Plato's final argument in Phaedo for the immortality of the soul is one of the most interesting topics of all time. It goes hand to hand with the application of the theory of forms to the question of the soul's immortality, as Plato constantly reminds us, the theory of forms is the most certain of all his theories. The Phaedo is Plato’s attempt to convince us of the immortality of the soul by using several main arguments. These include the argument of forms and the law of opposites. In the final passage of the Phaedo, Plato provides his final proof, although it may be his last attempt to give his reasoning, it is not very convincing. Plato has some good points and reasoning to believe in the immortality of the soul, but his arguments often …show more content…
For example, fire and snow are not themselves opposites, but fire always brings hot with it, and snow always brings cold with it. So fire will not become cold without ceasing to be fire, nor will snow become hot without ceasing to be snow. (103c-105b)
3. “Whatever the soul occupies, it always brings life to it? - It does.” (105c-d)
4.”Is there, or is there not, an opposite to life? It does. What is it - Death. So the soul will never admit the opposite of that which it brings along as we agree from what has been said.” (105d-e)
5. “Must then the same not be said of the deathless? If the deathless is also indestructible, it is impossible for the soul to be destroyed when death comes upon it” (105e-106d)
6. “If the deathless is indestructible, then the soul, if it is deathless, would also be indestructible? - Necessarily.” (106e-107a)
To understand Plato’s argument, he gives us an interesting theory, his theory of forms. If we take the example of a beautiful person, not only does Plato say that there is the form of beauty and there is the beautiful person, but he also seems to say that there is the beauty present in that person which is distinct both from the person and from the form. (Lecture from 11/27). This beauty can come and go, and must, either withdraw or disappear at the approach of ugliness.
Plato also makes an interesting distinction
2. What is the meaning and significance of death in light of the Christian narrative?
Socrates states that everything comes into existence from out of its opposite. For example, a tall man becomes tall only because he was short before. Similarly, death is the opposite of life, and so living things come to be out of dead things and vice versa. This implies that there is a perpetual cycle of life and death, so that when we die we do not stay dead, but come back to life after a period of time. Socrates mentions an ancient theory
In the Myth of the Soul, Darrow argues against different conceptions of immortality. One of the arguments that he presents to us is that we have a soul that can survive our death. Darrow argues that there is no evidence for the existence of the soul and questions where the soul stays within our body and when it enters our body. His arguments are to be further evaluated for its strengths and weaknesses as he tries to counter a belief with a long history particularly, in religion.
Within this essay, I am going to argue that the simple soul is a more plausible conception than the idea of multiplicity within the soul within Plato’s work. This is due to the multiplicity of the soul resting on a circular argument of Plato’s ideal city which in turn rests back upon his idea of the tripartite soul. However, it can also be argued that neither conceptions of the soul are plausible due to them both relying on Plato’s theory of the Forms. Throughout Plato’s works of the Phaedo and the Republic, his account for the soul is conflicting as Plato’s two accounts cannot be reconciled. I will also refer to Plato’s work in the Phaedrus to aid my explanation of the multiplicity within the soul.
“He is dead who called me into being; and when I shall be no more, the very remembrance of us both will speedily vanish. I shall no longer see the sun or stars, or feel the winds play on my cheeks. Light, feeling, and sense, will pass away; and in this condition must I find my happiness.”(161)
6 For to be carnally minded [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace.
Throughout Plato’s Phaedo, Socrates invokes different arguments to portray specific ideas about the immortality of the soul. One of the arguments in which Socrates brings about is the cyclical argument. The cyclical argument, also referred to as the principle of opposites, connects the core ideas of the body and the mind to later prove that the soul is an immortal entity. Forms are ever changing in and of themselves to create the cycle in which Socrates explains the basis of all things. It is through knowledge of the Forms, and the existence of the body and the soul that Socrates enhances the cyclical argument to demonstrate the concepts leading to the immortality of the soul.
In Phaedo, Phaedo presents the conversation between Socrates and his companions through his final hours, regarding one of the most fundamental arguments, Socrates’ argument for the immortality of the soul based on its likeness to the Forms. In what follows the essay will be focusing on the three arguments that Socrates provides for the immortality of the soul, the argument from the opposites, the Recollection Theory and the affinity argument, the analyses of Semmias counter arguments as well as Socrates response to them.
