Socrates and Aristotle: The Role of Ancient Philosophers in the Self‐Understanding of Desisting Prisoners
| Published date | 01 December 2017 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/hojo.12211 |
| Date | 01 December 2017 |
| Author | KIRSTINE SZIFRIS |
The Howard Journal Vol56 No 4. December 2017 DOI: 10.1111/hojo.12211
ISSN 2059-1098, pp. 419–436
Socrates and Aristotle: The Role of
Ancient Philosophers in the
Self-Understanding of Desisting
Prisoners
KIRSTINE SZIFRIS
Research Associate, Manchester Metropolitan University; PhD candidate,
University of Cambridge
Abstract: This article argues that providing a forum for philosophical conversation
within prison education is relevant to the self-understanding and desistance of prison-
ers. Semi-structured interviews with 20 participants of an in-prison philosophy class in
Scotland investigated the personal relevance of engaging in philosophical dialogue. Find-
ings demonstrated that philosophical dialogue develops participants’ self-understanding,
providing vocabulary for alternative self-definition. The philosophy class achieved this
by encouraging self-reflection, developing communication skills, and providing a fo-
rum for positive prosocial interaction with peers. These skills are essential in reframing
self-understanding which is, in turn, essential to desistance.
Keywords: desistance; education; philosophy; prison
It’s not something I’ve ever done before, philosophy, but I think for me helping to
understand what I’ve done, what I’m here for, and maybe help improve my life in
the future. (philosophy participant, Low Moss Prison)
The word ‘philosophy’ comes from the Greek words ‘philo’, to love and
‘sophia’, wisdom (Butler-Bowdon 2013). It has been described as an ‘activ-
ity’ (Thompson 2003), a method of finding ‘truth’ (Butler-Bowdon 2013),
an ‘inquiry’ (Grayling 1995), and as ‘thinking about thinking’ (Honderich
1995). Philosophers encourage us to consider what it means to be a person.
What is our identity? On what principles do I base my actions? How should
we, as people and members of a society, behave? What does it mean to live
the ‘good life’?
In this article, I focus on the process of engaging in philosophical conver-
sation. In the Socratic tradition, philosophy is an activity to be conducted
in the company of others. Interested in how we ought to live, and often
referred to as the father of ethics (Stokes 2010), Socrates changed both
the focus and the method of philosophical inquiry. The Socratic Method
allows individuals to engage with philosophical discussion without having
419
C
2017 The Howard League and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK
The Howard Journal Vol56 No 4. December 2017
ISSN 2059-1098, pp. 419–436
read or pursued study in the writings of the historical figures of philoso-
phy. The practice of philosophical discussion provides the individual with
opportunity to explore these questions with others. In a discursive envi-
ronment, weaknesses and discrepancies in a speaker’s views can be brought
to the fore. Being exposed in a safe, non-adversarial, and inquiring atmo-
sphere can allow participants to explore their own, and each other’s, way
of thinking. Through such discussions we can develop a deeper and more
insightful understanding of how we, and others, think.
As the medium of philosophy, language allows us to ‘express our beliefs
and assumptions’ (Grayling 1995, p.5). When expressed through commu-
nal dialogue, these assumptions can be questioned and interrogated. Philo-
sophical dialogue is characterised by critical inquiry and rational thought
and, to engage, we must be willing to reflect on our own opinions and
develop our understanding of the fundamental principles that govern our
lives (Grayling 1995).
Within criminology, desistance literature suggests that offenders need
to develop a ‘replacement self’ that is inconsistent with criminal activities
if they are to successfully desist from crime. Maruna (2001) argues that this
process involves a ‘re-biographing’ of the past to understand the present
and move towards the future. Giordano, Cernkovitch and Rudolph’s
(2002) research suggests that developing a concept of a ‘future self’ is
the first stage in this process. Both theories place heavy emphasis on the
offender’s view of themselves – or self-understanding. Research indicates
that self-reflection (Maruna 2001), developing language for alternative self-
definition (Giordano, Cernkovitch and Rudolph 2002) and improving un-
derstanding of alternative lifestyles (Giordano, Cernkovitch and Rudolph
2002) are key in understanding the self and working towards a positive
future.
This article presents the findings from 20 semi-structured interviews
with participants of a philosophy class in Scotland. The interviewees all
participated in a philosophy class delivered by Nikki Cameron in Low
Moss Prison, Scotland. At the point of data collection, the prison education
department had offered philosophy for just under a year.Over this period,
the class had grown in popularity.The education department increased the
delivery of the class from one session per week to five per week and New
College Lanarkshire was in the process of expanding delivery of the course
to other prisons. As such, an investigation into the impact and relevance of
this type of education was both necessary and timely.
This research constitutes the pilot stage of a broader investigation into
the use of philosophical dialogue in prison classrooms. The findings pre-
sented here are built upon in subsequent research forming part of a PhD
thesis (Szifris 2017). The classes under discussion are based on the prin-
ciples of Socratic dialogue (Barrow 2010) where the teacher aims to es-
tablish a ‘Community of Philosophical Inquiry’ (CoPI) which, in practice,
is a group of individuals who discuss philosophical questions in an ex-
ploratory, non-adversarial manner (Lien 2007). The conversation can be
based around a particular topic (for example, the death penalty, personal
identity,or happiness), a specific philosopher (for e xample, Kant, Socrates,
420
C
2017 The Howard League and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
To continue reading
Request your trial