Socrates and Plato in Phaedo

936 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Socrates views on 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. Socrates first argument is on the Theory of Opposites in which he discusses the nature of opposite things and beings. Socrates makes his claim that everything that is, comes from its opposite being. “If something smaller comes to be it will come from something larger before, which became smaller” (71a). What he is trying to explain is that something that is considered to be “smaller” requires it to once have been “larger” previously, so its size decreased in time. Just as large and small, Socrates compares the matter of life and death as being opposites in which the soul is what moves on. The issue with this reasoning is that unlike moving from opposites such as small to large or large to small, where an object may increase or decrease, life to death is not a reversible process. Life can move to death but it cannot reverse and move from death to life. Life cannot come from death, and though life is contrary to death it is not the contradicting opposite, and it cannot be considered to follow the Theory of Opposites. It is practically impossible for something to be alive and dead at the same time, so the soul that transfers from life to death it must be able to exist within the body or out of it. Socrates believes that th... ... middle of paper ... ...rms, life and death do not exist in peace but rather one is more dominant than the other. Socrates is unable to prove his argument that the soul is immortal through the theories of Opposites, Recollection, and Forms because he is unable to explain his reasoning to give a legitimate answer. Although he had given enough evidence to try and prove his point, the evidence given was not convincing enough. His idea often fell through when he tried to relate back to the theories because the possibility that the soul lives on forever leads to so many questions that all don’t necessarily have a reasonable answer or an answer at all, therefore Socrates idea that the soul is immortal is false. Works Cited "Phaedo, by Plato." : Phaedo. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Apr. 2014. Plato, and G. M. A. Grube. "Phaedo." Five Dialogues. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub., 2002. 93- 154. Print.

Show More
Related

  • Four Arguments Of Plato's Phaedo

    749 Words  | 2 Pages

    He views death as a separation of the soul from the body when the body and soul are together it is life. He believed this so powerfully, that he did not only fear death but welcomed it. Socrates believed that he had to live a life full and hope for death. He had to convince his disciples Cebes and Simmias to be okay with his death since they did not believe in his beliefs. Socrates believed that men were the property of the gods and stated, “it is gods who care for us, and for the gods, we human beings are among their belongings. Don't you think so?” (Phaedo, 62b). Cebes was in an agreement with Socrates on that argument. They both believed that if a man kills himself he will be punished. Cebes suggest that when the soul leaves a body, it may dissipate, no longer existing as one unit. However, Socrates argues that in favor of this myth, souls after death will eventually return to the world in other bodies. Everything that comes to come from its opposites that is explained in the first argument. Simmias then argues that destroying a body will destroy the soul in it. Cebes declares that there is no proof that the souls are immortal and suffer no negative effects after each death and rebirth. Socrates tries to convince his friends with the Argument of Opposites and the Theory of Forms. Socrates hopes that the theory of forms will help explain causation and proof of the

    Read More

  • To Accept or Not Accept Socrates’ Theory of Recollection as Sufficient Answer to Meno’s Paradox

    1008 Words  | 3 Pages

    Before addressing the fundamental issues of the Theory of Recollection, it is worth noting that Socrates never addresses the second half of Meno’s Paradox- assuming one has found what it is they are looking for, how is one to know they have found it if they do not know what they are looking for? There seems to lack a method for verifying one’s answer and if you cannot confirm that what you have found is in fact what you were looking for then inquiry seems to be never-ending. Although this is a discussion for another time, it does highlight an issue, which Socrates faces in the first part of the paradox, the part he addresses, which is the problem of circularity. Ironically, Socrates’ Theory of Recollection, which is used to overcome Meno’s Paradox, is subject to the criticism of being paradoxical. The claim that the soul is immortal and all knowing is necessary for his Theory of Recollection to be true, thus it is vital that Socrates be able prove the immortality of the soul. The issue of circularity arises when Socrates attempts to prove the immortality through the use of the slave boy. According to Socrates, if the slave boy can recall knowledge about geometry, a subject which he appears to know nothing about, then he has successfully proven the existence of an immortal and all knowing soul. Socrates seems to suggest that the knowledge the slave boy is able to recall is evidence of the immortality and all knowing nature of the soul, while also stating that the immortality and all knowing nature of the soul is the reason why learning is just recollection (Fraser). Therefore, his ability to recollect past information is based on the existence of the all knowing and immortal soul and the existence of this soul is based in the slav...

