You're comparing oranges to apples, and depreciating philosophy, which is more science than art. No one seriously discusses papers of guys who believed odd scientific theories from XVI.
You're still not getting it. What I'm saying is that Plato's works have both philosophical and literary value. Even if you dispute the first, there is still the second. I'm not sure why this is would mean moving them from philosophy to literature courses (or why those should be mutually exclusive in the first place).
