I don't know how easy it is to avoid coming off as condescending. For example: > "Let's say someone makes the argument that the Socratic method has major flaws

I don't know how easy it is to avoid coming off as condescending. For example: > "Let's say someone makes the argument that the Socratic method has major flaws related to how it is applied in practice, and that it's better to explicitly state issues with someone's approach or line of reasoning? How might you respond to such a disagreement among your cohort of senior engineers when it comes to code review practices?" It's always going to come across as "Look I'm patiently trying to lead you arond to the conclusion that you made a mistake or don't understand things correctly, because trust me, I know better." Also, a lot of junior people know all about how this game is played and will play along, faking the whole 'dawning realization of the error they made' thing and expressing appreciation for the master's wisdom, while secretly thinking, 'am I going to have to go through this every time I make some mistake or other?' I certainly spent quite a bit of time doing that in the past. I think it's just a lot faster and more efficient to point out errors and issues as you see them, and any decent engineer will absorb that information pretty quickly.