In the last days of Socrates’ life while he awaits his death sentence, he examines and evaluates the facets of life and the morals that come as a part of human nature. He analyzes the concept of being, and what it means to be either living or deceased and through this analysis, Socrates particularly goes in depth with his examination of the human soul. In Phaedo, Plato meets with a follower who had been with Socrates on his last day, on which he talked much about the innermost qualities of being; life and death and how the soul constitutes those two entities. According to Socrates, there are four arguments that prove the existence of the soul: the Argument from Opposites, the Theory of Recollection, the Affinity Argument, and the Theory of Forms. In the Argument of Opposites, Socrates argues that everything in life holds an opposite to another force. He uses sleep as an example, remarking, “waking comes from sleeping and sleeping comes from waking, and the processes between them are going to sleep and waking up” (Plato 135). Socrates deepens this example further, saying, “the living have come from the dead no less than the dead from the living...the souls …show more content…
Socrates explains, “Before we began to see and hear and otherwise perceive equals we must somewhere have acquired the knowledge of equality as it really is; otherwise we could never have realized, by using it as a standard for comparison, that all equal objects of sense are desirous of being like it, but are only imperfect copies” (141). Prior to physical living, humans have innate knowledge and understanding of equality, and what is seen, heard, or learned pertaining to the notion of equality is simply just recollections to what was comprehended prior to birth, proving their soul existed
Socrates is unable to prove his argument that the soul is immortal through the theories of Opposites, Recollection, and Forms because he is unable to explain his reasoning to give a legitimate answer. Although he had given enough evidence to try and prove his point, the evidence given was not convincing enough. His idea often fell through when he tried to relate back to the theories because the possibility that the soul lives on forever leads to so many questions that all don’t necessarily have a reasonable answer or an answer at all, therefore Socrates idea that the soul is immortal is false.
According to Plato, the body and the soul are separate entities. The soul is capable of existing before life of the body and after death of the body and it is constant, unchanging and non-physical (invisible). The soul resembles what is divine, immortal, and always remaining true to itself. The body, however, resembles what is human, mortal, and destructible. The body is changing and never able to maintain its true identity (Plato, 80b). Due to this radical difference between body and soul, their relationship is can be described as antagonistic. In Phaedo, Plato says that body always hinders the soul from possessing truth and intelligence. Therefore if, by death, the soul can pursue divine and unchanging truth without being distracted by bodily desires, death is the real liberation or purification of soul from the body (Plato, 67c-e). This definition of the soul is embodied in a rational framework. In other words, Plato arrives at his conclusions through deductive reasoning and ideals. He believes that the body contributes to cognition only by the senses, only in which "seeing and hearing are neither precise nor clear" (Plato, 65b). Thus, senses are fallible and all true knowledge comes by way of reason and rationale. The other approach to obtaining knowledge of the soul, challenged by Aristotle in De Anima, holds that there is nothing in the intellect which is not learned from experience. He believes that the world can ...
The differences of mind and soul have intrigued mankind since the dawn of time, Rene Descartes, Thomas Nagel, and Plato have addressed the differences between mind and matter. Does the soul remain despite the demise of its material extension? Is the soul immaterial? Are bodies, but a mere extension of forms in the physical world? Descartes, Nagel, and Plato agree that the immaterial soul and the physical body are distinct entities.
Socrates was a classical Greek philosopher that was born in Athens, Greece around 470/469 BC. He served in the Athenian army and fought in many battles. When Socrates retired from fighting in the army, he began focusing on expressing his beliefs. He wasn’t the typical “teacher” or “preacher”; he was a very critical and analytical thinker that helped guide his students and the Athenians during his time. Through his teachings and beliefs, Socrates had positive and negative influence on the people during his time and modern time. Although he is credited as one of the founders of Western Philosophy, Political Philosophy, and Ethics, his teachings was in disagreement with the teachings of the democracy of Athens, which led to him being put to death. Along with his philosophical beliefs, Socrates’ great thinking led to the creation of the Socratic Method and the Socratic Paradoxes.
