Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Soul and immortality according to plato
What is self according to plato and aristotle
Definition of self in philosophy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Soul and immortality according to plato
Aristotle’s Theory of The Soul as the Concept of The Self
One of the biggest questions throughout all of philosophy is what is the self? There have been different definitions and meanings across history, one being that it is the distinguishing mark of living things, as something that is the subject of emotional states and that is responsible for planning and practical thinking, and also as the bearer of such virtues as courage and justice (Lorenz, lines 9-10). We as humans may never contrive a valid answer to this question until we ourselves reach the point where our own individual souls are faced with the end of its life. Many philosophers have produced their own conclusions as to what the self is and how it functions in relation to our
Aristotle saw the relationship between the soul and the body to be one of unity; two different things that make one marvelous creation. Plato believed that the soul came into the body after it was conceived in order to capacitate and rule it. He also says that this action of fulfilling the physical body is a burden onto the soul and that we must spend our lives trying to liberate it. He argues that once the body dies, the soul is freed and let go so that it may be reincarnated for another body. This conclusion by Plato is not falsifiable because there is no way for a person to experience it without having to die and in turn have no way of reporting the findings. For Aristotle the soul isn’t placed inside of a body after the body is born or has arrived in the world. The soul is apart of our existence from the very beginning and cannot come from anywhere outside of the body, therefore making it one with the physical body. The death of a physical body is also the death of the soul according to Aristotle’s theory because the different skills that make the soul, which in turn fulfills a living creature, cannot simply disappear into thin air, as Plato suggests. So when faced with the question of the immortality of the soul he replied with “A soul is simply not the sort of thing could survive. How could my skills, my temper or my character survive me” (Barnes 67). Aristotle believed the soul made an individual unique, so if it was able to live on forever and be passed on from body to body then that would defy the individuality of people and what makes up our society. Therefore, until a theory that suggests that the soul does leave the body at the moment of death to live on, such as Plato’s, is proven we must rely on Aristotle’s theory of the unified soul in order to try to understand the relationship between soul and
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.
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...
The self represents the coherent whole resulting from the union of an individual's consciousness and unconsciousness. It is formed through a process referred to as 'individuation', within which the diverse aspects of personality are merged. Jung often depicted the self as a square, mandala, or circle.
Anil Ananthaswamy describes the self as the role the brain plays in our notions of self and existence. That our sense of self is layered, pulling information from
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
Melissa is more likely to be attracted to Aristotle’s basic orientation and his view on the soul. Melissa’s mind set leans more towards the scientific thought process when it comes to life and death. Like Aristotle her beliefs are more of the here and now. Making due with the reality put in front of them. Even though Melissa’s thoughts and beliefs mostly come with facts she still has some belief that there is something beyond the body that makes Matthew who he is, Matthew. But with that belief she also thinks without brain function there is no Matthew to save. It is a body with no ability to think and live. So like Aristotle she does think that there is a soul that is a part of our bodies. But without the ability to think then you are not living.
However, despite all of the analysis and vast literature on the topic of selfhood there are still no completely agreed upon definitions of the self. Several scholars argue that it can never be given one simple, consistent description. The majority of authors are inclined to avoid the ‘unanswerable’ question of what self is and their constructions are based more on implicit understandings than clear-cut descriptions. As with the idea of consciousness, the self is catalogued amid those notions that are
For Plato, the soul is considered to have three parts: the appetitive or the passions, the spirited part or the will, the reasonable part or the intellect. The appetitive deals with the bodily necessities and desires. The appetite is often considered base or even sinful, but is clearly not so for Aristotle: the passions merely demonstrate a person’s basic necessities, which one can not consider without considering the human person in the same way. The spirited part reacts to injustices or incorrectness in one’s surroundings, and it is often described as the “angry” part, as anger deal with perception of injustice as well. The reasonable part concerns itself with finding the truth and distinguishing it from falsities, and is often considered both the highest and hardest to perfect part of the soul. Each part has its own intricacies and specifics, allowing them to aid the human...
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.
Throughout the evolution of philosophic thought, there have been many different views on the relationship of mind and body. The great philosopher Plato and the Neoplatonists held the belief that man's body is merely a prison of his soul, but St. Augustine later refutes this with his idea of the disembodied soul. He distinguishes between the concept of the physical form and the spiritual soul, and he argues that humankind can be redeemed because of the God spirit contained in the intellectual soul. This intellectual soul is not an inseparable part of the body, as St. Thomas Aquinas postulates. Instead, this soul is indeed the higher part of man, the state and well-being of man depends upon its stability.
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.
Plato is writing the dialogue of a conversation being had prior to Socrates’ execution, and part of that argument is focused on how the soul is surely immortal. Socrates uses examples of opposites, and how one exists because of another, yet will not accept the other. This can be seen when Socrates speaks about the imperishable soul that would not accept death in the first paragraph on page 46. Plato records this dialogue
A self is some sort of inner being or principle, essential to, but not identical with, the person as whole. It is that in a person that thinks and feels. The self is usually conceived in philosophy as that which one refer to with the word “I”. It is that part or aspects of a person that accounts for personal identity through time. In spite of all the ways one can change with time, the self is invariably same through time. A self is what is supposed to account for the fact that an individual is same person today as he/she was at the age of five, given that all his characteristics have changed over time. For instance, compared to his childhood, this individual is stronger, taller, and smarter; he has different aspirations and dreams, different thoughts and fears, his interests and activities are remarkably different. Yet, he is still the same ...
The concept of the term “self” is a topic that has been analyzed for many years by many people. The self is the whole part of the being that contains the person. This is a very broad topic and although the term is simple it holds a vast amount if information. One of these people is a man by the name of Sigmund Freud. In the paper “The Dissection of the Psychical Personality” written by Freud, uses the term “Psychical Personality,” to explain the human thought processes, thinking and feelings that make up concept of “the self ” part of the person’s personality (Freud, The Dissection of the Psychical Personality, 2004, p. 70). The concept of the structural model of the psyche contains the Id, Ego and Superego, as developed by Freud tries to
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