Socrates is often hailed as the first coach, with his method of questioning cited as a precursor to modern coaching techniques.
The term “Socratic questioning” has become almost synonymous with the art of inquiry in coaching, valued for its ability to challenge assumptions, provoke self-reflection, and illuminate deeper truths.
But was Socrates truly the first coach?
Or are we romanticising his approach, overlooking some critical differences between his methods and the transformative intent of coaching?
Let’s explore the case for and against Socrates as the archetypal coach, and in doing so, question what truly distinguishes coaching from mere inquiry.
The Case for Socrates as a Coach
At the heart of Socratic questioning lies a commitment to inquiry as a tool for uncovering hidden assumptions and challenging preconceptions. Socrates engaged his students and interlocutors in dialectic dialogues, asking incisive questions that forced them to confront the limits of their knowledge.
This method—rooted in humility and curiosity—seems to align with several principles of transformative coaching:
Dialogic: Socratic questioning exemplifies open dialogue, with both parties exploring ideas collaboratively.
Phenomenological: Socrates began with the lived experience and beliefs of his interlocutors, respecting their unique perspectives.
Paradigmatic: His inquiries often aimed to expose unexamined worldviews and assumptions, encouraging a shift in perspective.
It is easy to see why Socrates’ method is frequently likened to coaching. In both practices, questions hold the power to catalyse insights, break down mental barriers, and challenge habitual patterns of thought.
The Case Against Socrates as a Coach
Yet, a closer examination of Socratic dialogues reveals a significant divergence from coaching as we understand it today. Socrates’ ultimate aim was not to empower others to discover actionable insights or create meaningful change. Instead, his dialogues often sought to dismantle certainty altogether, exposing the fragility of human knowledge.
In many cases, the Socratic method led to aporia—a state of puzzlement or confusion—rather than forward motion.
By the end of a dialogue, the participants were often left with the conclusion that they knew far less than they assumed, but without any clear sense of how to move forward.
While this intellectual humility is valuable, it falls short of the transformative purpose of coaching.
Socratic Questioning vs. Transformative Coaching
To highlight the distinction, consider the following:
Purpose: Socrates sought philosophical truth, often by dismantling existing beliefs. Coaches, on the other hand, aim to facilitate growth and forward motion, helping clients translate insights into actionable steps.
Relational Dynamics: Socrates’ dialogues could feel confrontational, even adversarial, as he exposed ignorance. Transformative coaching, by contrast, is grounded in trust, empathy, and partnership, ensuring the client feels supported rather than interrogated.
Outcome: Socratic questioning often culminated in uncertainty (we cannot know anything with certainty). Coaching, while embracing uncertainty, aims to guide clients towards clarity, purpose, and tangible transformation.
This is not to diminish the brilliance of Socrates’ approach.
His method remains foundational for critical thinking and reflective inquiry. However, it also serves as a cautionary tale: asking questions alone does not constitute coaching.
To truly help someone move forward, inquiry must be coupled with intentionality, empathy, and a commitment to the client’s growth.
Moving Beyond the Myth
The cliché of Socrates as the first coach endures because it speaks to the power of questions—a cornerstone of coaching. But transformative coaching goes beyond questioning. It is a holistic process that integrates relational, pragmatic, and systemic elements to support meaningful and lasting change.
Perhaps the real legacy of Socratic questioning is its reminder that transformation begins with curiosity. But for that transformation to unfold, inquiry must serve a greater purpose: not just to reveal ignorance, but to empower individuals to discover new possibilities and act upon them.
In this light, we can appreciate Socrates as a philosophical pioneer, while recognising that modern coaching has evolved far beyond the pursuit of truth for truth’s sake. Instead, it seeks to help clients not only understand their world but also reshape it.
By questioning the cliché of Socrates as the first coach, we can honour his contribution while clarifying what truly distinguishes transformative coaching: the ability to move beyond questioning into action, growth, and change.
