The Tripartite of the Soul that Socrates Discussed in Plato's Republic

1431 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Aristotle’s concept of “Soul” as compared with Plato and Socrates

In this paper I will be discussing the tripartite (three parts) of the soul that Socrates discussed in chapter 6 of Plato’s Republic, and I will compare and contrast them to that of Aristotle and Anthony Kenny. In Plato’s Republic the three parts of the soul consist of the rational, spirited and, desire. In this dialogue the three parts of the soul go hand and hand with three parts of a just society.
The desire or appetite of the soul is what controls our want for the pleasures of life. An example of some of these pleasures are the want for food, money, sex, and any other material good. This part of the soul has the ability to control your rational which then leads an individual to act in a way that they may not normally. In the community sense the individuals that fit into this area are craftsmen, artists, fisherman, and everyone else in the community that isn’t a ruler or in the military. The second part of the soul which is the spirited has to do with courage, crowdedness, anger, etc… Courage is the power to overcome challenges that an individual or community are faced with. When discussing the spirited part of the soul as courageous Socrates states “The only feature of a community which might justify describing it as either cowardly or courageous, I answered is its defensive and military arms.” (Plato, 429b)
The rational is seen as the driver of the soul. As the driver of the soul the rational deals with the knowledge and intellect and is in charge of controlling the other two parts of the soul. The rational part analysis and weighs options based on what is in the best interest for oneself. When Socrates compares the rational part of the soul to that of a community he says that some of a communities inhabitants are able to r...

... middle of paper ...

... What Aristotle is saying is when you gain knowledge the form of your soul is changing as well, and this is what makes you either good or bad. Plato believes a little different, he believes that you’re either morally good or bad based on if you can control the three parts of the soul. The rational part needs to have complete control over the spirited and appetite to be a morally good person.
There are many differences but not nearly as many similarities. One point that can be seen as similar between Aristotle and Plato is that they both believe that the soul is the ultimate life force of the body. As Plato states it is the driver of the chariot, but to Plato the body isn’t as important as the soul, and Aristotle sees them as equal. Another similarity that I noticed between the two is that they both believe that something will stay behind once the body has decayed.

Show More
Related

  • Justice and Moderation of the Soul in The Republic, by Plato

    3023 Words  | 7 Pages

    In his philosophical text, The Republic, Plato argues that justice can only be realized by the moderation of the soul, which he claims reflects as the moderation of the city. He engages in a debate, via the persona of Socrates, with Ademantus and Gaucon on the benefit, or lack thereof, for the man who leads a just life. I shall argue that this analogy reflecting the governing of forces in the soul and in city serves as a sufficient device in proving that justice is beneficial to those who believe in, and practice it. I shall further argue that Plato establishes that the metaphorical bridge between the city and soul analogy and reality is the leader, and that in the city governed by justice the philosopher is king.

    Read More

  • Aristotle And Aristotle: Aristotelian Vs. Aristotle

    1528 Words  | 4 Pages

    Although I do not totally agree with every aspect of his views, there are some firm beliefs that I agree with on a larger scale than I do with Aristotle. Upon examination of my belief system in relation to Plato’s, it appears that I am more of an abstract thinker. I believe that I possess the ability to see beyond basic objects and appreciate the artistic gestures that an object or form represents. I am also inclined to agree with Plato in the fact that there is a higher being and that the soul is capable of succeeding from life to death to life again. I firmly believe in the four cardinal virtues and that all human beings have the ability to use every virtue for good or evil purposes. Although I am more inclined to relate to Plato than Aristotle, I do agree with Aristotle’s idea of maintaining the mean. I do believe that each individual is in control of their own happiness and that a certain level of control must be utilized when it comes to

    Read More

  • Does Aristotle’s Function Argument Offer a Convincing Account of the Human Good?

    1843 Words  | 4 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • Socrates And Chuang Tzu: The Concept Of The Body And Soul

    1356 Words  | 3 Pages

    Life is a combination of body with soul, but to philosopher Socrates, this combination is not the best for attaining Knowledge Socrates arguments were that he believed that the soul and the body were essentially diverse he called this

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Aristotle On The Soul

    1892 Words  | 4 Pages

    Like with most of Aristotle’s passages the terms he uses to define abstract ideas require a definition of their own. To better understand his thesis of the soul, we must first look at what he means by “first actuality” and how that relates to “second actuality.” According to Aristotle, there are three states of a rational being. The first is to have potentiality, which is the cornerstone to being rational. Each rational being has the potential to be things in

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Socrates: The Imorality Of The Soul

    1321 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Plato’s dialogue, the Phaedo, Socrates gives an account of the immortality of the soul. Socrates does this through a series of arguments. He 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 his 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 who argue that even the soul is long lasting, it is not immortal and it is destroyed when the body dies. This paper focuses on Socrates 's first argument for immortality of the human soul, his counter arguments to Cebes and Simmias ' arguments, and an explanation as to why Socrates first argument for the immorality of the soul does not succeed in establishing that the soul is immortal.

