“Proper education arouses intellectual curiosity”

Nathan Ballantyne (ASU) continues his wonderful series of thoughtful, in-depth interviews of philosophers, The Workbench, with a conversation with Paul Gooch (Toronto).
.
The conversation is wide-ranging, with many amusing anecdotes (including one about the role Richard Taylor’s dog played at a dissertation defense), interesting reflections on various aspects of being a philosophy professor, a discussion of what “Canadian Philosophy” is, and thoughts about the limits of philosophy.
Here’s one part of the interview that focused on teaching:
Gooch: As Plato pointed out in the Phaedrus, written texts can’t answer your questions, so the conversation is one-way. (Of course, he made the claim about the inadequacy of the written word in writing.) You talk to yourself when you read. That’s not teaching. I was fortunate to learn very early on that teaching isn’t just about getting my own thoughts in order; it’s an interaction that has to take into account the place the student inhabits. Unsurprisingly, another fifty years on I argued that education is best understood as a kind of conversation involving interlocutors—not a surprising view given my interest in Socrates (who wrote nothing himself).
Ballantyne: How is that different from the so-called Socratic method?
Gooch: It’s certainly different. I don’t mean interrogation to deflate intellectual pretense. Socrates’ victims don’t participate in the dialogue beyond the occasional answer. In fact, I once wrote a poem titled “As I said to Socrates the other day,” which was only a series of Yes, No, Maybe, with ‘Sorry, I’ve got to go now’ as the ending. Proper education arouses intellectual curiosity that asks to know, and the teacher must be open to interrogation as well as the student. I want the conversation to be interrogative in both directions, between teacher and student.
Ballantyne: What have you done to keep your students talking?
Gooch: Early in my career I tried to get my students to do more than tell me what I told them. I often told them not to trust the teacher, but rather the argument. And sometimes I tested them—by going to my Philosophy of Religion class and beginning the lecture by summarizing what I had said the previous week—except that I took my Ancient Philosophy notes and talked from them. I wanted to see if anyone would interrupt…
The full interview is here.
And here’s the poem Gooch mentioned in the foregoing excerpt:
“AS I SAID TO SOCRATES THE OTHER DAY…”
Yes, that’s what I think it is.
Clearly.
Well, if you want to know about that, yes, that’s true.
No.
I should say not.
Of course.
Perhaps.
Perhaps, again.
If you make me choose, yes.
Sometimes, I think.
Alright, on all occasions.
No, I hadn’t seen…
Well, now that you point it out, I guess not.
No, not at all.
I guess I didn’t.
It would be pretty difficult to think that now.
No.
I’m not sure I could.
Well, thank you very much, but…
Really, I’d better not keep him waiting.
Goodbye.
— Paul Gooch

Facts Only

* Nathan Ballantyne interviews Paul Gooch.
* The conversation covers aspects of philosophy, teaching, and the limits of philosophy.
* Gooch stated that written texts cannot answer questions.
* Teaching is understood as an interaction accounting for the student's place.
* Education is best understood as a conversation involving interlocutors.
* Gooch contrasted this with the Socratic method, noting Socrates' victims did not participate beyond occasional answers.
* Gooch asserted that proper education arouses intellectual curiosity that asks to know.
* Gooch encouraged students to engage by trusting arguments rather than the teacher.
* Gooch shared a poem regarding the process of inquiry between teacher and student.

Executive Summary

The exchange features a conversation between Nathan Ballantyne and Paul Gooch concerning the nature of education and teaching, framed by philosophical reflection. Gooch posits that written texts cannot fully answer questions, suggesting that true teaching is an interactive conversation rather than a one-way transmission of knowledge. He argues that education involves dialogue between interlocutors, drawing a parallel to Socrates, suggesting that proper education fosters intellectual curiosity demanding inquiry in both directions from teacher and student. Ballantyne seeks clarification on this view in relation to the Socratic method. Gooch distinguishes his view by contrasting it with the Socratic method, emphasizing that true education involves interrogative exchange, unlike methods where participants are passive recipients of answers. Furthermore, Gooch describes practices employed to encourage student engagement, such as testing students by having them engage with arguments rather than just accepting information, aiming for a dynamic interaction in the classroom.

Full Take

The core tension in the dialogue resides in the shift from epistemology (how knowledge is transmitted) to pedagogy (how knowledge is learned). Gooch establishes a powerful position that contrasts received wisdom—the passive reception of written text—with an active, dialectical process of intellectual engagement. The concept that education must be inherently interrogative, functioning as a reciprocal conversation between teacher and student, moves the discussion beyond mere content delivery into the realm of epistemological interaction. This pattern suggests a resistance to static educational models where knowledge is merely transferred; instead, it privileges dynamic intellectual development. The anecdote about testing students by having them engage with arguments exemplifies an attempt to realize this interactive ideal in practice. The poem itself functions as a microcosm of the very philosophical process being advocated: a spiraling series of qualified responses that acknowledges uncertainty and continuous negotiation. This framing implies that the limitations of philosophy are not just textual boundaries but also structural boundaries within instructional methods themselves, asking whether current teaching practices truly facilitate the kind of curiosity they claim to foster. What structures currently enforce unidirectional knowledge flow in academic settings? How can institutional demands be reconciled with an educational model predicated on mutual interrogation?

Sentinel — Human

Confidence

This text appears to be a verbatim excerpt from an interview, exhibiting the natural conversational rhythm and specific contextual details typical of human journalistic reporting.

Signals Detected

Varied sentence structure and natural flow reflective of an interview transcript.

Consistent, focused thematic development centered on the philosophy of education and dialogue; flows logically from anecdote to central argument.

Direct attribution of specific quotes and context, suggesting direct reporting rather than aggregation.

The inclusion of a specific, self-referential piece of material (the poem excerpt) directly tied to the source's narrative, increasing verifiability.

Human Indicators

Presence of natural conversational digressions and anecdotal framing.

Idiosyncratic tone evident in the reflection on teaching methods.

The specific inclusion and context given to the poem strongly suggests direct source material handling.