The generalization of pg’s argument is the classic “EDGE” method (“Explain, Demonstrate, Guide, and Evaluate”). You don’t understand something until you can “fully” explain it to others.
And note that our understanding of Socrates is a product of Plato. Thoughts that might have been half-baked in Socrates’ telling could be thought through and expanded by Plato through the process described in this essay. Or have been formulated de novo by Plato and then ascribed to Socrates.
- Think of a point I'd want to make, perhaps in 20-60 seconds.
- Do a few video takes until I believe it's good enough. Sometimes the first take works.
- Keep doing it until I have enough material, then edit the video.
As someone who is in his 50s though, I can understand the point of view of someone who grew up in an age in which writing was the obvious way. Paul might think differently if he tried to start a Youtube channel, but it doesn't seem to be interesting to him.
For example, when editing video, there is a lot of friction due to the software you are using. Writing can have a lot less friction. You can literally just take a pen and paper avoiding a computer altogether.
That being said, one point Paul makes, is that finding a conversation partner that is willing to patiently listen to you as you explain ideas may be challenging. Filming a video and putting it out there can make it less challenging. And you can get some constructive feedback from many individuals. Although, I am not sure to what extent Youtube is the right medium for this exercise.
In the end, whatever was written down is what their long term effect on the world was.
This would imply that Socrates only had trivial ideas. Socrates would disagree with this statement, and so would a large number of people. This belief seems like a cognitive bias to me. If you prefer written ideas, unwritten ideas may seem trivial to you.