Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Plato's view on immortality
Plato's arguments for immortality
Plato's idea on the immortality of the soul
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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 …show more content…
He argues that non-physical forms or ideas represent the most accurate reality. There exists a fundamental opposition between in the world like the object as a concrete, sensible object and the idea or concept of the objects. Forms are typically universal concepts. The world of appearance corresponds to the body. The world of truth corresponds with the soul. According to Plato, for any conceivable thing or property there is a corresponding Form, a perfect example of that or property is a tree, house, mountain, man, woman, Table and Chair, would all be examples of existing abstract perfect Ideas. Plato says that true and reliable knowledge rests only with those who can comprehend the true reality behind the world of everyday experience. In order to perceive the world of the Forms, individuals must undergo a difficult …show more content…
Our soul has already had to have these concepts before birth. Which brings him to believe the soul is capable of existing without the body, and so it is immortal. The next argument is called “the affinity” it simply reiterates that the world of the forms is superior to the world of senses. This argument is intended to establish only the probability of the soul’s continued existence after the death of the body. The soul is more like the world of forms. The body is the mortal part of us, the part that passes away. Which makes him believe the soul is divine. If the soul is freed from the pleasures of the body, it’s most likely to participate in the world of forms. The final argument, Cebes argument says the body might harm the soul, or cause it to be destroyed over time. Socrates responds by establishing the casual power of forms. Forms are “ideas” but are also causes of things in the world. This is because the properties of things only belong to objects in relation to the forms they represent. These forms never become opposites. The idea of tallness can never be the idea of the
He believes the soul is immortal. He uses Death as the separation of the body and soul to prove this argument. He also uses reincarnation and change as other arguments. The argument of Death begins when Socrates tells Celeb to tell Evenus to follow him.
He suggests that the physical substance (body) and mental substance (mind) are different in nature from each other. He believes that what we see could possibly be deceiving us and that this world might just be a dream.
... it’s just as possible that there’s a possibility that there is an afterlife as there is that there isn’t. He does not consider this problem. This is a very big point one should consider because for a lot of people, the possibility of an afterlife is what makes death a little less scary and shows that it can be a good thing. If there is an afterlife, this means that we never really die. We die in the physical sense that our bodies are no longer functioning, but in a way our consciousness still exists. We are “alive” even though we are dead. Suppose that the concept of immortality is the concept of living sometime, but never dying. Consider a living thing that goes into eternal suspended animation. It never dies, but this sort of immortality is hardly better than death. It is just like living forever, therefore it does not matter on the desirability of eternal life.
The 'doctrine of recollection' states that all true knowledge exists implicitly within us, and can be brought to consciousness - made explicit - by recollection. Using the Platonic concepts of 'Forms', 'particulars', 'knowledge' and 'true opinion', this essay explains what can or cannot be recollected, why all knowledge is based on recollection, and why the doctrine does not prove the soul to be immortal.
In Chapter 13 of Concerning the Soul, Avicenna argues that, because the soul is incorruptible, it does not die with the death of the body. He then presents two arguments to support the conclusion that, upon death, the soul does not die. It is my intent to explain the general structure of the “absolutely incorruptible” argument that Avicenna gives for the immortality of the soul, and to give a critical assessment of that argument.
Plato (in Phaedo) and Aristotle (in De Anima) present two fundamentally different conceptions of the soul. Through an analysis of their frameworks and genre, and whether their methods are plausible, it can be concluded that Aristotle's formulation of the soul is more compelling than that of Plato.
The main theme behind the "Phaedo" is Socrates' readiness and willingness to die, because of his belief of immortality. Socrates believed that when his body ceased to exist anymore, that his soul would leave and join that of the forms, where he would be eternally. Socrates believed so strongly in this, that not only did he not fear his death, he welcomed it. He believed that only when the soul separated from the body, is a person able to be truly enlightened and gain all knowledge. This "enlightenment" has been Socrates' life long goal of discovering the truth. Even at his hour of death, Socrates showed no hesitation. However, Socrates' friends did not believe so strongly, and took some great convincing by Socrates, to allow his friends to be okay with his death. The two proofs that Socrates used to convince his friends are the "Doctrine of Opposites" and the "simple and composite theory.
