What Socrates can teach us about semantics

We are increasingly aware of the importance of language and its explicit use in conceptual frameworks. Well-defined concepts form the basis for our data and information provision. Thinking about language and semantics is very old. What can we learn from Socrates in this regard?

We use words as if we know exactly what they mean. Justice. Safety. Quality. Professionalism. Courage. We build policies, organizations, laws, conversations, and sometimes even entire lives on them. But when someone suddenly asks us, "What exactly do you mean by that?" things often start to shift.

That is precisely the point Socrates was concerned with. In his dialogues, he essentially does the same thing over and over again: he asks people what they mean. And he keeps asking. Until it turns out that something that seemed obvious is actually surprisingly unclear.

There is a lesson in that. Not only philosophically, but also practically.

1. Meaning emerges in dialogue
We often talk about meaning as if it were fixed. As if words have a fixed content that you only need to name. But in the Socratic dialogues, you see something different: meaning emerges in the conversation itself. Socrates rarely provides a definition himself. He asks questions, refines, and offers counterexamples. As the conversation develops, the concept being discussed also changes. It takes shape—or, conversely, begins to waver. Meaning here turns out not to be private property, but something that must endure between people. A concept only becomes clear when it is questioned and tested in interaction.

This also has a practical lesson: if you want to establish a concept, you shouldn't conceive of it in isolation. Clarity emerges precisely in the conversation. Clarity is not a monologue, but a collaborative process.

2. We think meaning is self-evident
In Socratic dialogues, someone usually begins with confidence. They know what courage is. Or justice. Or knowledge. Until Socrates asks: "What is that then?"

At that moment, it becomes clear how often we rely on some kind of shared feeling instead of a clear definition. As long as no one questions it, that works fine. But as soon as you have to define a concept it turns out to be less clear-cut than expected.

Socrates teaches us something uncomfortable here: much of what we "understand" is actually functional vagueness.

3. An example is not yet a definition
When his conversation partners explain what they mean, they often give examples. "Courage? Well, like a soldier who stands his ground in battle."

But Socrates isn't satisfied with that. He wants to know what all these examples have in common. What makes something courageous—regardless of the specific situation?

That distinction is crucial. An example shows what a concept looks like. A definition tries to say what it is.

In everyday life, the two are often confused. But anyone who truly wants to define words in a controlled vocabulary must take that difference seriously.

4. Good definitions draw boundaries
What Socrates constantly does is test where the boundaries lie. If courage is “standing firm,” what about someone who recklessly stands firm? Is that courage too? If justice is “giving everyone their due,” who then determines what someone is entitled to?

With such questions, he makes clear that a definition not only describes something but also excludes something. It determines what is included—and what is not.

That is perhaps the core of semantics: meaning is about drawing boundaries. About defining boundaries.

5. One counterexample can change everything
What is so powerful about the Socratic method is how little is sometimes needed to undermine a definition. One well-chosen counterexample can be enough.

This teaches us a practical lesson: a definition is only strong if it can handle difficult cases. If she only works with the ideal, clear example, she is probably too weak.

Socrates shows that thinking about meaning doesn't begin with confirmation, but with testing.

6. Meaning is never completely neutral
It is striking that Socrates primarily concerns himself with moral concepts. Justice, virtue, wisdom. This is no coincidence.

How you define such a concept influences how you live. If justice means that the strongest determines what is good, then power acquires moral legitimacy. If justice means something different, it immediately changes the normative structure of society.

Words are therefore not innocent labels. They carry values ​​within them. Whoever defines a concept also implicitly makes choices.

7. And sometimes uncertainty remains
Many dialogues end without a conclusive definition. There is doubt. Uncertainty. Aporia.

That may seem unsatisfactory, but perhaps this is precisely one of the most important lessons. Some concepts cannot be definitively pinned down. They are complex, historically developed, and normatively loaded.

Socrates shows that clarity doesn't always mean reaching a final destination. Sometimes it means better understanding the difficulties.

What we can learn from Socrates about semantics, therefore, is not so much which definitions are correct, but how we handle concepts. That we shouldn't be too quick to settle for the obvious. That examples are not demarcations. That good definitions must be tested. And that language is never entirely separate from values.

Perhaps that's the most practical lesson of all: meaning isn't a given. It's work.