    Read More

  • Platos Argument For A Just Life

    1677 Words  | 4 Pages

    reasoning than desire. So we see two distinct parts of the soul. The first is

    Read More

  • Plato’s Theory of The Soul in The Republic

    1754 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Emerson's Over-Soul

    2025 Words  | 5 Pages

    A citizen of Concord, a denizen of philosophy, a certain Mr. Emerson has recently informed me of his observations of a peculiar phenomenon he dubs the Over-Soul. I wish to, rather than bicker over the particular, interpret the general meaning and nature of this universal specimen.

    Read More

  • Analysis of Plato's The Republic

    2022 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Republic is an examination of the "Good Life"; the harmony reached by applying pure reason and justice. The ideas and arguments of Plato center on the social settings of an ideal republic - those that lead each person to the most perfect possible life for him. Socrates was  Plato's early mentor in real life.  As a tribute to his teacher, Plato uses Socrates in several of his works and dialogues.  Socrates moderates the discussion throughout, as Plato's mouthpiece. Through Socrates' powerful and brilliant questions and explanations on a series of topics, the reader comes to understand what Plato's model society would look like. The basic plan of the Republic is to draw an analogy between the operation of society as a whole and the life of any individual human being.  In this paper I will present Plato’s argument that the soul is divides into three parts.  I will examine what these parts are, and I will also explain his arguments behind this conclusion.  Finally, I will describe how Plato relates the three parts of the soul to a city the different social classes within that city.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Descartes And Aristotle

    1509 Words  | 4 Pages

    The pursuit of knowledge has led many a philosopher to wonder what the purpose of life truly is, and how the material and immaterial are connected. The simple fact is, we can never know for certain. Arguments can be made, words can be thrown around, and rationale can be supported, but we as mere humans are not capable of arriving at the perfect understanding of life. Nonetheless, in the war against our own ignorance, we seek possible explanations to explain that which science and math cannot. Philosopher 's such as Plato and Aristotle have made notable contributions to our idea of the soul and its role in the grand scheme of life, while some, such as Descartes, have taken a more metaphysical view by pondering the impact one 's mind has on

    Read More

  • The View of Hinduism on Human Nature

    787 Words  | 2 Pages

    To gain a full understanding of Plato’s view of human nature and its innate tendencies, one must refer to the three aspects of the soul. These aspects are explained through a model known as the chariot model. This model involves three elements: a chariot, two horses, and a driver. The two horses of the soul are explained as the irrational elements and the drive represents the rational part. One horse is easy to maintain and remains calm while the other horse is difficult to control and runs off. It is the drivers duty to control both horses and make sure they work together. The chariot driver must also whip both horses into shape, mainly the difficult one, in order to make progress. This model refers to the soul and its three parts. One part of the soul is irrational and difficult to control, another part of the soul is relatively calm and obedient.

    Read More

  • Akrasia Vs Ignorance

    744 Words  | 2 Pages

    In this paper, I am going to discuss Plato and Aristotle's viewpoints on inconsistency within the soul in accordance with virtue and vice. Aristotle identifies bad and good states of character. The bad includes vice, inconsistency, lack of moderation, and brutality. These are mirrored alongside their positive counterparts of virtue, superhuman virtue, moderation, and consistency. This can also be extrapolated to cover softness and its opposite of endurance and courage. The problem arises when considering inconsistency and incontinence between these paralleled vices and virtues. In this Paper, I will analyze and provide an account of how the philosophers Plato and Aristotle tackle questions regarding this inconsistency. The questions that arrive regarding this are as follows. How does inconsistency arise and manifest itself, and in what way does it delineate itself from vice.

    Read More

  • Essay On Aristotle's View On The Self

    1099 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Platos Concept Of Self

    1191 Words  | 3 Pages

    He believes that the soul takes shelter within the body. The three parts are all located in three different areas: reason is in the mind, spirited is in the heart, and desire is in the stomach. Reason is what controls the whole soul (Plato p. 49). The mind tells the body what to do, how to feel, what to say. The mind controls our appetites and decides who to honor according to memories about those people or events. The spirit is in the heart, the heart is what shows us how we feel about others. The stomach is desire as we crave to have certain possessions such as food or other physical materials in life. If what Plato is saying is any truth, than the argument presented that our soul is our life and our body is nothing but what carries our soul, is therefore false and unsupported by this idea of the mind, heart and stomach. Then so, our thought that Plato’s idea that we can make ourselves alive, is fairly reasonable and true. This is because it is more understandable to say that the reason why our souls are what makes us alive is because our souls are physically made of three parts that control the way we live. Our body is now not only what carries life for us, but what allows us to keep it. Our soul is different from the body because it represents life, but it is our body that allows our lives to

    Read More

More about The Tripartite of the Soul that Socrates Discussed in Plato's Republic

Open Document