Plato's Symbolism Of A Chaariot And The Soul

2195 Words9 Pages
Part A
A-2:
In Phaedrus, Plato uses the symbol of a chariot and team to represent the soul. He states, “Let us then liken the soul to the natural union of a team of winged horses and the charioteer. The gods have horses and charioteers that are themselves all good and come from stock of the same sort, everyone else has a mixture” (Phaedrus 246B). As the chariot is made of a charioteer and two horses, Plato claims that the soul is made of three parts. In Plato’s myth, reason is the charioteer that drives the two other parts of the soul the horses onwards. This portion of the soul Plato associates with the virtue of nous (reason or wisdom), with which chooses the best path for the chariot to take. Plato believes that this part of the soul is
…show more content…
For Aristotle, every object has a final cause, which is the reason for which the object is made. In other words, the final cause is the function of the object. An object achieves the Good when it fulfills its function excellently. As an example, a good shovel is a shovel that digs well, whereas a good knife is a knife that cuts well. These functions depend heavily on the object, and an object is not good if it fulfills a function of a different object, a knife that is good at digging holes well would not be a good knife. This principle holds for human beings as well, a good person is the one who fulfills his or her function in an excellent manner. This includes both the function of a person as an individual in a certain field, as well as the general function of a human on a holistic sense. There is no perfect definition of what the overall function of a human being is, though. However, society as a whole has identified several virtues, characteristics that are widely thought to help people fulfill the function of being human and therefore lead to the good. Aristotle believed these traits are learned and developed through practice, but he also says these traits deteriorate if practiced wrong. Under what this philosophy, the best course would seem to be developing these traits to their fullest extreme. Yet Aristotle states “, we observe that these sorts of states naturally tend to be ruined by excess and deficiency” (Nicomachean Ethics, II, 1104a15). In other words, do much of a characteristic can be just as bad as too little of the trait or not having the trait at all. For instance, too much bravery causes one to act without thinking of the consequences or considering the dangers, whereas too much lawfulness would result an individual who is strict and inflexible. On the other hand, living without bravery or lawfulness would also cause problems. Aristotle believes the
Open Document