This evidence below sounds like enough proof that Socrates did definitely exist, but the Socratic Problem is not the question of whether he existed or not, but INSTEAD what did he believe, what was his philosophy?

Hope to see your replies to this one soon!

Well, brilliant historians might do brilliant hypothesis, but that's just as far as they can get. I don't think we have consistent proof or disproof of Socrates physical existence... that being said, he continues to exist as we're talking about him right now. Maybe the very doubt of whether he exists or not makes his real or fictional existence even more fascinating.

Yet, Plato's writings do not seem fictional at all! Another character emerges, with his own philosophy and personality. But how can we form an arguement if so many textbooks that are in circulation right now, and were, state that Plato was a student of Socrates? The textbooks were written by brilliant historians, not that i can name any, but i have to say- it seems extremly unlikely that Plato wrote all dialogue by himself, and were his own ideas. but i may be wrong- I'm sorry- but yes, paradiselost, the existence of some of his teachings, and Plato's writings and Aristophanes' writings- is enough- we hae magneficent text, and that's enpugh to read and to study and to understand.

Well, I think that the fact that some teachings attributed to him actually existed is enough. Even if Plato went through all the trouble of inventing a fictional character, if the thoughts of this character were stimulating and insightful, his purpose would have been fulfilled.

Did Socrates really exist?> how can we substantiate this proof through Plato and Aristophanes?