I am also unable to comment, despite having updated flash!
My response to "Hoi Polloi":

"Should there be more of a pursuit to understand the truths of other people, even if they are not factually correct?"

I agreement with Professor Silliman, I interpreted Socrates' "sunasia" or dialogues with others to be exactly that, a pursuit to understand their 'truths', rather than an attempt at disapproval/dismissal. When applied to the polloi, I would imagine that he intended to convey the importance of individual thought/questioning, as he does during individual dialogues, rather than the simple acceptance of predominant ideologies (which the ‘polloi’ tend to be guilty of). One can question a general belief by the many even if one has no access to the answers; it’s not the lack of answers that his character disapproves of, rather the lack of questions.

In regards to the Ivory Tower analogy, I feel it could be applied to the way many contemporary students/philosophers view Socrates', however, it's difficult to apply to the platonic character of Socrates, considering his pursuit of knowledge centered largely around proving to the oracle that he was, in fact, not at the top of the “Ivory Tower” of intellect.

I enjoy where you were going with this post; I sometimes fall victim to doing exactly what Plato’s Socrates preaches against: I seem to, so far, generally be accepting Socrates as a god-like character with flawless ideologies. I’m very glad you helped me question this idea with your post!