Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Plato and his theory about self
An evaluation of Aristotle's concept of the soul
Body mind dichotomy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Plato and his theory about self
One of the most profound scholars of all time, Plato, envisaged to have commenced his thoughts on Self from Socrates’ ideological doctrines on the concept of immortality. In the earlier writings of Socrates, Plato presents his well knitted conviction towards immortality of soul and gods with judicious words, judgmental and extremely thoughtful ideas. Aristotle’s concept of soul and self contradicts theory of Plato vindicating that soul does not have separate existence of its own. The essay is a theoretical understanding on what makes Aristotle’s theory of self as a manifestation of the soul and body as against Plato’s theory of the soul as a distinct identity which needs more consideration, food of thought and knowledge as contrast to body. …show more content…
Our physical features and soul works together to form what we are as human being. We think and act as our mind and our heart orders us to do so, but with the mind and heart, we also hear our inner voice which dictates us what is right or wrong and what we should do and what we should not. Any action when performed is considered as our self, in other words, physical aspect of our body. Our activities like Growth, Self nourishment, Decay, Movement and Rest, Perception and Intellect (“Aristotle on the Soul” 2) are all the functions of our soul. It is our soul that helps us to think rationally and makes us realize our own self, our own real potentials and an absence of any one may renders us into beast. Self is a realization of ourselves in a certain particular way which helps to nourish our natural talents and makes us understand our vices and virtues. puts forward that our emotions like anger, pity, love, courage and hate involve our body which is central to our self but are controlled by our soul. If we want to do something, we think about it, this thinking is a dictate of our soul while action is predominantly physical act of our body. Aristotle posits his view on the basis of Hylomorphism emphasizing the concept of body and soul being an embodiment of matter-formism (“Hylomorphism and Functionalism” 63). In other words, he formulates the soul as a “form of the body” which in turn is considered as a matter of the soul as our body is formed of the matter (Granger 5). His theory is based on the scientific reasoning related with the formation of the different facets of human bodies, nutrition aspects of plant moments and reasoning power of human beings. Each aspect of all these living things is a mathematical formulation that constitutes its different parts and relationship to each other. Aristotle’s rational justification and the practical
Aristotle 's great-souled man is not only an inaccurate depiction of greatness of soul, honour, perfect virtue and human excellence, but also a hypocritical, short-tempered and insensitive human being. Aristotle describes the great-souled man as being the ultimate person but as Fetter points out in Aristotle’s Great-Souled Man: The Limited Perfection of the Ethical Virtues, we see that there are many flaws in his account. This article looks at the contradictory statements being made about Aristotle’s great-souled man by loyal readers of his works, other philosophers and metaphysicians before Aristotle’s time who seem to have a sense for the worth of honour. We see that nearly all of Aristotle’s statements regarding the great-souled man can
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...
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
To achieve this topic, I have sectioned my paper into three main sections, in which I have subsections supporting. In the first section, I will provide much information about Aristotle and his beliefs in virtue and obtaining happiness. Using information from his book of ethics I will provide examples and quote on quote statements to support his views. In the second section, I will provide my agreements as to why I relate and very fond of Aristotle’s book of Nicomachean Ethics. In the third section, I will provide research as to why there are such objections to Aristotle’s book of ethics, and counter act as to why I disagree with them. Lastly I will conclude much of my and as well as Aristotle’s views on ethics and why I so strongly agree with this route of ethics for humans.
In conclusion, it remains that, even after being around for over 2000 years, Aristotle’s philosophy on human nature remains one of the most accurate questions to the eternal question of “what is human nature?” It may not, in the end, prove to be the correct answer to the question, in fact, it may very well be possible that there is no definite answer possible. But until scholars and students in programs such as ours can find a suitable replacement, his analysis will remain superior to all others.
...of the body, and no problem arises of how soul and body can be united into a substantial whole: ‘there is no need to investigate whether the soul and the body are one, any more than the wax and the shape, or in general the matter of each thing and that of which it is the matter; for while “one” and “being” are said in many ways, the primary [sense] is actuality’ (De anima 2.1, 12B6–9).Many twentieth-century philosophers have been looking for just such a via media between materialism and dualism, at least for the case of the human mind; and much scholarly attention has gone into asking whether Aristotle’s view can be aligned with one of the modern alternatives, or whether it offers something preferable to any of the modern alternatives, or whether it is so bound up with a falsified Aristotelian science that it must regretfully be dismissed as no longer a live option.
