[thinking4real]

Eh, even the socratic method is quite patronizing in many situations.

For example: underlying does a task that is correct and valid but not what the higher up envisioned or hoped for. In this case you’re just going to come off as a prick for “gently guiding me” to a conclusion I disagree with, but which I’m not allowed to (non confrontationally) articulate as you’ve corralled this conversation down one narrow path based on your personal preference

As someone who while I was a junior was starved for someone to actually teach and mentor me, I’d say this scenario played out much more often than one where I was given valuable education. yrmv

[goostavos]

100% Agreed. Just say what you think and why. The Socratic stuff works really well if you're making up a pretend conversation where you get to write both parts, and every question gets the perfect answer, and it all gets to ends with perfect enlightenment. In the real world, your questions probably suck, and the answers probably suck more. Nothing is more obnoxious than enduring someone badly doing "the socratic method" on you.

The main problem with junior engineers is that they have narrow views of the world. Software is complex. Being experienced, is mostly about earning hard won scars through mistakes, missteps, and rewrites. It's tough to convey the scope of impact by just asking them questions. It's much more guiding to just give them what they don't yet have!

I'd much prefer: "Oh, man, so this looks like it shouldn't matter, but let me tell you how I once took down prod for 3 hours by doing this same thing. I can show you how it can fail in this really subtle way".

to: "what is the nature of being?"