Aphorisms on Discussion

Many actions can be performed using literature; it can be read, written about, ignored, thought upon, etc. Literature can also be discussed, a word that comes to us from the Latin dis, “two-ways, in twain,” + quatere, “to shake, strike with a shock,” which is to say that a literary text can be stirred up or shaken in twain when discussed by a group of persons.

Because humans find security in certainty, and discussion is the displacement of certain knowledge, no one wants to discuss literature. In general, those who think they want to discuss literature, or are perceived by others as wanting to discuss literature, really only want to talk about it. This word, talk, comes from the Old English word tellan, “narrate, relate, make known, declare,” which is to say that the talker wants to convince others to adopt his or her account of a text. Alternately, one who discusses literature aims to have his or her account of the text challenged and displaced.

In a classroom setting, there are three kinds of discussion: standard lectures, guided conversations, and open forums. A lecture aims to teach, a conversation aims to instruct, and the open forum aims to investigate. 

As such, a lecture is monological (Gk. mono, “alone, single” + logoz, “word, oration, reasoning”), a conversation is dialogical (Gk. dia, “through, across” + logoz,), and a forum is polylogical (Gk. polu, “much” + logoz).

The most important aspect of discussion is the question. Each kind of discussion has an appropriate kind of question associated with it. The lecture has the reply, the guided conversation has the Socratic question, and the open forum has the solicitation.

Since a standard lecture is monological, the appropriate kind of question is a reply, from the Latin re, “again,” + plicare, “to fold.” Once a lecture has been completed, a reply aims to advance, clarify, qualify, challenge, counter, refute, or respond to the content of the lecture. These replies can take any number of shapes, but here are two tried-and-true methods. First, you can put some pressure on the internal consistency of the argument of the lecture. Second, you can put some pressure on that argument of the lecture by bringing up information that was not mentioned during the lecture that might change the claims made in the lecture.

Since the guided conversation is dialogical, the appropriate kind of question is the Socratic question. In his dialogues, Socrates asks questions to which he already knows the answer, not so that he can come to know new information, but so that he can replicate his train of thought in the minds of his interlocutors. A Socratic question aims to bring an audience to one’s position by presenting a problem to an audience and approving of the replies that best support one’s case.

Since the open forum is polylogical, the appropriate kind of question is the solicitation (L. sollus, “whole, entire” + citus “aroused,” from ciere, “shake, excite, set in motion”). A solicitation aims to excite alternate attitudes with respect to a given problem without necessarily resolving the problem.

A standard lecture aims to teach (O.E. tæcan, “to show, point out”) an audience things that will make them smart, but the aim of the guided conversation is to instruct (L. instruere, “to build within”) an audience on how to be intelligent. A lecture aims to show students a static set of privileged knowledge (terms, names, dates, etc.); a guided conversation aims to build within them the capacity to gain knowledge themselves.

The guided conversation is about the argument to which the discussion leads, but the open forum is about the question the discussion aims to answer. The Socratic method uses general questions to arrive at a specific reading of a text. The open forum uses specific readings of a text to ask general questions.

Since Socrates asks questions to which he already knows the answer, the Socratic method is an argument in the disguise of an interrogation. Alternately, since participants in an open forum suggest answers that they do not believe with conviction, the forum is an interrogation in the disguise of arguments.

Discussions can be good or bad, successes or failures. The success of a discussion depends upon the preparation of the discussants, not on their performance. There is no point in discussing literature before the discussants have attempted and provisionally arrived at an interpretation.

Good discussion is better than just any discussion, but any discussion is better than no discussion at all.

You should compartmentalize the actions that must occur in order for you to participate in a discussion – reading, thinking, formulating, writing, and speaking – and perform as many ahead of time as possible (i.e. all except talking). If you try to perform all these actions at once, you will not succeed. Do your reading, thinking, formulating, and writing ahead of time. Write out your questions in advance. If you have prepared a good question, a good discussion will inevitably present to you the opportunity to ask it.

Discussion is a dramatic performance, just like a play at the theatre. Not only are the discussants actors, but they will emerge as characters as well. Some discussions have a protagonist and an antagonist, some have main characters and supporting roles, some have a hero and a villain, some have aggressors and defenders, and some have characters who offer comic relief. Some discussions contain elements of tragedy (hubris, error, misfortune, reversals, and recognitions), and some elements of comedy (confusion, idiocy, correction, and a happy ending). Approach a discussion as you would a play, so learn your lines and get in character.

Asking a question is an art. Here is a quick and dirty guide to asking a good question: a claim should precede every question, and a reference should precede every claim. First, begin a question with a reference to a text. This reference establishes a standard point of contact for the discussants, a grounding and touchstone for the variety that will emerge based on the alternate perspectives of the discussants. Follow the reference with a claim. The claim is always stipulative, and it can be hyperbolically controversial to foster conversation. The claim gives a discussion direction, so that a dialectic can be established.

A discussion question, as it is outlined above, can also serve as an effective introduction to a paper: (1) make a reference, (2) make a claim, and (3) ask a question. That is, (1) through quotation, paraphrase, or summary, provide some evidence from the text you’re looking at; (2) analyze that evidence; and (3) open up a field of inquiry by discussing the problems and questions that emerge from your analysis of that evidence. From here, you can proceed to specify exactly what you’re going to be looking at in the paper that follows (i.e., to define your text) and then offer your interpretation (i.e., your thesis statement).

In society, with capability comes responsibility. That is, the strength of a community rests upon the notion that those who can must. Likewise, participation in a discussion is not an option for a good student but a requirement. If you have a contribution to make to the conversation, you should feel morally compelled to make it. Shyness, trepidation, and insecurity are real challenges, but they cannot become excuses for a good student not to contribute to a discussion. These obstacles can be overcome with confidence, which is established via preparation.