The Phaedo is a dialogue that portrays the last leading moments of the philosopher known as Socrates, before his execution. It is written from the perspective of Phaedo who was present at the time, and includes dialogue from Socrates and his friends: Cebes and Simmias. They discuss ideas surrounding the themes of death and various arguments for the immortality of the soul i.e. what can be expected to happen to the soul in the afterlife and how a philosopher should relate to death.
One of the main topics in the Phaedo is the immortality of the soul, as Socrates believes that the meaning of life for a philosopher is to prepare for death so that the soul can live on suggesting death is the release of the soul from the body. Socrates goes
…show more content…
on to justify this by proposing that ‘the soul…when it is most by itself, taking leave of the body and as far as possible having no contact or association with it in its search for reality’ REFERENCE Socrates explores three arguments for the immortality of the soul, one of which is the doctrine of recollection. Cebes mentions Socrates’ Theory of Recollection, which illustrates the idea that all learning/knowledge that we obtain exists within us and can be brought to our conscious mind through recollection as ‘what we recollect now we must have learned at some time before, which is impossible unless our souls existed somewhere before they entered human shape.’ REFERENCE Socrates explains to Simmias who asks for proof of the theory, that we can be reminded of one thing by thinking of another thing. For example when one sees their beloveds lyre, they are automatically reminded of their loved one in their mind, even though they are two very distinct objects. Following this, Socrates relates back to the Theory of Forms by claiming that the Form of Equality exists, introducing that the soul can see two equal things though they aren’t perfectly equal, supported by the statement ‘equal stones and sticks…appear equal to one person and unequal to another’. REFERENCE. Physical items do not meet the requirements of absolute equality yet we can derive that it is not perfectly equal without any empirical evidence (i.e. having never physically seen the perfect). From this, it can be concluded that the knowledge of this is attained before birth, but then somehow lost at the moment of birth. Socrates believes that through a process of learning and sense experience, the knowledge of these forms, including Equality is recollected again. After Socrates finishes all the arguments for the immortality of the soul, Simmias and Cebes voice their concerns with some of the arguments. It becomes clear that the strongest objection to the recollection argument is Cebes’ objection. Cebes is convinced by Socrates’ argument of recollection that the soul does in fact exist before birth but objects that it continues to live immortally after the body dies. Cebes compares the soul to a weaver’s cloak supposing that a cloak is more fragile than the man who wears the cloak proposing that the weaver will make/re-make many cloaks during his life to suit the body. When the weaver dies, evidently the cloak outlives him but will eventually deteriorate and become worn out. This is likened to the soul and body and the body is forever changing during its lifetime in which it could be argued that this is because of the soul. Eventually the soul will die, though having lived through several bodies, which implies that the body cannot be recreated again and will quickly rot, much like the cloak and the weaver. Cebes argues to Socrates that this does not prove that the soul is eternal therefore one should fear death, opposing Socrates’ view that one should be confident and happy to die, as stated by Cebes, ‘…everyone must always feel apprehension at the approach of death that in this particular separation from the body his soul may be finally and utterly destroyed’ REFERENCE This is the strongest objection because it makes the reader question whether the soul really does live on eternally after death and completely opposes Socrates’ main idea that the soul is immortal. For Cebes to agree to the recollection argument, ‘Socrates must show that “soul is imperishable and immortal…”’ REFERENCE Rather than responding directly to Cebes objection, Socrates offers Cebes a story, and thus a new argument for the immortality of the soul.
Socrates recalls from personal experience that when he was younger he has a passion to learn about nature and the sciences but then soon realized that he did not have the right mind to obtain such knowledge. Socrates then discovered Anaxagoras who claimed that the mind and intelligence are the cause for everything. Upon further studying of Anaxagoras, Socrates began to disagree with his teachings as he realized that the mind was not talked about as a cause and that he mainly preached about physical explanations for the universe, therefore could be classed as teleological. Socrates fashions a new method that he believes to be the most convincing and reintroduces the Theory of Forms and using it in accordance of all the causations in the world, offering a more materialistic viewpoint. This can be interpreted to mean that the physical body is an obstacle that we live with in the material world implying that real world is in fact immaterial in which the soul just participates in existing in, concluding that it is in fact
immortal.
In the book “Phaedo,” Plato discusses the theory of forms with ideas that concern the morality of the form. There are four philosophers that are expressed which are Phaedo, Cebes, and Simmias regarding the execution of Socrates. Socrates is presented in “Phaedo” on the morning of his execution where he is being killed. He tells his disciples Simmias and Cebes that he is not afraid of dying because a true philosopher should welcome and look forward to death but not suicide. A man should never commit suicide. He says that we are possessions of the Gods and should not harm themselves. He provides the four arguments for his claim that the soul is immortal and that a philosopher spends his whole life preparing for death.
Socrates a classical Greek philosopher and character of Plato’s book Phaedo, defines a philosopher as one who has the greatest desire of acquiring knowledge and does not fear death or the separation of the body from the soul but should welcome it. Even in his last days Socrates was in pursuit of knowledge, he presents theories to strengthen his argument that the soul is immortal. His attempts to argue his point can’t necessarily be considered as convincing evidence to support the existence of an immortal soul.
