Plato And Aristotle's Connection Between The Soul And Soul

1795 Words4 Pages

How do we obtain our knowledge? Do we use our senses of touch, taste, hearing, smell and sight? This is a basic philosophical question that has been asked and elaborated upon by philosophers. Plato and Aristotle have formed their own opinions upon whether or not the senses can be trusted. In order to understand their ideas on the senses, first their philosophy on the connection between the soul and body must be examined. Plato states that the body and soul are separate, while Aristotle says they are one. Concerning the senses, Plato says they cannot be trusted and knowledge cannot be gained through them. Aristotle creates an opposing view, saying that the senses are essential to gaining knowledge and learning about the world.
Plato’s philosophy …show more content…

He uses his concepts of actuality and potentiality to explain the connection between the soul and body, as well as argues that each soul and body combination is unique and therefore the two must be one. A major aspect of Aristotle’s philosophy is the concept of potentiality and actuality. Matter, a thing that is not itself without form, is potentiality. Form, the essence that makes a thing (or matter) itself, is actuality. In order for a thing to fulfill its purpose, it must move from potentiality to actuality. (On the soul Bk.II) He states that the soul is the actuality of the body. (On the soul bk.II) He defines the body as having the potentiality of life and therefore it must be matter. Because form and matter are compliments and one cannot exist without the other, the soul must be the form because it fills the body, that had potentiality of life, with actual life. Through this reasoning the conclusion is made that the body and soul are connected and compliment each other. Contrasting to Plato, they seem to need to be together and they are not striving to be separate. Aristotle creates a concept that deals with classifying souls into categories. He defines the soul as “substance in the sense which corresponds to the definitive formula of a thing’s essence” and that it is the “essential whatness of a body of the character just assigned”. (On the soul book II) He has three …show more content…

He states that “It is impossible to attain any pure knowledge with the body” (P 66 e) This is because the physical senses, touching, smelling, seeing, hearing and tasting are deceiving (P 65 b). If you stick your hand in cold water until it becomes numb and put your hand into hot water afterwards the water would still feel cold and not hot, like the water actually is. Eyes can be deceiving as well. There are many optical illusions where objects look closer or farther away than they really are. There are mirages, like the illusion of a water pool in the desert that results from the sun and reflections. Plato says you cannot gain knowledge from the senses because they are deceiving and are “not clear, precise or accurate” (P 65 b). Plato also discusses the idea that the senses cannot grasp the reality of things. Plato uses the concept of forms, which are the real, original, immortal, perfect form of things like justice, good and truth. In the Phaedo he has Socrates have a conversation with Simmias, asking if he has ever seen the Beautiful, or the Good or the Just with his eyes, or if he has ever grasped them with any of his bodily senses. They conclude that the senses cannot grasp the reality of things and therefore pure knowledge and truth can never be

Show More
Related

  • Pre-Socratic Influences In Plato

    764 Words  | 2 Pages

    Therefore, many of the philosophers disagreed with each other and came up with very different answers for the same concepts. Plato also did not know the answers to all of the questions that arose in the pre-Socratic era. Plato decided to look back on the pre-Socratics era in particular at the philosophers Heraclitus and Parmenides. He agreed with Heraclitus who believed our world is constantly changing and with Parmenides who believed that the real world is not the same as the world of our experience. Plato chose to look at materialism and also his theory of Forms in a two-world setting in order to attempt to answer the questions of the universe. The two worlds Plato is talking about are: a world that is in constant flux (the world we live in) and a world that is ever-changing (the real world, otherwise known as Forms). Plato’s Forms distinguishes things that are real from things in our mind that we perceive as real. Plato also made the argument that reality is different than our worldly experience. Plato believed that material objects can imitate the forms because they have order, however, Aristotle’s disagreed. However, Aristotle thought that Plato’s concept of “participation” didn’t make sense. Aristotle believed that the world we live in is our reality and he argued that Plato’s idea of forms

    Read More

  • Plato's Doctrine of Recollection

    412 Words  | 1 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Immortalityality Of The Soul In The Meno

    1017 Words  | 3 Pages

    Therefore, through the soul, that has been born before being placed into a physical human body, the human has knowledge. As a result of the soul being immortal and knowing everything, Socrates ties that idea of immortality with the theory of recollection, which claims that our knowledge is inside of us because of the soul and it never learns anything new, only remembers, consequently, serving as an evidence that the soul is pre- existent. Socrates uses the knowledge of the soul to explain that there is no such thing as learning but instead there is discovery of the knowledge that one has and does, by himself, without receiving new information. However, most knowledge is forgotten at birth since we are born without knowing, for example, how to add, subtract,talk, etc. Nonetheless, the knowledge we have, has to be recollected with the help of a teacher. Socrates is able to prove this argument to a degree by using Meno’s slave, who had no prior knowledge of geometry before, as an example of how humans have the knowledge inside of them, through the soul, and they know everything but all they need are a sort of guidance to be able to “free” the knowledge they didn’t know they had inside them all this time. (Plato,

    Read More

  • Rene Descartes, Nagel And Plato's Approach To Understanding The Difference Between Soul And Soul

    931 Words  | 2 Pages

    The differences of mind and soul have intrigued mankind since the dawn of time, Rene Descartes, Thomas Nagel, and Plato have addressed the differences between mind and matter. Does the soul remain despite the demise of its material extension? Is the soul immaterial? Are bodies, but a mere extension of forms in the physical world? Descartes, Nagel, and Plato agree that the immaterial soul and the physical body are distinct entities.

