Socrates filter and social media posts.

I've been thinking about the quality of discourse on social media lately, and it reminded me of an ancient wisdom that feels more relevant than ever: the Socrates filter.

The Socrates filter is a method of questioning assumptions and challenging beliefs before sharing them with others. It involves three simple but powerful questions that Socrates would ask before speaking:

1. Is it true?
2. Is it good?
3. Is it useful?

The story goes that someone once approached Socrates, eager to share some gossip about a mutual friend. Before the person could speak, Socrates stopped them and asked them to evaluate their statement against these three criteria. When pressed, the person admitted they weren't sure if the information was true, they weren't certain it was good, and they couldn't argue that it would be useful. Socrates' response was simple: if the information fails all three tests, why share it at all?

I recently witnessed this principle in action when I saw a friend's social media post about "ethnically 'camouflaged' plasters." The post seemed well-intentioned but got me thinking about how we might apply the Socrates filter to modern digital communication.

Let's consider that post through the three-part filter:

• Is it true? The post raised questions about representation in medical supplies, which is a documented issue in healthcare.
• Is it good? The intent seemed positive - raising awareness about inclusivity - but the execution and potential interpretations were more ambiguous.
• Is it useful? This is where things got interesting. Did the post actually contribute to constructive dialogue or positive change, or did it just add to the noise?

What strikes me about social media is how rarely we pause to apply this kind of thoughtful evaluation before hitting "post" or "share." We're often driven by immediate reactions - outrage, amusement, the desire to signal our values - rather than careful consideration of whether our contribution adds value to the conversation.

If you have nothing true, good, or useful to say, why bother saying it at all? This ancient wisdom feels particularly urgent in our age of information overload and viral misinformation.

But here's where it gets really interesting: I've been exploring whether we could apply this filter automatically. What if we could use artificial intelligence to help people evaluate their social media posts before sharing them?

I would like to explore using GPT-3/4 to automatically filter posts based upon a hybrid Socrates filter. Imagine a tool that could analyze your draft post and ask:

• Can you verify this information?
• Does this contribute positively to discourse?
• Will this be helpful to your audience?

This isn't about censorship - it's about encouraging more thoughtful communication. The tool wouldn't prevent anyone from posting; it would simply prompt reflection before publication.

The technical challenges are fascinating. How do you train an AI to evaluate "goodness" or "usefulness" in context? How do you account for cultural differences, humor, irony, and the complex nuances of human communication? These questions sit at the intersection of philosophy, technology, and social psychology.

If you're interested in collaborating on this kind of project - whether from a technical, philosophical, or social perspective - I'd love to hear from you. The intersection of ancient wisdom and modern technology often yields the most interesting innovations.

In the meantime, maybe we can all try applying the Socrates filter manually. Before your next post, tweet, or comment, pause and ask: Is it true? Is it good? Is it useful? You might be surprised by how much this simple framework clarifies your thinking.

All Posts