The standard mode of education in the United States, and I assume everywhere, is didactic. A teacher with a classroom full of students scatters knowledge about and the students absorb this knowledge—teaching by telling. I would say that it is an osmosis form of education—effortless often-unconscious assimilation. The great advantage of this system is that the students assimilate knowledge quickly and efficiently. Our great success in the development of technology is evidence of this reality. A high technology society is dependent upon a citizenry with a large knowledge base. Another feature of such a system is that society determines just what knowledge the citizens need and supplies that to them without wasted interference. A much less efficient teaching method that is almost never used is the Socratic or dialogue method. This is a dialogue method because a group of students engage one another in dialogue. A teacher tries to keep the dialogue moving and on track. In a dialogue the students interact, attempting to move a thesis forward in a dialectic method—thesis, antithesis leading to synthesis that becomes the following thesis etc. Students uncover bias and poor assumptions within the group and must remain alert and involved continuously. The dialogue system is very inefficient in the student’s assimilation of knowledge. The great advantage of the dialogue method is that students are very involved and learn quickly the fact that we all have bias and unconscious assumptions. The most important characteristic of the dialogue system is that students develop understanding skills that receive little attention in the didactic mode. All this is probably why we are great technicians but lousy at the art of understanding. We can go to war with great skill and high technology but we seem incapable of not constantly going to war.