Courage, Virtue, and the Immortality of the Soul: According to Socrates

1983 Words4 Pages

In the Laches and the Phaedo, courage and virtue are discussed in depth. Also, arguments for the possibility of the existence of the immorality of the soul are given in the Phaedo. In the Laches, Socrates and two generals, Nicias and Laches, wrestle with how exactly to define courage. After discussing and working their way through two definitions of courage, Nicias proposes a third definition of courage. However, this definition of courage that he proposes is actually the definition of virtue. When the dialogue comes to an end, no definition of courage has been reached.

Virtue is very tough to define, as evidenced in the difficulty that Socrates, Nicias, and Laches have with trying to define both courage and virtue. In Socrates’ arguments with Nicias, he does seem to indicate that Nicias stumbled into a possible definition of virtue. Socrates says in regards to what Nicias thought was that, “Courage is the knowledge not just of the fearful and the hopeful, but in your [Nicias’] opinion, it would be the knowledge of practically all goods and evils put together” (Laches and Charmides, 199D). However, after Nicias agrees that this is not the definition of courage that Socrates and Nicias are searching for, Socrates asks if “[Does] a man with this kind of knowledge seem to depart from virtue in any respect” (Laches and Charmides, 199D)? The simple answer to this question is no. The definition that was suggested by Socrates for the definition of courage has become the definition of virtue. “Then the thing you are now talking about, Nicias, would seem not be a part of virtue but rather virtue entire” (Laches and Charmides, 199E). To summarize, for a person to be virtuous, he or she must have knowledge of all goods and evils...

... middle of paper ...

...I agree with most everything that he has said on the topic in the Laches. Having said that, I do not think that the definition of courage and virtue that Socrates has provided is sufficient enough to be complete. In regards to the “affinity argument” for the preservation of the soul after death, I enjoyed the argument and I think that it is very believable and even possible. However, his whole argument rests on the reader’s acceptance of the theory of Forms. Overall, I have to say that Socrates has amazing insights into very tough metaphysical problems and that he has giving me much to ponder.

Works Cited

Plato. Laches and Charmides. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1992. Book.

Plato. Phaedo. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1977. Book.

“The Republic.” Plato. Web. 19 March 2009. http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.3.ii.html.

Open Document