There are examples of that (typeMany of rhetoric) in otherthe suttas show the Buddha asking "leading questions", e.g. (the first one which comes to mind is) the Kalama Sutta
I don't find it especially subtle tothink I found this line of questioning persuasive when I read it for the first time (and I'm not a big fan of Socrates -- e.g. because I'm not naive about doctrine it's obviousthough I wasn't always convinced by Socrates' for what the "right" answers arethat's worth); but perhaps the technique is helpful sometimes, I'm. I'm not sure why the technique can be helpful, perhaps forit lets the student to experience working something out for themself.
As an aside, I wonder if the technique helps to bypass a student's resistance to dogma. If you made a claim like, "Greed is harmful!", then I might question that, "Oh yeah? Isn't that what makes people work for a living? Don't people say that's the best way to organise society?" Or saying "Greed is harmful!" would be saying that greed is always harmful (and I wonder whether that's true), whereas when the student answers they're admitting that it's generally harmful -- also the question supplies a little more context, e.g. that it's about what's "arising".
I think that one is (again) a question about doctrine, but this one is a bit practical too: i.e. "So there's some doctrine, more- or less-well learned ... can you practice it?"
When I learned Maths, for what it's worth, the lessons were half theory and half practice: the teacher would explain some theory or a new technique, and the second half of the class was student exercises in applying that technique to some problem.
I think that not all of the Zen stories are so obviously connected to a specific piece of of Dhamma (at least, that I recognise as such), e.g. there is some obvious "moral" to the story (or several orals) of Is That So? but the protagonist isn't so obviously asking a Dhamma question.