Socrates, Critical Thinking, and AI
Living with questions in a time of fake news
New Developments
This topic touches every organisation, every leader, and every individual navigating the modern world. It provides a conceptual foundation that underpins effective functioning across all areas of
strategy, culture, and change.
The world is in what has, for many years, been referred to as the information age and now as information overload. Consider the current availability of information in terms of the Library of Alexandria in Egypt. This building held around 40,000 papyrus scrolls[i] when it finally burnt down in 48 BCE, and researchers travelled great distances to visit it. Information is no longer kept behind doors but is available in the palm of every person’s hand. At the push of a few buttons, the enquirer ends up with a myriad of responses and viewpoints to make sense of.
The sheer volume of available information does not, by itself, produce knowledge or wisdom. Volume without the ability to evaluate, filter, and contextualise what one reads or hears can be more paralysing than enlightening. This is the central challenge of the information age.
Throughout history, people have been both excited and terrified by new inventions. Whether it’s the printing press, the telephone, the computer, or generative AI, each new technology has faced its own set of challenges and uncertainties. Currently, we are confronted by AI (Artificial Intelligence) with all the criticism levelled at it. Hardly a day goes by without someone providing a list of jobs that will become obsolete and replaced by AI.
Important to remember: AI is a blanket term, not a single technology like a computer. Within AI, a significant category is Large Language Models (LLMs), which have been developed to understand, process, and generate human language. There are numerous videos on social media where people complain about AI destroying education and even being the cause of the world’s dumbing down.
On a different level are fake photos and videos generated using AI models. Interacting with this material, from innocent memes to unacceptable and immoral uses of AI, requires critical evaluation of information. The problem becomes how to navigate this environment without either paralysis or naivety? The answer is not new. Long before AI, philosophers, educators, and scientists developed tools for thinking clearly in the face of complexity and uncertainty. The most enduring of these tools is critical thinking.
Living with questions
Trainers are taught the art of questioning. There are various types of questions, ranging from open- and closed-ended to probing, leading, or rhetorical. In a classroom, the primary reason for questioning is to facilitate learning, check for understanding, or assist with problem-solving. One approach to questions is that of Mediated Learning Experience, developed by Prof. Reuven Feuerstein[ii]. The objectives of this approach are:
- encouraging habits for continuous exploration to identify flexible strategies when facing new and complex problems, and
- to continue the process of self-expansion of a person’s intellectual potential.
The process of mediated learning comprises questioning with a specific focus on probing questions that prompt the respondent to reflect and explain their thoughts. The focus is on the process rather than the final learning. The process assists the individual in learning how to question themselves and, through that, learn. This process of questioning becomes practical not just in the classroom but also when the individual faces new and unfamiliar situations. A similar view is that of the poet Rilke. He is quoted as writing “Do not now seek the answers, which cannot be given you because you would not be able to live them. And the point is, to live everything. Live the questions now.” This has been popularised as “living with questions.”
Rilke wrote those words in 1903[iii]. Yet the practice of living with questions – of suspending the need for immediate answers in favour of deeper exploration – has roots that reach back more than two thousand years to the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates. The Socratic method forms the philosophical bedrock for modern approaches to questioning and critical thinking.
The Socratic method[iv] can be outlined as:
- The best way to teach is through reasoning, primarily questioning, and answering
- There are two ways of reasoning, namely the destructive and the constructive processes
- The teacher should assist students in uncovering self-deception in their thinking, and
- The primary goal is to help students formulate principles – that develop from deep conceptual understanding – by which to live
At the heart of the Socratic method is the recognition that unexamined assumptions are dangerous – in life, in business, and in strategy. Socrates described himself not as a teacher of knowledge, but as a midwife of ideas: his role was to help others give birth to the understanding they already carried within them. This is, in essence, what critical thinking asks of each of us.
Critical Thinking
“Socrates’ practice was followed by the critical thinking of Aristotle and the Greek sceptics all of whom emphasised that things are often very different from what they appear to be and that only the trained mind is prepared to see through the way things look to us on the surface to the way they really are beneath the surface.
Paul, Elder and Bartell[v][vi][vii] make an important point here. The ability to see beneath surface appearances – to ask not only what is being said, but why, by whom, and in whose interest – is not an innate gift. It is a discipline that must be deliberately cultivated. This is particularly relevant in an era in which algorithms selectively present information, confirmation bias is reinforced by social media, and the speed of communication leaves little room for reflection.
This discipline, closely linked to questions and the Socratic method, is critical thinking. Critical thinking goes beyond the acceptance or rejection of facts or information and emphasises the need to identify personal – and presented – biases underlying information, challenge the assumptions therein, and make logical, evidence-based decisions. In essence, living with questions as described above.
Although critical thinking is not linked to negativity, it is easy to become negative when faced with the proliferation of unverifiable information, which seems to be growing exponentially. Critical thinking allows on to interrogate the information presented. It is a process of self-development and developing a deeper understanding. It is also a process that helps identify what is called fake news. Essential questions must always be if something is, or is not, fake and, whatever the response – if it is, or is not, fake – what are the objectives of the person distributing or disputing it. The presence of fake news neccesitates extensive and intense data analysis.
