Irony highlights contradictions or gaps in reasoning to provoke critical thinking. Socrates often used irony to expose and emphasize ignorance or challenge pretensions, encouraging his interlocutors to reconsider their assumptions. In chemistry, irony plays a subtle but effective role in addressing apparent inconsistencies or anomalies that may otherwise go unnoticed. For example, questioning why a "spontaneous" reaction still requires external heat can shed light on the complexities of reaction thermodynamics, such as the balance between enthalpy and entropy. Similarly, asking why a catalyst is described as "unchanged" when it participates in multiple reaction steps can reveal misconceptions about catalytic behavior, prompting a reevaluation of its role. Highlighting such contradictions pushes researchers to revisit and refine their understanding of chemical processes. Socratic prompts rooted in irony encourage LLMs to engage with these inconsistencies critically. For instance, a prompt might ask: "Isn't it surprising that we describe this reaction as spontaneous even though heat is required to initiate it? How might this challenge our understanding of spontaneity?" Another prompt could pose: "If catalysts are 'unchanged,' why do they participate in intermediate steps? How does this impact our definition of catalysis?" These prompts challenge the model to recognize and address contradictions, fostering nuanced reasoning. In contrast, a non-Socratic prompt such as "What is a spontaneous reaction?" offers a simple, surface-level explanation without addressing the underlying inconsistencies. Socratic irony-based prompts challenge LLMs to recognize contradictions, refine reasoning, and uncover overlooked insights, deepening understanding in chemistry.