[soniman]

This guy says ignore the scholars, then says, this is the order the dialogues were meant to be read, and lists "tetralogies." Nobody knows what the order of the dialogues is or how they are grouped, if at all. The best way to group the dialogues is probably the dramatic order, for instance Theatetus-Sophist-Statesmen-Apology-Crito-Phaedo, but there are other ways to group the dialogues too. For instance, some dialogues are narrated by Socrates (Lovers, Charmides, Menexenus), others are narrated but not by Socrates (Theatetus, Symposium), others are straight dialogue (Crito, Euthyphro) etc etc. There are a lot of ways to look at it and the best way is probably just to pick up the Apology and start reading it.

Second, he says that the dialogues should be examined as a whole. Well, how would we understand the entire corpus of dialogues without first understanding each individual dialogue on its own, and vice versa? An individual dialogue is easier to understand on its own, that's probably where we should start.

[emblaegh]

I don't think he's contradicting himself. His scholar opinion is about the form of Plato's work (i.e. the order it should be read), and not about its content. I think he recomended people to avoid the second, as following the first is very helpful for the beginner who sees themself without knowing where to start, even if the suggested order is very opinionated.