Socratic dialogues in Autumn
October 18 @ 16:00 - October 20 @ 13:00 CEST
The following Socratic Dialogues will take place in Autumn in Münster:
Ingrid Bißwurm: Is Art beautiful? (dialogue in German)
The issue will be dealt with using as an example a work of art of painting from the mid-twentieth century. Beauty has been a central concept in the contemplation and interpretation of paintings, also in the examination of works of modern art. The chosen example will be used to examine precise appreciations of the content of the work from concrete affirmations and appreciations, we will gradually move towards general principles on the broader concept of beauty.
We will work following a procedure of deep observation, through an appropriate approach to a painting as an object that at the same time shows itself and it is seen. The form of work proposed is to see and think for oneself. In the context of a Socratic aesthetic dialogue it is not necessary to have specific prior knowledge about different types of interpretations of works of art.
We want to see in order to discover and recognize, and not just to see what we already know.
Katrin Nortdorf: Mathematical topic (dialogue in German)
In the mathematical dialogue, the participants work on a concrete mathematical topic presented by the facilitator under a question of their own choice and they seek together an answer to this question in dialogue.
The mathematical topic is chosen so that all participants have access to it and can participate with pleasure in the common reflection and the mutual understanding of each other. The mathematical language is suitable for everyone, even for those who consider their mathematical knowledge low. Because the starting position of the dialogue should be as equal as possible for all participants, the mathematical problems are only announced at the beginning of the dialogue.
Hannah Altdorf: When do I value someone’s opinion? (SD in English)
A quick look at any news website confirms that there is no shortage of opinions. People are keen to tell other readers what they think of a political issue or they’ll comment on a film even before they have seen it. If the issue is controversial, a news item can receive thousands of opinions in only a few hours. Opinions are rife and yet rarely held in high regard. ‘A matter of opinion’ is open to debate, but almost never debated. Are then the only opinions we value those of the experts, when we ask for ‘a second opinion’? Is this preference justified? What is your opinion and why does that matter?
Hans-Peter Griewatz: “Pretty Best Friends” – How important is friendship to our lives? (dialogue in German)
A life without friendships is not a life worth living. Looks like we agree on that. In the meantime, the title of this Socratic dialogue has become a commonplace. This is a 2012 French film that became famous and was very successful. In this film – and this is the special charm of the film – two men from completely different social worlds meet and become friends. But what’s so special about friendship? And what is its particular value in comparison with other forms of social coexistence? I would like to research these and other questions with you in the Socratic dialogue.
Peter Brune: What belongs to my political identity? (dialogue in German)
As a politically interested person, I have noticed a change in myself for some time now. In the past, I have associated politics with “interests” and “disputes”, “facts” and “convictions”, “formation of opinions” and “search for compromises”; meanwhile, more and more negative associations are emerging: “crisis”, “populism”, “establishment”, “citizens of anger”, “EU dictatorship”, “social tourism”, “the press of lies”.
In public debates on important and complex issues, more and more political ground is being gained which, with “post-factual” speeches, is addressed to those who spread hate speeches in the so-called social media. This development is certainly dangerous for a democratic society and should call into question the self-image of its members, provided that this self-image is based on the principles of the rule of law and democracy. But these principles are quite abstract.
In the Socratic dialogue we want to know how the political identity of the individual is expressed in concrete terms: what can we say about our political identity from our own experience?
What beliefs and attitudes make up this identity? What opposes it?