Critical thinking gives new relevance to the familiar concept of the five wise questions – asking why, what, when, where, and how in terms of everything seen or experienced. In addition to these five questions comes the requirement to be open and actively seek alternative viewpoints, reflect on all viewpoints, and learn. Being critical of someone’s viewpoints and accepting only opinions that support one’s own views destroys critical thinking and moves into the realm of groupthink.
In an organisational context, critical thinking is not merely an individual skill but a collective practice. A team that asks “Why are we doing this?” before “How do we do this?” will consistently make better strategic decisions. Equally, an organisation that creates a culture where questioning is welcomed – rather than seen as a sign of disloyalty or incompetence – builds resilience against poor decisions, missed opportunities, and ethical failures.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect
The Dunning-Kruger effect is a theory about cognitive bias. In summary, it holds that people with limited knowledge or competence in a specific area greatly overestimate their own skills. Because they lack expertise, they also lack the self-awareness to recognise their own mistakes or ignorance. There have been numerous studies on the use of prompts and responses obtained through AI. In one study of medical diagnosis[viii], physicians significantly outperformed lay individuals, with 91% to 74% accuracy. Another 2026 study in Nature Medicine found that lay people using AI only received a correct medical diagnosis around one third of the time.[ix]
These studies illustrate an important organisational risk. When people use tools – whether AI or any other technology – without understanding their limitations, overconfidence in the output can lead to poor decisions with serious consequences. The Dunning-Kruger effect compounds this: those least qualified to evaluate a response are often the most confident in its accuracy. The antidote is not the rejection of AI or other tools, but the development of sufficient foundational knowledge to critically evaluate what they produce.
The key with AI, and in life, lies in having the knowledge to ask the right questions or craft the right prompts to obtain the best possible responses. This is again where critical thinking becomes key, including critically questioning one’s own competence and knowledge.
Group think and peer pressure
Janis[x], in his 1971 article, referred to groupthink as “a mode of thinking that persons engage in when concurrence-seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive in group that it tends to override realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action.”
This often occurs when members do not want to, or are not allowed to contradict the group leader or colleagues. It is also strengthened when there are threats of expulsion or repercussion for not supporting the group. The net result is a lack of critical thinking, missed opportunities, and failure to see threats in a situation. Groupthink is a core problem in strategic management, particularly in a very strong culture of conformance.
Closely related to groupthink is peer pressure. While groupthink operates at an organisational level through structural conformity, peer pressure operates at the interpersonal level through social consequence. People modify their expressed views, and sometimes even their actual beliefs, to align with those of their social or professional group. The fear of being seen as difficult, uninformed, or disloyal can silence precisely those voices most needed in a healthy decision-making process.
In the context of AI, both groupthink and peer pressure manifest in a specific way. When an organisation collectively decides to adopt a new tool or platform because “everyone is doing it,” or when an individual accepts an AI-generated answer because questioning it feels cumbersome or socially awkward, both groupthink and peer pressure are at work. Critical thinking is the counterweight to both.
Conclusion
Critical thinking is a fundamental requirement in any organisation, and care should be taken to foster and develop it. It is through critical thinking that organisations will be able to anticipate and pre-empt problems as well as identify potential market opportunities.
Critical thinking is also key during strategic planning, where ideas and knowledge must be presented and shared openly with a view to common understanding.
In a world where AI generates an ever-growing volume of information, the ability to ask the right questions – and to question the answers – becomes not merely a personal virtue but an organisational imperative. The tools discussed in this reflection are not new. What is new is the urgency with which they must be applied.
Endnotes
[i] Brian Haughton. “What Happened to the Great Library at Alexandria?” World History Encyclopedia, February 1, 2011. https://www.worldhistory.org/article/207/what-happened-to-the-great-library-at-alexandria/.
[ii] Chiara Vedovelli. “Neuro-Teaching in Primary School: The Principles of Feuerstein’s Mediated Learning Integrated into School Curriculum.” The European Conference on Education 2014 Official Conference Proceedings (2014).
[iii] Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet, trans. M. D. Herter Norton (New York: W. W. Norton, 1934). Originally written 1903.
[iv] Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Art of Socratic Questioning: Based on Critical Thinking Concepts & Tools (Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking, n.d.).
[vi] Richard Paul, Linda Elder, and Ted Bartell. “A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking.” Foundation for Critical Thinking, n.d. http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/a-brief-history-of-the-idea-of-critical-thinking/408.
[vii] Richard W. Paul, Linda Elder, and Ted Bartell. California Teacher Preparation for Instruction in Critical Thinking: Research Findings and Policy Recommendations (Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking, 1997).
[viii] “The Diagnostic and Triage Accuracy of the GPT-3 Artificial Intelligence Model: An Observational Study.” Lancet Digital Health 6, no. 8 (2024): e555–e561. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(24)00097-9.
[ix] Katia Riddle. “ChatGPT Might Give You Bad Medical Advice, Studies Warn.” NPR, March 11, 2026. https://www.npr.org/2026/03/11/nx-s1-5744035/chatgpt-might-give-you-bad-medical-advice-studies-warn.
[x] Irving L. Janis. “Groupthink.” Psychology Today 5, no. 6 (1971): 43–46, 74–76.
Leave a Reply