In Plato's account of the death of Socrates, The Apology, the Greek philosopher and gadfly explains to his disciples why and how it is that he is able to accept his death sentence without fear or regret. The main thrust of Socrates position is that he prefers death to abandoning his principles, by which he means the right to speak and act freely and according to his convictions. Socrates is not entirely idealistic or irrational in his preference for death; he admits that he is old, that he has no irreplaceable attachments or obligations, and that he has accomplished most of what he set out to do in life. But at the same time, he offers compelling reasons why he should follow his convictions rather than obey his instinct for self-preservation: 1) he would "never give way to anyone, contrary to right, for fear of death, but rather... be read to perish at once; 2) he does not think it right "to entreat the judge, or to be acquitted by entreating; one should instruct and persuade him" (Plato, 1956:441); and finally 3) death is only a "migration from this world into another place," and is mostly likely a good thing which should be received as a blessing. Against these arguments, Socrates sees only the vain hope of preserving his life amid the likes of his judges, or fleeing ignominiously to some other land, losing his only home, his friends and the respect of those who admire the strength of his principles. In this essay, I will examine Socrates' decision to accept death rather than abandon his principles, and show why it is better to live and die according to one's convictions, than to take the easy way out.
There are times in every mans life where our actions and beliefs collide—these collisions are known as contradictions. There are endless instances in which we are so determined to make a point that we resort to using absurd overstatements, demeaning language, and false accusations in our arguments. This tendency to contradict ourselves often questions our character and morals. Similarly, in The Trial of Socrates (Plato’s Apology), Meletus’ fallacies in reason and his eventual mistake of contradicting himself will clear the accusations placed on Socrates. In this paper, I will argue that Socrates is not guilty of corrupting the youth with the idea of not believing in the Gods but of teaching the youth to think for themselves by looking to new divinities.
Socrates: A Gift To The Athenians As Socrates said in Apology by Plato, “...the envy and detraction of the world, which has been the death of many good men, and will probably be the death of many more…”(Philosophical Texts, 34) Throughout history, many leaders have been put to death for their knowledge. In Apology, Socrates- soon to be put to death- says he was placed in Athens by a god to render a service to the city and its citizens. Yet he will not venture out to come forward and advise the state and says this abstention is a condition on his usefulness to the city.
In the book Plato 's Phaedo, Socrates argues that the soul will continue to exist, and that it will go on to a better place. The argument begins on the day of Socrates execution with the question of whether it is good or bad to die. In other words, he is arguing that the soul is immortal and indestructible. This argument is contrary to Cebes and Simmias beliefs who argue that even the soul is long lasting, it is not immortal and it is destroyed when the body dies. This paper is going to focus on Socrates four arguments for the soul 's immortality. The four arguments are the Opposite argument, the theory of recollection, the affinity argument, and the argument from form of life. As the body is mortal and is subject to physical death, the soul
In a time where science and materialism reign, the topic of the soul is rarely mentioned, ostensibly left in the past with the philosophers of old. Nichols, however, candidly broaches this difficult topic and gives new life to the argument that humans do indeed have an immaterial, immortal soul. Nichols summarizes several popular arguments for the existence of the soul as he builds his own argument, which discusses a soul as limited in relation to its environment as well as a soul that is one with the mind and a controller of the body. He discusses both the strengths and challenges to his argument, offering rebuttals to the challenges. Because this soul is the organizing principle of the body it is involved in the Resurrection as well, bridging the gap between the material and spiritual worlds. However, I disagree with Nichols’ assessment, instead choosing the side of materialism where an immaterial soul does not exist.
