Well, you have to realise that Socrates did say of himself that he knew that he knew nothing, much to the contrary of Fido...
Only kidding Fido, but it was a shot before an open goal...
Well thanks. In fact a book I read recently said that we know more about the Greeks than they did. I may have read it wrong. I could check it out to make sure. They were curious about other cultures and ethics, and they wrote a lot about that apparantly. Yet we have the same problem in our society where people within, all their lives, hearing only one side of the story have no means to judge their own behavior, or the behavior of their society. So, if it were possible to disregard all the poor arguments and contradictions present in Plato's Socradramas, you would still have to say he did not know much about his own society. He was a Lover of Sparta. He did not understand his own democracy, and he certainly did not understand the transition from an honor society and economy to a money economy. To suggest anyone could better govern any man than he himself could is criminal; and while it is difficult to divide Plato from Socrates, we might fairly say that each suffered a contempt for the average citizen of Attica. Socrate's inability to make his own marriage work is a miniture of his inability to make the larger form of his society work for him, so that he so badly mismanaged the relationship as to forfeit his life.
All these people misunderstood so much about human kind that their ignorance is remarkable. They actually believed a person could be taught to be virtuous, that knowledge is virtue. What standard of judgement of their own kind did they bring to bear when measuring virtue? Wealth, intelligence, industry, merit? If they were truly ethical, they would have found themselves unable to judge their fellow citizens. As in our own society wealth in few hands creates two societies, and he judged the wealthy one to be good.
And, it was not just women and wives who had been reduced to nearly slaves, but poverty was so wide spread that you could not strike a slave for fear that you might hit an Athenian in destitution. And for that reason these oligarchs loved Sparta which did not suffer much democracy. But it was the poor of Attica in hopes of glory, plunder, and opportunity that dragged Athens to war with the Peloponese, not once, but twice, and on to defeat. As in our land, the poor express the injustice they suffer in war. Injustice is not dealt with at home so much as exported. It is the hope less who hope for opportunity in the military. So yes, Plato's Socrates was a dumass. I can't believe the original was quite so stupid, but his wife might have felt differently. And if he can be forgiven it is because there was no anthropologythen; but it is as much a mistake to think man can be remade, as societies.
Societies, like people, grow into what they are, and the ancient forms from olden times may have a purpose even thinking people cannot discern. If his society was in transition, it was put in that transition on the path to self destruction. If he understood how his people had reached their present because he understood their past then he would surely have pushed for less wealth, and a more general democracy where wealth, and equality, and risk were evenly shared.