The mind, body and soul are connected therefore the soul must die with the body, therefore the soul must be mortal, therefore one will experience nothing after death, therefore one should not fear death. That is the Super Sparknotes version of Book III of Lucretius’ On the Nature of Things. It looks so tidy on the page laid out like that, but when broken down and considered with respect to human nature and existence, it becomes far more complex, as many things often do when taken out of the context of academic theory and applied to, for lack of a better term, real life.
In the Phaedo we encounter a dialogue in which related the conversation Socrates has with his friends on the last day of his death; where the main subject was the immortality of soul. Socrates make two things very clear that we were placed in specific place in life by the will of the gods and that every philosopher should abandon this life. He argues that true philosopher must face death with courage and expect a happy life in the other world; that frees the body and take away the obstacle so the soul can search the truth. The arguments of affinity suggested that there’s two types of existences; the visible world that we perceive with our senses, which is human, mortal, composite, unintelligible and always changing and the invisible world
One of the most ancient mystery yet unsolved is the question pertaining to death and the afterlife. This mystery is one of the fundamental studies in both field of philosophy and religion. Comparing those who believe in a god-existing religion against those who don’t, we often see many differences in the answers relating to death. In the contrary, the similar answers to theist and atheist are evident strongly in two great thinkers and their works. The focus will be on Socrates’ speech in the Apology by Plato setting in 399 BCE and De Rerum Natura by Titus Lucretius 300 years later.
For example, fire participates in the Form of hotness while excluding the opposite Form of coldness wherever fire sees to exist. He argues, what makes the body sick, not sickness but fever. In such manner, what makes a body hot is not heat—but rather fire (Phaedo 105B-C).We can cease that just as fire brings the Form of hotness and rejects the Form coldness, the soul will bring the Form of life and omit its opposite, death. That is to say that the soul does not admit death, so the soul is deathless (Phaedo 105E). Since, the soul is connected with the Form of life and does not permit death; the soul must withdraw at the approach of death. This argument can be approached through the discussion involving non-heat as being indestructible. “If the non-hot were of necessity indestructible, then whenever anyone brought heat to snow, the snow would retreat safe and unthawed, for it could not be destroyed, nor again could it stand its ground and admit heat (Phaedo 106A). In addition, “if the non-cold were indestructible, then when some cold attacked the fire, it would be neither quenched nor destroyed, but retreat safely (Phaedo 106A). We can also conclude that at the approach of death, the soul cannot disappear and perish because the soul is indestructible. The soul does not die with the body, but withdraws from it, living on, eternal and
will.” ( III I, 179-181) The fear of what will happen after death deters him.
Plato was interested in how we can apply a single word or concept to many words or things. For example how can the word house be used for all the individual dwellings that are houses? Plato answered that various things can be called by the same name because they have something in common. He called this common factor the thing’s form or idea. Plato insisted that the forms differ greatly from the ordinary things that we see around us. Ordinary things change but their forms do not. A particular triangle may be altered in size or shape but the form of a triangle can never change. Plato concluded that forms exist neither in space or time. They can be known not only by the intellect but also by the senses. Because of their stability and perfection, the forms have greater reality than ordinary objects observed by the senses. Thus true knowledge is knowledge of the forms.
Since philosophers don’t fear death and believe that the soul is the most important, Plato says that the soul is immortal and has has existed before our birth. “For if the soul existed before birth, and in coming life and being born can be born only from death and dying, must she not after death exist, since she has to be born again? Surely the proof which you desire has been already furnished” (Plato 55). This quote explains how our soul has lived for many years and what happens to our soul from the result of our death. Plato says that our soul could have lived inside other bodies during its many lives, such as animals or other people. If your soul has lived a previous life before being inside your body like Plato explains, it makes you wonder what other lives our soul has gone through before our own. This is pretty interesting to think that once you die, your soul will live on, your body is just another life or stop, for your soul to gain even more experiences and wisdom. Plato explains that the soul is the most important, and that the body is just another obstacle for your soul to go through.