According to Aristotle, living things are made up of matter, form and a “complex of both” (414b 16-20). In general, matter represents potential and consists of the component parts of an object. Not until the parts take the form of a recognizable, functional object can they be considered as such. The matter or potential of a living thing is its component parts, i.e. the stem, leaves and roots of a plant; or the limbs and organs of a human being or animal. The parts must take form in order to achieve actuality, which is the role of the soul in living things. The soul, therefore, is what moves the potential of matter into the actuality of life. A living thing is the complex of both matter and form; and the soul represents the “…actuality of a certain kind of body…” (414a 18-19), i.e. a living body.
"As for me, all I know is that I know nothing" is a famous quote from Socrates, that describes him very well as the intelligent, humble person that he was. Socrates was born on 469 B.C. in Athens, Greece. He was well known throughout the world for his dialogues and the work of his followers and students such as Xenophon and Plato. He built the foundation for the Socratic Method as well as Socratic Irony. Although everything known about him is second-hand, and we do not have any of his philosophical writings, he is still known as one of the most important philosophers who changed the world. Socrates is often seen as the person who created the foundation for philosophy in the West. The influence of Socrates views can be seen during the time of Renaissance, where his works were often reflected in paintings and other works of art, he is often represented as a great Saint, because of all of his exemplary accomplishments.
Still other dualists hold not that intellect and body are unmistakable ontologically, but our mentalistic lexicon cannot be diminished to a physicalistic lexicon. In this sort of dualism, intellect and body are conceptually particular, in spite of the fact that the marvels alluded to by mentalistic and physicalistic wording are coextensive. The taking after areas to begin with talk about dualism as elucidated by two of its essential shields, Plato and Descartes. This is taken after by extra contentions for and against dualism, with extraordinary accentuation on substance dualism, the verifiably most imperative and powerful adaptation of dualism. The essential source for Plato's sees on the supernatural status of the soul is the Phaedo, set on the last day of Socrates' life some time recently his self-administered execution. Plato (through the mouth of Socrates, his sensational persona) compares the body to a jail in which the soul is kept. While detained, the intellect is compelled to examine the truth by implies of the body and is unable (or extremely prevented) of obtaining information of the most elevated, unceasing, constant, and non-perceptible objects of information, the Shapes. Shapes are universals and speak to the substances of sensible
Plato believed that the body and the soul were two separate entities, the body being mortal and the soul being immortal. In Plato’s phaedo, this is further explained by Socrates. He claims that by living a philosophical life, we are able to eventually free the soul from the body and its needs. If we have not yield to our bodily needs, we should not fear death, since it can than permanently detach the soul from the body. The most convincing argument for the immortality of the body is the theory of recollection, which shows that we are already born with knowledge of forms and that learning is thus recalling these ideas. If we are already born with knowledge this implies that are soul is immortal, since it would otherwise be a blank page.
Since the times of Plato and before, humans have pondered the existence of a soul and the afterlife. I am going to present my argument for the existence of a soul and the potential for surviving one's physical death. For the purpose of my argument I will define that the meaning of the mind and soul are one and the same. The two main accepted views of the human condition are that of the physicalist and that of the dualist. The physicalist views the human condition in a purely physical state. That is to say that the human mind and consciousness is confined to the human body, and thus when the body dies so does the mind. The dualist view holds that the human condition is made up of two parts. The first part being the physical body and the second the soul or the non-physical mind. I present my argument in this form; (1) Physical objects such as the human body have to obey physical laws; (2) Non-physical objects such as the human mind/soul do not have to obey physical laws; (3) Humans present both physical and non-physical properties; (4) Therefore the mind/soul does not die with the physical body.
Socrates whose role is mostly wise into understanding a person of reality higher than anyone that can understand a person. He is one who implements the entire arsenal of Western logic and rhetoric to accomplish his end of rarifying and finally fixing the point of a given dialogue. For philosophy, we see ourselves mirrored in the arguments we advance and are made intellectually and spiritually better for having reflected so much and having been so reflected. He is portrayed in these works as a man of great insight, integrity, self-mastery, and argumentative skill. Socrates use a dialogue known as the Socratic Method based on between two or more people who are hold different in the views they pursue to seek the truth with one another. Using questioning skills in order to