1G0xxeB

2 2 6 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n Volume 41 / Issue 3does Plato have Adeimantus object, thereby possibly upsetting the convictionsSocrates is relying on? One plausible answer presents itself if one reflectsthat the Republic is not, of course, an actual conversation, but rather a writtenimitation of one. Understanding Socrates’s intentions with regard to theinterlocutors (as well as the interlocutors themselves and their motivations)is a necessary part of coming to understand Plato’s intentions for the reader.It seems likely that one of the main reasons Adeimantus joins Glaucon as aninterlocutor is precisely because he will raise questions or objections that hisbrother will not (and vice versa). Thus, Adeimantus’s initial objection servesto call the reader’s attention precisely to the fact that there is a gap betweenthe common good and that of the citizens—one that Glaucon is disposed toassume is not there, or is not disposed to notice. Adeimantus’s objection thusserves to signal to the reader a problem in the argument, even as Socrates’sresponse hides the problem through ambiguity. We, as readers, are thus ableto come to a more precise understanding of the kinds of questions we shouldbe raising as we read, as well as a clearer understanding of what problemsPlato refuses to resolve for us—at least within the confines of the Republic.Careful attention to the passages about the happiness of the city as a wholecan take us this far, at least.