In this passage, when referring to pathe/affections of the soul, Aristotle is talking about emotions, such as pain, fear, desire, and pleasure, and arguably, perception. Whenever we get angry, happy, upset, etc., there is also a simultaneous change in our bodies. Moreover, a pathe of soul is common to that which has soul. This means that attributes of soul are with body. Understanding what this means can be best done in juxtaposition with human activity. For example, when I say that some activity is done that my sister and I do in common, this does not exclude both of us participating in this activity independently. Moreover, if I ask of some activity of another individual, X, whether it is also common to X’s brother or peculiar to X alone, …show more content…
An axe can chop because it has a certain organization. When we say that an axe chops because of its form or organization, however, we do not mean that this form or organization does anything over and above what the composite axe (form and matter) does. Rather, the axe can chop because it has a certain form or organization. The axe can chop because it is arranged this way. Likewise, if one was to read the claim that ‘if an axe had a soul, it would be its ability to chop’ in a certain way, he or she would be lead to think that the soul, like the axe’s ability to chop, does not explain the activities of the body by doing anything over and above what the body does. Akin to the axe organization, the soul/form of a living body is the way that this living body is organized. Moreover, just like all capacities that come from being organized in a certain way, the soul does not explain activities of organized whole by doing anything. Rather, the soul explains perception by explaining how a body, organized in a certain way, (a body that has a soul), can undergo changes that are perception. This is what someone who thinks that the soul is a functionally useful structure or arrangement would have to say about this …show more content…
Since the sailor, the actuality of a ship, and the ship itself are distinct entities in some sense, it is also possible for the sailor to do things, and undergo changes, that the ship does not do or undergo. For example, the sailor can move his arm, and the sailor walk around the ship; the ship does not/cannot do either. Likewise, the ship can undergo changes that the sailor does/cannot. For instance, the ship can lose a plank, and water can splash up against its wooden sides, but this does not also happen to the sailor. The sailor, the actuality of the ship, is distinct from the ship in a way that the organization of the ship is not. This distinction allows the sailor to do/undergo things that are not just a way of referring to what the ship does/undergoes in virtue of having a certain structure. Moreover, if the soul is the actuality of a body in this way, then it will be possible for the soul to do/undergo things that the body cannot do/undergo, and vice versa. For example, the soul can undergo a spiritual change that is becoming aware of an object of perception, and the body and its organs can undergo a straightforward material change. Perceiving, like sailing, will
In Plato’s Republic Book IV, Socrates sets out to convince Glaucon that a person acts with three different parts of the soul, rather than with the soul as a whole. He does this by presenting Glaucon with a variety of situations in which parts of the soul may conflict with one another, and therefore not acting together. Socrates describes the three parts of the soul as the rational part, or that which makes decisions, the appetitive part, or that which desires, and the spirited part, or that which gets angry (436a).
choose to live, though he had all other goods.” (1155a5) So it is agreed that
...d as nonmaterial and accordingly it does not follow the laws of nature. Descartes states, “as regards body in particular, we have only the notion of extension, which entails the notions of shape and motion; and as regards the soul on its own, we have only the notion of thought, which includes the perceptions of the intellect and the inclinations of the will (AT III 665: CSMK 218).” Therefore, Descartes is elaborating that the soul is an extension of the mind, and further distinguishes the notions of the body, as a physical entity, and the soul, as something notable through thought and perception. Furthermore, the mind is influenced through perception of physical and external features and the body reacts accordingly to Though he laid the groundwork for these beliefs in the 1630s, they are still prominent and controversial topics today and have yet to be invalidated.
Aristotle's ethics consist of a form of virtue ethics, in which the ethical action is that which properly complies with virtue(s) by finding the mean within each particular one. Aristotle outlines two types of virtues: moral/character virtues and intellectual virtues. Though similar to, and inspired by, Plato and Socrates’ ethics, Aristotle's ethical account differs in some areas.
Plato’s Republic introduces a multitude of important and interesting concepts, of topics ranging from music, to gender equality, to political regime. For this reason, many philosophers and scholars still look back to The Republic in spite of its age. Yet one part that stands out in particular is Plato’s discussion of the soul in the fourth book of the Republic. Not only is this section interesting, but it was also extremely important for all proceeding moral philosophy, as Plato’s definition has been used ever since as a standard since then. Plato’s confabulation on the soul contains three main portions: defining each of the three parts and explanation of their functions, description of the interaction of the parts, and then how the the parts and their interaction motivate action. This essay will investigate each segment, and seek to explain their importance.