    Read More

  • Aristotle's Theory Of The Soul

    702 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and The Matrix

    2260 Words  | 5 Pages

    ... middle of paper ... ... By examining Plato’s use of themes as well as a modern-day comparison to the allegory, one can best grasp the concept of knowledge and how the Sun and our senses guide our education. The concept of our knowledge being a result of our surroundings in the world, rather than a text book, is simply fascinating.

    Read More

  • Plato vs. Aristotle

    350 Words  | 1 Pages

    Our senses can correctly perceive the natural forms. Basically, reality became a debate between Plato's two worlds and Aristotle's single world reality. Secondly, Plato and Aristotle contrast in their view of what knowledge we possess at birth. Plato supports the doctrine of Innatism, which claims that we enter this world with prior knowledge. All people possess immortal souls; therefore, the knowledge acquired in one life can be transferred into the next reincarnation.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Descartes And Aristotle

    1509 Words  | 4 Pages

    For Descartes, these are mind and body, and for Plato they are body and soul. Aristotle, in contrast, believes in a singular being where both body and soul are connected. For myself, a Christian who believes in the existence of a life after death, Aristotle 's theory creates an obvious negation. While I could agree with the levels of the soul argument, I cannot agree with the body and soul being one and the same for the simple reason that I do not believe that when the body dies, everything dies. I believe something is left over. What that something is, where it goes and what its purpose is, I may not know for certain, but to believe otherwise would not create a better life for me. Believing the soul lives on beyond the body creates an inner desire to seek morality and goodness, and it is in that endeavor that one creates a “better” life. Similarly, it is intuition that leads me to reject Descartes ' argument because my best judgment would tell me not to believe that everything I know, all that I sense, is a figment of my mind. I cannot know if such a thing is true or false, but far too many questions are raised by such an explanation. For myself, neither Aristotle nor Descartes provide an adequate understanding into the nature of the

    Read More

  • Aristotle's Theory of the Soul in the De Anima

    645 Words  | 2 Pages

    Aristotle's Theory of the Soul in the De Anima centres on the kinds of souls possessed by different kinds of living things, distinguished by their different operations. He holds that the soul is the form, or essence of any living thing; that it is not a distinct substance from the body that it is in; that it is the possession of soul (of a specific kind) that makes an organism an organism at all, and thus that the notion of a body without a soul, or of a soul in the wrong kind of body, is simply unintelligible. Aristotle uses his familiar matter/form distinction to answer the question “What is soul?” he says that there are three sorts of substance which are matter, form and the compound of the matter and form. Aristotle is interested in compounds that are alive. These - plants and animals - are the things that have souls. Their souls are what make them living things. Aristotle also argues that the mind is immaterial, able to exist without the body, and immortal by “Saying that something has a soul just means that it is alive”

    Read More

  • Essay On Theaetetus

    1436 Words  | 3 Pages

    General ideas can be formed by the mind without the use of our senses or sensory organs. Senses are acquired at birth but, the essentials of knowledge, truth and being, is slowly and hardly gain through many years of education, experience, and reflection later on. We now know that we cannot get the essentials of knowledge, truth and being for perception itself. Therefore knowledge cannot be based on

    Read More

  • The Soul According to Plato, Aristotle, and Augustine

    1196 Words  | 3 Pages

    Plato believes the soul is an immortal separate entity that is entrapped in the body until one dies. The soul is what possess knowledge and remembers what was known from previous lifetimes. He illustrates this with the story of Socrates and the slave boy. With this, he showed that while the slave boy was an unschooled individual, he was still able to solve the problem of doubling a square. Plato attributes this accomplishment to the soul as remembering a previous encounter with an eternal knowledge.

    Read More

  • Plato's Arguments for Proving the Inmortality and Longevity of the Soul

    848 Words  | 2 Pages

    Plato argues for the immortality of the soul in the Phaedo. He provides 3 arguments for his theory, the arguments from opposites, recollection, and affinity. Each argument proposes an intriguing account for his claim that the soul must exist past death. His evidence and proposal for each account leave no room for counterarguments. Fellow philosophers like Simmias and Cebes provide two different counters for Plato’s claim, however he accurately disproves them by using his 3 arguments as rebuttal. Plato’s three arguments for the proving of the immortality and longevity of a soul provide clear and concise reasons to agree with his approach.

    Read More

  • Plato's Argument For The Immortality Of The Body And The Soul

    1047 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    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

  • Plato's Concept of the Body and Soul Distinction

    482 Words  | 1 Pages

    body, the mind and the soul. The body is the physical part of the body

    Read More

More about Plato And Aristotle's Connection Between The Soul And Soul

Open Document