Abstract

This study addresses the interpretative problem of how Plato ought to be read and orients itself within the debate between Hellenists, on the one hand, who treat the dialogues as works of literary and dramatic art, and philosophers, on the other hand, who concentrate on the arguments and their logic. Stokes argues for a model of interpretation that takes both Plato the philosopher and the dialogue form seriously. He then systematically applies this method to three whole conversations or dialogues: the Laches, the conversation between Socrates and Agathon in the Symposium, and the Protagoras.