The lesson plans for Socrates or Jesus include:  a complete guide to the Socratic method of teaching, principal characters and plot-check quizzes, basic questions of interpretation, film notation sheets and discussion questions, essay exam prompts, research topics for independent study, and additional AP Open Essay Exam Prompts (Timed Writing Assignments). Can We Forget We Are Human is published in a Teacher Edition (a workbook with answers) and a Student Edition (a workbook without answers). 

Scroll down to read Mr. Moeller's introduction to Socrates or Jesus:  From Whom Do You Prefer to Learn?

Introduction to Socrates or Jesus:  From Whom Would You Prefer to Learn?

Socrates and Jesus: the two most influential teachers of Western Civilization.  From Socrates (who lived 400 years before Christ) the founder of classical philosophy in the Greco-Roman world, we  have its offspring, science, which resulted in technologyóthe distinguishing characteristic of our secular culture today.   From Jesus, ìa marginal Jew,î we have ìthe Christ,î the promised Messiah who founded the Judeo-Christian culture.  His disciples today, the Church, continue to thrive and to influence our world 2000 years later because of their joyful and confident belief in the Resurrection.

From these two most influential teachers who have ever lived, we have two models of teaching and learning that are so basic, teachers continue to use them today.  The Semitic or didactic method centers largely on lecture, story telling, and use of analogy to illustrate.  In contrast, the Socratic method is all about dialogue, discussion, and problem solving.  Forty years of teaching have enabled me to formulate a comparison-contrast outline.  My article, in Chapter 1, ìIf Good Teaching is Dialogue, Why Does the Monologue Continue to Dominate?î  illustrates these two methods 

In the Acts of the Apostles, Lukeís sequel to his Gospel, we find one of the life-changing events of Western Civilization: the meeting between a disciple of Jesus, Paul, and a group of the disciples of Socrates.   Unlike Socrates who began always by posing a question or problem about meaning, Paul, like Jesus, proclaims.

      ìNow while Paul was waiting for them at Athens, his spirit was provoked
       within him as he saw that the city was full of idols.  So he argued in the synagogue
       with the Jews and the devout persons, and in the market place every day with 
       those who chanced to be there.  Some also of the Epicurean and Stoic 
       philosophers met him.  And some said, ëWhat would this babbler say?í Others 
       said, ëHe seems to be a preacher of foreign divinitiesí--because he preached 
       Jesus and his resurrection.  And they took hold of him and brought him to the     
       Areopagus, saying, May we know  what this new teaching is which you present?      
       For you bring some strange things to our ears; we wish to know therefore what 
       these things mean.í  Now all of the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there     
       spent their time in nothing except telling or hearing of something new.
          
       So Paul, standing the middle of the Areopagus, said, ëMen of Athens, I
       perceive that in every way you are very religious.  For as I passed along, and
       observed objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ëTo
       an unknown god.í  What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to 
       you.í î  (17:16-23)

How can Paul say, ìWhat you are worshiping as unknown, this I proclaim to youî?  Could he have known that he had met some of the disciples of Socrates?  Could he have meant that they were worshiping the God of Socrates, ìthe unknown god,î for whom he was martyred?  Clearly, in the defense of his life (the Apology), Socrates argues that he cannot and will not abandon his vocation as a philosopher (lover of wisdom) because it has been given him by ìthe god.î  The supreme irony of Socratesí trial is that he was executed for atheism.  He refused to acknowledge the gods of Athens.  Socrates did not know who the true God was, but he did know what  he was not.  

In short, whoever the true god was, Socrates firmly believed and understood that he had to be the God of Truth.  According to philosopher Peter Kreeft, ìIf Jesus is the Truth, and if Socrates sought the truth with his whole heart (which, of course, God alone can know), and if Truth promised that all who seek him will find him, then we have every reason to hope that Socrates found him.  We cannot be certain about Socrates, but we can be certain about Christî (Socrates Meets Jesus, 2002, p. 5). 

In contrast, Paul knows who this ìunknown god is.î   He has revealed himself to Paul, ìthe least of the last to see the Lord,î as Jesus, the Christ, who is ìthe Way, the Truth, and the Lifeî (John 14:6).  This is the Jesus who was put to death as a criminal by the Romans at the urging of Jewish leaders who accused Jesus, not of atheism, but of something worse--blasphemy.  How  could this suspect Jew claim to forgive sin because he was the son of Yahweh, the one and only true God?  Not only is Paul telling the Athenians who this unknown god is but also and, more importantly, Paul proclaims why this Jesus is he who he claims to beóhis resurrection.  However, when Paul spoke of the resurrection of the dead, some of the fallen-away Epicurean Socratics and the unorthodox Stoic Socratics, began to mock Paulís mention of the resurrection of the dead while others wanted to hear more.  Paul would be back.
 
