Analysis Of ' Last Days '

1210 Words5 Pages
During Socrates’ last days, he speaks with Cebes about the fate of the soul. Cebes is unconvinced that the soul doesn’t die concurrently with the body, which leads him to create an alternative analogy. Cebes’ imperfect analogy compares the body and soul to a cloak and a weaver, respectively. A cloak can be worn over and over again, which represents multiple human lives in a body. The weaver, however, outlasts each cloak until the last cloak dies. Cebes argues that because the weaver no long has a cloak to wear, he will die. This means that although the soul may preexist and outlive a body, it too will eventually die. Therefore, if Cebes’ analogy turns out to be more accurate and correct, then the soul is not immortal. Socrates, on the other hand, believes that the soul is immortal and looks to Forms to prove the soul’s immortality. He provides a “safe answer” that helps the reader understand not only his argument, but Plato’s argument and view of philosophy as well.
In order to respond to Cebes’ argument, Socrates discusses causes. As a young man, Socrates was interested in physical science. However, he grew uninterested in physical science because he believed the inquiry into nature and science blinded him from certain ideas that he found paradoxical. For example, he was dissatisfied by the idea that “two” can be achieved in multiple ways: adding together two items or dividing a single item into two parts (97a-b). He believed there should be a consistent cause for this,
Get Access