The dominant philosophical approach to Plato's dialogues is the mouthpiece interpretation according to which Plato intends to convey as his own in the dialogues, various theories, doctrines, and/or beliefs. Two principal interpreters of this approach are Richard Kraut and Julia Annas, each of whom upholds the respective tenets of the mouthpiece interpretation. Contrary to their views, I argue that some of the primary arguments for the mouthpiece approach to Plato are highly problematic and claim that, due to their misdirected analyses, mouthpiece interpreters are akin to the prisoners in Plato's cave. I argue (along with others) that the Socratic interpretation is a more promising approach by which to interpret Plato's dialogues insofar as it regards more heavily the influence of Socrates on Plato and (in particular) the significance of movement. I further suggest that the Socratic interpretation reveals a deeper reality about the human condition, as presented in the Allegory of the Cave. As such, it provides a unique and valuable means by which to understand the significance of reason and action in our lives.
