While scholars almost universally (0) HAVE considered the story of Atlantis little more than a fine , does the fact alone preclude it being true? Though the story is written as an imaginary dialogue, it contains a of detail that seems out of place in a piece of pure fiction. Additionally, Plato himself implies that the story was true and takes great to explain how the story came to him through various intermediaries. Why employ such an elaborate if it was intended purely as a fable? Unless we are prepared to accept that Plato lied, which would seem with history's view of him as one of the most ethical men of the ancient world, it seems presumptuous to simply dismiss it as a work of fiction and leave it that. On the other hand, there is no especially compelling reason to assume Plato could not have been duped himself, as so erroneously portrayed a purely story as fact; after all, anyone – even the greatest individual of all time, or so one would imagine – is capable of being deceived.