In the Phaedo Socrates claims that the soul is indeed immortal, that it lives forever and cannot die even after the body has died, thus philosophers spend their lives devaluing themselves from their body. Socrates presents the Theory of Recollection to persuade his fellow philosophers that have convened inside his cell that the soul is immortal. In essence, the recollection argument refers to the act of learning, because the soul is immortal, according to Socrates, then this suggests that when a person is learning something they are actually relearning it, because their soul has existed before they were born. This idea of recollecting knowledge is prominent and is the most convincing argument in proving the existence of immortality through the soul, however, this argument does not suggest that the soul continues to exist after death and lacks clarity regarding what truly happens after a person dies.
The argument of Forms was the most convincing in proving that the soul is immortal due to the explanation and examples that Socrates provides ...
Plato postulated that the mind was not dependent on the physical body of a person. Meaning that the mind (or soul) should be regarded as separate from the physical part of a person’s being. This proposal is the ground work from which Descartes would expand his theory of the mind. Descartes established that the mind and body were two distinct things. He stated that the mind is a thinking and non-extended thing and the body a non-thinking and extended entity. Furthering on this idea, he suggests that because the mind is not a tangible object and does not exist in three space the mind must be a quality of the body, just as all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. This connection is a contradiction because a square can only be a square if it is changed into a rectangle; the quality of the shape being a square is also gone. In contrast, a stone by itself can exist independently of all others without exact dimensions. For Descartes this meant that “God, if he chose, could create a world constituted by this stone all by itself, showing further that it is a subst...
According to Plato, his Theory of Forms states perfection only lives in the realm of thought. There only exists one of every ideal and the rest is just a copy. This one creation is called a form, the most flawless representation of an idea. In the physical world everything is a copy of these forms and all copies are imperfect. Plato believed in two worlds; the intelligible world and the illusionistic world. The intelligible world is where everything is unchanging and eternal. We can only grasp the intelligible world with our mind. It is the world of ideas and not senses. A place where there are perfect forms of the things we know on Earth. According to Plato everything in the world we live in is an illusion. All objects are only shadows of their true forms. His theory further states every group of objects that have the same defying properties must have an ideal form. For example, in the class of wine glasses there must be one in particular that is the ideal wine glass. All others would fall under this ideal form.
To Plato, the soul is a self mover that is not restricted to mortality. He also states that without the soul, the body would not be able to move; the soul is the provider of energy for movement in the body. Since the soul is a self mover, it is inherently a source of energy and life that depends on nothing else to exist; therefore, the soul is immortal.
In the Phaedo, Socrates is concerned about the soul. He wants to show how the soul is immortal and will survive after death. He does this through the opposites (Phaedo, 107-70d-72d) and the recollection (Phaedo, 111-73a-76c) arguments. While discussing recollection and opposites, Socrates introduces qualities (which turn into forms starting at Phaedo, 112-74a). In this paper, I will argue that Socrates’s forms fail for two reasons: he does not prove the existence of forms, and he does not sufficiently prove the existence of innate knowledge. Frist, this paper will go over Socrates’ opposites argument. Second, the argument of recollection. Then finally, it will show the failure of Socrates’ arguments that involve
We should not focus on pleasures of the body and only fulfill those that are necessary to live. The soul’s only desire is wisdom, which can only be achieved through the intellect and not through the deceitful senses. This can be illustrated by the fact that the true form of things such as justice, beauty and goodness can never be perceived through the senses. However, we are born with some sort of sense of what these things are, therefore there must be an ideal form which the things in the emperical world are somewhat equal to. Since the mind already has a sense of these forms when its born, the soul needs to be immortal. (102-104,
Still other dualists hold not that intellect and body are unmistakable ontologically, but our mentalistic lexicon cannot be diminished to a physicalistic lexicon. In this sort of dualism, intellect and body are conceptually particular, in spite of the fact that the marvels alluded to by mentalistic and physicalistic wording are coextensive. The taking after areas to begin with talk about dualism as elucidated by two of its essential shields, Plato and Descartes. This is taken after by extra contentions for and against dualism, with extraordinary accentuation on substance dualism, the verifiably most imperative and powerful adaptation of dualism. The essential source for Plato's sees on the supernatural status of the soul is the Phaedo, set on the last day of Socrates' life some time recently his self-administered execution. Plato (through the mouth of Socrates, his sensational persona) compares the body to a jail in which the soul is kept. While detained, the intellect is compelled to examine the truth by implies of the body and is unable (or extremely prevented) of obtaining information of the most elevated, unceasing, constant, and non-perceptible objects of information, the Shapes. Shapes are universals and speak to the substances of sensible