Comparing The Horses Of Reason In Socrates 'Phaedrus'

Balancing the Horses of Reason
In the Phaedrus, Socrates uses the metaphor of the winged chariot to describe the soul. In the metaphor, Socrates illustrates how the soul is made up of a charioteer and two winged horses, one white and the other black. Socrates then goes to describe each of the components by saying “To begin with, our driver is in charge of a pair of horses; second, one of his horses is beautiful and good and from stock of the same sort, while the other is the opposite and has the opposite sort of bloodline. This means that chariot-driving in our case is inevitably a painfully difficult business” (246b1-246b6). In this allegory each part of the chariot represents something; the charioteer represents reason, the white horse represents

rationality, and the black horse represents irrational passion. From this allegory, Socrates implies for one to find pure reason, one must be able to find a balance between both horses, and appealing to both sides.
To find a harmonic balance between both horses we need understand both of the horses. The first horse is the good, or white, horse. Socrates describes this horse as “his coat is white, his eyes are black, and he is a lover of honor with modesty and self-control; companion to true glory, he needs no whip, and is guided by verbal commands alone” (253D7-253E1). From this quote, the white horse listens to what the charioteer wants and is obedient to the charioteer’s commands. This can be seen in the example of the boy they love as the charioteer and white horse work together and hold themselves back from treating the boy improperly as they work against the black horses pull. From this example, we understand the charioteer, reason, can easily control the white horse, rationality, but with everyone also having a black horse in their chariot, simply only controlling the white horse is not enough to find pure reason.
Next we look at the characteristics of the black horse.

Socrates describes this horse by commenting on its “black skin, and bloodshot white eyes; companion to wild boasts and indecency, he is shaggy around the ears— deaf as a post— and just barely yields to horsewhip and goad combined” (253E3-256E6). This describes the black horse as an opposite for the white as it is deaf and not obedient to the charioteer. While looking at the example of the boy again, the black horse does not follow the white horse or charioteer, instead the black horse keeps pushing towards the boy so it can accomplish its own goal. This shows how the black horse’s irrationality is reckless. From this point Socrates would explain even though the black horse can be reckless it is still necessary. This again can be seen in the example of the boy as the black horse leads the white horse and the chariot to see the beauty of the boy closer. This closer beauty of the boy would have gone unseen without the irrationality and drive of the black horse. This demonstrates that not all irrationality can be bad. From this we understand that proper control of the black horse requires a deft and skillful charioteer because the irrational desires represented by the black horse can actually lead to motivation and drive for the charioteer.
Finally, we can understand the necessary components of pure reason from the chariot allegory. For the chariot to work in harmony, the charioteer needs to be able to harness and control both horses, but more importantly, the charioteer must also use the black horse to contribute to the sense of pure reason.
In conclusion, the chariot allegory is not just significant in its ability to break down the soul into three components, but is also a representation of harmonic function of reason between rationality and

irrationality.