves but the way we do it, seems to place us all in a box at the corners and we need to think of a way to get out of this box.

Someone else has begun talking. “Adding on to what she said…” The girl who has just finished speaking looks happy.

I look at the clock and it’s ten minutes to the end of school. I look out the window. Traffic whizzes by on the road below. I look away and at the overhead bridge leading to the estate opposite. An elderly man bounds up the steps on the other side. He is probably crossing over to pick up his grandson or granddaughter. As he reaches somewhere close to the middle of the bridge, he passes by another man crossing in the opposite direction. He is dressed like he went to work and is probably going for lunch.

I may have imagined it but I thought I saw the two exchange a smile.

The Brain Dojo