According to Saint Augustine, ìYou may look through all the prayers in the Scriptures but you will not find anything that is not contained in the Lordís Prayer.î  When his disciples are unsure about how to express their new and personal relationship with God, they ask Jesus to teach them how to pray--just as John the Baptist had done for his disciples.  He gives them ìThe Lordís Prayerî in the Sermon on the Mount in the Gospel of Matthew but in the Gospel of Luke it is in the Sermon on the Plains.  Why two forms?  Most scripture scholars today point out that since Matthew writes for a Jewish audience, his concern is to address those who had learned to pray in childhood but who may be in danger of making prayer routine.  In contrast, Luke addresses Gentiles, non-Jews, who are learning for the first time to pray and need coaxing and encouragement.  In short, there are not two forms of the Lordís prayer because the shorter version of Luke (11: 2-4) is completely contained in the longer form of Matthew (6: 9-13).  Our basic question for discussion is then:  How does the Lordís Prayer contain the entire message of Jesus?
 
Like many Rabbis and masters before him, Jesus taught often by telling short stories--parables.  Two of the most  renowned that are only in the Gospel of Luke, The Good Samaritan, and The Prodigal Son, have become so familiar that their titles remain in use even today.  When asked to be ìa good samaritanî or to tell ìthe prodigalî to return home, many readily understand.  The story of the Good Samaritan is the result of a question that is meant to test Jesus.  When a lawyer asks what he must do to gain eternal life, Jesus asks him ìWhat is written in the Law [of Moses]?î  The young man correctly replies by citing the two Great Commandments about loving God and your neighbor as your self.  After Jesus commends his answer, the lawyer then asks (to justify himself),  ìAnd who is my neighbor?î  The answer is The Parable of the Good Samaritan which continues to raise the same question today: Why does the story imply that love of God cannot be separated from love of neighbor--even enemies?
 
The Prodigal Son is directly related to The Lordís Prayer that begins by telling his disciples how they are to address God.  They are to say, abba, father or papa.  What kind of father is the Father of Jesus?  He is the kind of Father never gives up on his lost son, who looks for him daily, and who, when he does finally return, he readily forgives.  He is also the kind of Father who goes out to speak with his older son who angrily refuses to come into the house because of his younger brotherís special treatment.  A basic question for discussion, then, is: How does the father of the story love his two sons equally?
 
According to the English philosopher and mathematician, Alfred North Whitehead the entire history of Western philosophy since the ancient Greeks is but ìa footnote on Plato.î  He was the first philosopher to take all the main branches of philosophyóbeing (metaphysics), knowing (epistemology), and choosing (ethics)--and put them together in one coherent systemóPlatonism.  Plato [427-347 BC] founded the Academy in 387 BC (from which we derive the word academic) which some historians regard as the first university.  The Academy thrived for over 900 years and Platoís method of teaching, like his masterís, Socrates, was dialogue.  The trial and execution of Socrates is the subject of four of Platoís dialogues: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, and Phaedo.  
 
In Euthyphro, the shortest of the four, we learn that Meletus, a prosecutor, wants to put Socrates on trial for ìcorrupting his young friends.î  The ground of his indictment is that Socrates ìmakes new gods and denies the existence of old ones.î  When Socrates discovers that Euthyphro, himself a prosecutor, claims to know the difference between piety and impiety, Socrates wants to become his disciple.  He believes that if Euthyphro ìwould instruct him in the nature  of piety and impiety,î he would be able to clear himself of the indictment of Meletus.  However, Socrates eventually discovers that Euthyphro can be of no help because he does not know what he is talking about.

Apology is the record of Socrates detailed defense of his life as a philosopher during his trial.  He answers the charges of his accusers by giving a brief summary of his life and an explanation why he believes that his vocation to seek wisdom is God-given.  He then begins to cross-exam his chief accuser, Meletus.  However, when Socrates receives the death sentence, he accepts it even though he believe he has broken no  law.  The Apology raises several basic questions on interpretation: (1)  Is Socrates more concerned with defending his own life or with getting his judges to examine theirs?  (2) Does Plato imply that Socrates needed divine guidance, as well as his ability to reason, to carry out his mission? (3) According to Socrates, does human wisdom consist solely in recognizing how little we know?  and (4) Since Socrates believes that he did not break the laws, why does he accept the death penalty?
 
Crito is the passionate plea of his best friend, Crito, who uses numerous arguments to beg Socrates to escape his death sentence.  In response, Socrates asks if it can ever be  right to defend oneself against evil by doing evil in return.  Even if he has been condemned unjustly, can he be justified to break the law by escaping?  Among others, the dialogue raises two basic questions: (1) Why is Crito unable to convince Socrates to escape his unjust death sentence? and (2)  Does Plato regard the verdict to condemn Socrates to death as unjust?
 
Phaedo is the years-later account by a life-long disciple of what Socrates said and did during his last hours before execution.  As he has during his entire life, Socrates spends his final moments discussing the big questions about life: the immortality of the soul, the nature of learning and knowledge, why death is to be welcomed, not feared, why suicide is never permissible.  However, the overriding question in everyoneís mind during the entire dialogue is: Why is death not the greatest evil?