For Plato, the pursuit of the philosopher should be that which the sage has already attained in their status as a “godlike philosopher”. In Phaedo, Socrates takes length describing the pursuit of philosophy as preparation for death. The account of Socrates’ death gives a portrait of man successfully detached from his body, allowing his soul to continue to its next phase of being. Plato however does not present this as a strict asceticism, but rather accounts that the philosopher should spend his life trying to detach himself from the needs of the body and earthly pleasures. Further, Socrates agrees with Simmias that philosophers must distance themselves from bodily pleasures including food, drink, sex, superfluous physical items, etc. The philosopher in turn exchanges all of these things for wisdom, the only thing of true value which leads to an exalted life among the gods. Their main goal is to transform their values through a greater reality of the forms and an ability to recognize the importance of distinguishing the one from the many—which in turn aligns themselves in a position to be ethically superior to unenlightened human beings with a greater degree of
In the book Plato 's Phaedo, Socrates 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 Socrates 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 beliefs who argue that even the soul is long lasting, it is not immortal and it is destroyed when the body dies. This paper is going to focus on Socrates four arguments for the soul 's immortality. The four arguments are the Opposite argument, the theory of recollection, the affinity argument, and the argument from form of life. As the body is mortal and is subject to physical death, the soul
hilosophers have contemplated over the subject of immortality. They question if the soul, particularly, is immortal. Although Plato writes the Meno, it is supposed to be a copy of what Socrates personally encountered and “taught” in his lifetime. Even though the Meno is originally about the search for the meaning of virtue, one perspective on the immortality of the soul is introduced to us by Socrates in that play. Therefore, what Socrates thought about the immortality of the soul in the Meno is the following: “If the truth about reality is always in our soul, the soul would be immortal so that you should always confidently try to seek out and recollect what you do not know at present” (Plato, 86b) In the beginning, Meno challenges Socrates
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.
...I agree with most everything that he has said on the topic in the Laches. Having said that, I do not think that the definition of courage and virtue that Socrates has provided is sufficient enough to be complete. In regards to the “affinity argument” for the preservation of the soul after death, I enjoyed the argument and I think that it is very believable and even possible. However, his whole argument rests on the reader’s acceptance of the theory of Forms. Overall, I have to say that Socrates has amazing insights into very tough metaphysical problems and that he has giving me much to ponder.
Socrates was a philosopher who was true to his word and his death was ultimately felt by his closest friends and followers. In Phaedo, Socrates is met with his closest friends during his final hours as they await his death. At this point Socrates is prepared for death and seems to welcome it. Although death may seem like a scary inevitable fate that we all must face at one point; Socrates saw death as a privilege mainly because he believed that the soul was immortal. As a result, Socrates provides arguments as to why he believed the soul was immortal and even though all his arguments lacked unconvincing evidence, he does bring up good points. In this paper I will talk about Socrates’ most and least convincing arguments on immortality, and explain what Socrates’ problem was with Anaxagoras.
Is it simply performing the will of the Gods and Goddesses, living justly and avoiding that which might corrupt the soul? To Socrates, though he recognizes that each individual can make choices in how they live their life, these individuals will be judged as the dead at Tartarus, their actions in life weighed out in full, punished or rewarded as seen fit. Further, Socrates feels that by ignoring the pleasures of the body, and learned more the pleasures of the mind, should be glad of his own soul. (Phaedo, 113d-114d) Of course, the punishments doled out for those deemed ‘incurable’ are rather terrifying to consider, especially taking into account that Socrates argues that our soul is immortal. That, he feels, is even further grounds to celebrate a man’s life if he lived well. I feel that this could, in some way, be Socrates reassuring not just Simmias, Cebes, Phaedo, and the others there, but he’s reassuring himself that he is justified in his actions as a philosopher. After all, Socrates is on being put to death for impiety, and the corruption of the youth of Athens. Surely, for a man so concerned with philosophy and his Gods, these crimes must have weighed on his mind in some fashion, though he “appeared happy both in manner and words as he died nobly without fear.” (Phaedo, 58e) Socrates, also, is a man who respects the laws of his country, not taking the opportunity to escape his
What happens when we die? This is a question humans have been pondering for centuries and although there are those who say they’ve been to the beyond there is no tangible proof of what lies beyond the grave. Sokrates was one of those who pondered what happens when we die and if death is worth fearing along with the idea immortality. In Apology, Sokrates defends his ideas before being prosecuted and in Phaedo those same values are tested when he faces his own death.
Socrates discusses that people should not fear death because we do not know the qualities of death. Even though we do not know what death is, he makes some suggestions for the possibilities after death. He suggests that maybe death is just an endless sleep without dreaming, it is where we can finally come to peace with ourselves. He also suggest that maybe in the afterlife he will be able to meet heroic people in the past, where he can share his experience and question people to see whether they are wise. Even in death Socrates is still going to practice philosophy even if the place is bad. Even if he did not live a just life that he thought he did, he can examine what he did wrong and fix the problems in the after life. I agree with Socrates
Phaedo was set in a prison. While in prison, Socrates contemplated whether or not there is an afterlife and whether or not the soul can survive death. He explains that we discuss the soul because it applies to all humans; it’s more personal, closer to us than the nature of being. Socrates adds that he doesn’t fear death because it means fearing your soul. You shouldn’t fear the unknown, but embrace it. Furthermore, he comes to the conclusion that the soul is immortal based on the following 3 arguments.
Plato believed that the body and the soul were two separate entities, the body being mortal and the soul being immortal. In Plato’s phaedo, this is further explained by Socrates. He claims that by living a philosophical life, we are able to eventually free the soul from the body and its needs. If we have not yield to our bodily needs, we should not fear death, since it can than permanently detach the soul from the body. The most convincing argument for the immortality of the body is the theory of recollection, which shows that we are already born with knowledge of forms and that learning is thus recalling these ideas. If we are already born with knowledge this implies that are soul is immortal, since it would otherwise be a blank page.
Nails, Debra, N. (2005, September 16). Socrates. Stanford University. Retrieved November 11, 2013, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socrates/
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