Ontological Coaching

After reading numerous articles on the socrtico origin of coaching, I have thought about refuting such argumentation. Inlcuso is a company of RRHH and Coaching that is denominated like the Greek philosopher (1). Scrates was not coach, was a philosopher. Perhaps and coaching is a philosophy, but he is not philosophical. The socrtico method arises in the dialogues from its student Plato, as fundamental personage of that work, whose margins the history of the philosophy has been written that is also the history of the western thought. Pealver indicates, that ” accurately; the dialectic standard which finds enseando” (2).

Of all it is known, that the method of Scrates is the maieutic one. That one that by means of questions to the interlocutor, is slowly extracting the wisdom or the sapiencia of the questioned one. Classically it has been interpreted as if an own process of a matron one was. The mother of Scrates thinks that she was midwife of childbirths in Athens. In this sense one says that socrtico process consists more of remove-of, than in put-in (3). And of there, that many coachings affirm that like Scrates, coach can put or never impose the sapiencia, but it must cause that it leaves in the light of coachee (questioned). As if coach made wake up to us of the forgetfulness of the heideggeriano being.

The same Steiner, interpreted that Scrates did not teach anything. But the certain thing is, that Scrates died poisoned with cicuta, by its coacheados or taught fellow citizens. It wants to finish equal, the Coach? coach cannot affirm like ” that one that only knows that nada” does not know;. Coach cannot be limited to listen to oracles of Delphi, nor to pitonisas Greek. Coach cannot exert like a midwife. Scrates was condemned by Athens, for that reason he was ” tbano” of Athens.