    Read More

  • Plato Paradox Of Recollection Essay

    1247 Words  | 3 Pages

    Tis theory consists of the following theses: (1) the soul is immortal (2) there is nothing which the soul has not learned; and (3) what humans call learning is actually recollecting. For Socrates, there is no difference between “learning” and recollecting. “As the whole of nature is akin, and the soul has learned everything, nothing prevents a man, after recalling one thing only – a process men call learning…” In more common words, knowledge is simply forgotten memories and learning is the process of remembering these ideas, by this man is able to recognize the true from the

    Read More

  • Plato Final Analysis

    685 Words  | 2 Pages

    Socrates argues in premise one that the form will never admit its opposite, which is accurate if the argument is true. He relates the soul here to other examples of opposites further validating premise one. One example involves fire and ice. Snow is always cold, and cannot admit the opposite of cold, heat, without withdrawing or disappearing completely; fire is always hot, and cannot admit of the opposite of hot, cold, with...

    Read More

  • Four Arguments For The World Of Life In Plato's Phaedo

    1217 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • The Immortalityality Of The Soul In The Meno

    1017 Words  | 3 Pages

    One of the problems in his argument is how he believes the soul cannot be taught anything because it knows all and just recollects prior knowledge, but then argues that virtue is a kind of knowledge and it can be taught. (Plato, 87c) This implies that Socrates believes that virtue can be taught to the soul and it’s not something that we are born with. His principal argument of the theory of recollection, tied with immortality of the soul contradicts his other idea that virtue can be taught since it is knowledge. This causes Socrates’ argument to become very questionable, and as a result, can create the following questions; How can virtue be taught to the soul if it’s supposed to know everything? If the soul actually knew everything, then it would know what virtue is. If it does not know everything, especially what virtue is, then does that imply that the soul is not immortal? Socrates agrees, in the beginning, with an idea that he heard wise people talk about in regards to the immortality of the soul. The idea is that the soul is immortal and can, at times, reborn but never destroyed. (Plato, 81b) When relating this idea to Socrates’ argument that the soul is eternal, therefore all knowing, and has been born multiple times, wouldn’t it have been able to know what virtue is, implying that it is part of our knowledge and it is something that we are all born with?

    Read More

  • Argument On The Immortal Soul

    1110 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the section The Idea of an Immortal Soul, James Rachels describes Socrates’ ideas of the immortal soul. According to Rachels, Socrates did not use any particular events, or established

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Socrates Theory Of Recollection

    392 Words  | 1 Pages

    Socrates' theory of recollection argues that all learning is recollection of prior knowledge acquired in a previous existence that we have simply forgotten. The theory maintains that the soul exists before birth and since our experiences began with our birth, we had to have this awareness before birth. Socrates states that since we can be reminded of one thing by another thing, we must have previous knowledge of the form and its qualities and since we begin to see and hear only at birth, our knowledge preexists that birth. Socrates is in essence arguing that the soul is immortal and lives on after the death of the body.

    Read More

  • Phaedo by Plato

    1041 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Socrates and Epicurus - Live Life Without Fear of Death

    2744 Words  | 6 Pages

    In order for this argument to be sound, however, the premises need to be true. The first premise immediately comes in to question because it appears to be a false dilemma. Socrates is asserting in his argument that there are only two avenues death might take, when in fact there could be other possibilities. For instance, couldn't death be an eternity of sta...

    Read More

  • Socrates Arguments On Immortality

    1137 Words  | 3 Pages

    First and foremost, Socrates believed that when a person dies the body is what seems to die while the soul continues to live and exist. Although many suggested that when the body dies the soul dies with it, Socrates provides numerous arguments to prove his point otherwise. The arguments that were presented consisted of The argument of Reincarnation, The argument of Opposites, The argument of Recollection, and The argument of Forms. The argument that was most convincing for me was that of the Argument of Forms because Socrates makes his most compelling arguments here and it’s the most effective. On the other hand, the argument that I saw to be the least convincing was that of the Argument of Recollection and Reincarnation because both arguments fail to fully support the idea of the soul being immortal.

    Read More

  • Argument Of Recollection

    1373 Words  | 3 Pages

    Socrates proposed three arguments that defended his reasoning that the soul was immortal and lived passed the death of the human body. The first argument that Socrates stated was the Argument

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Socrates's View On Death

    1013 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Meno's Paradox Analysis

    1396 Words  | 3 Pages

    Socrates goes on by referring to a Greek poet Pindar, to highlights the belief that the human soul is immortal and that every time “it comes to an end-that which is called death – and at another is born again” (81b). Thus, he concludes that given that the “soul has been born many times, and has seen all things both here and in the other world” (81d), then it must have acquired all knowledge possible already. Further, he adds that since the soul has indeed learned everything already, then there is no such thing as “seeking and learning [for they] are in fact nothing but recollection” (81d). To illustrate his point, Socrates uses a slave boy who most likely is very limited in his knowledge of things. He uses a process whereby he simply start by interrogating the boy and leading him to give his opinion on geometrical questions. He concludes that, the fact that the boy is able to answer positively, negatively or by a number to the questions asked, it must be that “his opinions were somewhere in him” (85c), and that “the spontaneous recovery of knowledge that is in him is recollection”

    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

More about Socrates and Plato in Phaedo

Open Document