Chris Peers begins his response to Jim Mackenzie's article, "Peers on Socrates and Plato" by asking "What is the 'masculine imaginary?'" Peers defines the term "imaginary" as it is applied in his article, "Freud, Plato and Irigaray: A Morpho-Logic of Teaching and Learning" (2012) and draws from mainly psychoanalytic sources, i.e. Lacan. Peers explains that "imaginary" refers to the cathexis, preservation and retention of an array of idealized forms within a given domain of discursive practice and that we imagine teaching and learning by reference to such forms. Usually these forms take the shape of metaphors that stand in the place of a "signified" or referent, something that is presumed to precede the image and for which it provides meaning. Peers responds to "Peers on Socrates and Plato" by stating that while he dealt with the application of Lacan's conception of the imaginary to "learning," in the first part of his article it is only in the shorter, second part of the article that he reaches Socrates as an image of "teaching." Peers argues that Mackenzie insists on an orthodox interpretation of Greek Philosophy and moreover of historical practice, without taking into account the psychoanalytic methodology Peers uses to explore broader implications of the "Theaetetus".