Aristotle's Theory of the Soul in the De Anima centres on the kinds of souls possessed by different kinds of living things, distinguished by their different operations. He holds that the soul is the form, or essence of any living thing; that it is not a distinct substance from the body that it is in; that it is the possession of soul (of a specific kind) that makes an organism an organism at all, and thus that the notion of a body without a soul, or of a soul in the wrong kind of body, is simply unintelligible. Aristotle uses his familiar matter/form distinction to answer the question “What is soul?” he says that there are three sorts of substance which are matter, form and the compound of the matter and form. Aristotle is interested in compounds that are alive. These - plants and animals - are the things that have souls. Their souls are what make them living things. Aristotle also argues that the mind is immaterial, able to exist without the body, and immortal by “Saying that something has a soul just means that it is alive”
The identification of the soul parts as the contributors and main elements for the function of the most important human activity (reasoning), marks the inevitable psychological asset of Aristotle’s thinking; specifically, the classification of human virtues derives from the analysis of the soul’s types, attributing to human beings the ability of reasoning which distinguishes human beings from the rest of ‘natural bodies.’ Indeed, reason exists in two parts of the soul, namely the rational and the appetitive (desires or passions), and so it expresses within two different virtues, the moral and intellectual ones. Moral virtues satisfy the impulses of the appetitive part and the intellectual virtues hav...
Courageous and admirable with noble qualities defines a heroine. In Aristotle’s Poetics he describes a tragic hero as a character who is larger than life and through fate and a flaw they destroy themselves. Additionally, Aristotle states excessive pride is the hubris of a tragic hero. The hero is very self-involved; they are blind to their surroundings and commit a tragic action. A tragedy describes a story that evokes sadness and awe, something larger than life. Furthermore, a tragedy of a play results in the destruction of a hero, evoking catharsis and feelings of pity and fear among the audience. Aristotle states, "It should, moreover, imitate actions which excite pity and fear, this being the distinctive mark of tragic imitation." (18) For a tragedy to arouse fear, the audience believes similar fate might happen to them and the sight of the suffering of others arouses pity. A tragedy's plot includes peripeteia, anagnorisis, hamartia and catharsis. Using Aristotle’s criteria, both characters in Oedipus The King and The Medea share similar qualities that define a tragic hero such as being of noble birth, having excessive pride, and making poor choices. They both gain recognition through their downfall and the audience feels pity and fear.
"Soul" has, historically, always been tied up with morality and religious dogma, and I believe modern neuropsychology and psychobiology has effectively refuted any scientific basis for a "Soul." To state as fact, "The soul exists," one must first socratically define Soul. More on this later:
Aristotle was said to be the most memorable philosopher in Roman Times. Being in a part of the lower-class, he had more opportunities than the people in his same social class. With these opportunities, Aristotle took full advantage of them and built a life for himself. Throughout his lifetime, he accomplished many things. Aristotle’s findings have proven throughout the many years they have been useful. 1
The lion is always considered the head of his clan but is it because he is the strongest, the most vibrant, or because his roar is the loudest? What causes this desire to dominate someone else? People want to feel superior because they are convinced that it is human nature to become superior. While Aristotle describes the idea of human nature as consisting of a natural pattern of wanting to dominate other people, often to the point of slavery, Douglass believes in the idea of education leading to people wanting to dominate other people, proving that it is a social force that affects peoples’ nature. Men are looked upon as individuals who dominate everything. White men are the common oppressors of both women and slaves. White women believe themselves to be superior to slaves and as equal as men. These groups believe the reason to their sense of superiority is human nature. But, this is not actually the case; in reality, everyone is equal.
These mental sensations of the soul cannot be explained by any simplistic illustration, as can be readily evidenced through modern technology. Machinery can be programmed to perform several of the basic physical tasks that humans can perform (Nagel). A baby doll, for instance, can respond to stimuli and cry or perhaps verbalize a simple phrase. Yet, while this baby doll behaves similarly to a human, it is not truly responding to a complex environment; instead, it is restricted by its programming (Nagel). The baby doll will never learn a new phrase to say, and it will not always cry when the same event occurs. In fact, it may cry for no real reason at all. This distinguishes humans from such technology. People have “conscious [experiences]” (Nagel) that are unique to each individual’s soul, reinforcing the division between mind and
Socrates was an insightful philosopher who had an opinion on all the basic fundamental questions. He had very strong beliefs that he willed others into believing through questioning and proving ignorance in others beliefs. He has particular views on every fundamental question and particular views on how people should live their lives. He says God has spoken to him about philosophy and says that it is his destiny and it is his calling in life. Through philosophy he searches for answers to the fundamental questions and gains wisdom and knowledge. The fundamental question of condition is the question of what, if anything, has gone wrong with the world? The question of solution is what can fix the problem? Then there is Death which asks what happens
Aristotle argued and disagreed with Plato’s views of the self and soul being a separate from the body. Aristotle’s view is that all humans have a soul, yet they cannot be separate from the body in which they reside. To him, there are four sections of the soul; the desiderative and vegetative parts on the irrational side are used to help one find what they are needing and the calculative and scientific parts on the rational side are
There are distinct differences between the theories outlined within Aristotle’s Poetics and Bharata’s The Nāṭyaśāstra which both attempt to elaborate upon the audience relationship and the phenomenon produced relating to the theatrical experience. However, despite the dissimilarities there are components of catharsis and rasa that share common elements and ideas surrounding the creation and the effects of these experiences. Aristotle contends the cathartic nature of tragedy aids in purgation of emotion, however ultimately limiting it to the powers of tragedy as only creating this, where, contrarily, The Nāṭyaśāstra outlines the power any actor has in creating bhāva, leading to rasa. Whilst both theories do have common attributes in their aims of heightening an audience experience, it is the differentiating that outcomes that greatly affect their overall influence.