Como ler Platão? Para uma leitura nãoapologética dos Diálogos.

In the very broad field of Platonic scholarship, we note that the most respected scholars have views that sometimes are completely different. On the one hand, it results from the richness and complexity of these works, on the other, it is also a consequence of different methods that the scholars use in approaching the Dialogues. In the light of that, a natural question emerges: How should we read the Dialogues? However, analyzing the different approaches used, we can see that the answers to a previous question often determines, even if tacitly, the answers to how to read the Dialogues and the approach used in practice. This previous question is the question about the main function of the Dialogues, which tends to be similar to the question about what are the Dialogues. For example, scholars that tend to focuse in the theses and arguments (instead of the literary elements) assume that they are dealing with “philosophical” works, which therefore should fullfil “philosophical” tasks, such as (according to certain conception often presupposed of philosophy) to define a concept, to answer a theoretical question with rational arguments and so on. On the other hand, scholars that tend to focuse in the dramatic and literary aspects assume that they are interpreting literary works which therefore do not need to accomplish philosophical tasks. Thus, I would like to challenge one of these hypothesis often used (even if implicitly) about the function of the Dialogues: the idea that these works or at least some of them are a defense of Socrates against the accusation that put him to death. Comparing the charge with some passages of the Dialogues, I intend to show that we should leave this hypothesis aside while reading the Dialogues. The exegetical benefits that might result from this are considerable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]