One of Aristotle’s conclusions in the first book of Nicomachean Ethics is that “human good turns out to be the soul’s activity that expresses virtue”(EN 1.7.1098a17). This conclusion can be explicated with Aristotle’s definitions and reasonings concerning good, activity of soul, and excellence through virtue; all with respect to happiness.
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.
...ence of the cognitive feature of the animal. For Aristotle the body and soul are not two separate elements, but they are of one thing. A body and a soul make a person. If a person has no soul, then that person is dead and it would only be a person by name. A thing that has a soul and is complete must be able to move and change. The soul dies with the body, and without the soul, the person is no more a person, but another inanimate object. One cannot exist without the other. With this concept of one not existing without the other, Aristotle leaves no room for there to be a possibility of immortality. Aristotle’s ideas of the soul and the body really formulate and combine both psychology and biology together, even though today many of his ideas have been proven wrong, for his time, they were very advanced with the research and materials that he was able to come by.
Socrates and Plato had a very distinct view on the human life and what constitutes a living of a “good life”-a life that would allow man access to the forms. Socrates was Plato’s teacher, and throughout much of Plato’s works, Socrates is the main character, who is ultimately the mouthpiece to express Plato’s ideas about life. These ideas were centralized around the idea of an immortal soul and one’s location of critical thinking and reasoning. Socrates and Plato believed that the soul was the home to reasoning and the body was a mere obstacle that hindered the pursuit of true knowledge. However, this theory may not be valid due to the knowledge that we possess today about the brain, senses, and biology of the human body.
...rts of the soul in order to find the function of human beings which is activity in accordance with reason. It is first in this function that men ought to be virtuous. It is thanks to the same distinction that Aristotle gives the different types of virtues. However while Aristotle dedicates most of his piece to the practical, active aspects of virtue it is necessary to keep in mind the virtues of the life of study which is reintroduced in the chapters 7 and 8 of book X. Thus what appears as a contradiction in these chapters is in fact a reminder and a justification of the honourable and divine aspect of the life of study which is necessary to reach complete happiness.
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.
Aristotle argued and disagreed with Plato’s views of the self and soul being a separate from the body. Aristotle’s view is that all humans have a soul, yet they cannot be separate from the body in which they reside. To him, there are four sections of the soul; the desiderative and vegetative parts on the irrational side are used to help one find what they are needing and the calculative and scientific parts on the rational side are
In the Phaedo, Plato introduced the theory of Ideas which centered on the problem of immortality of the soul, which suggested that true cannot be finding in the sensible world, but in the world of ideas. He talked about the knowledge of equality in the sense world in which it is impossible to have things that are equal. Things in the sense world might seem to be equal, but in reality it is not. Equality can only come from the mind and this equality is Ideas, which has always been in the mind and is unchangeable, universal, and eternal. He lays down that ideas such as beauty itself, goodness itself, and justice itself are itself when they partake in themselves. For example, beautiful object is beautiful because they partake in itself or all beautiful things are beauty by itself. This makes beauty exist forever and not like objects in the sense world which is temporary. He used these Ideas to use as his proof for the immorality of the soul. The body is like objects in the sense world, which is temporary and insignificant. These objects can change from hour to hour and from day to day. They are unreliable and useless. The soul, on the other hand, is in the Ideas world which is unchangeable, perfect and is forever. Just like beautiful thing partake of beauty by itself, the soul partake in the ideas of life which means that the soul li...
According to Hutchison (2015), “religion is symbolic patterns that consists of values, beliefs, behaviors and experiences” (p. 184). I personal conceptualize spirituality as a vital role in my life that helps me during a time of sickness, forgiveness, and needed guidance. Spirituality helps guide me throughout life during the difficult times I have encountered. Spirituality impacts my life in positive ways that influence and regulate my behavior and health. Health is very important to me; I believe the spirit can heal a person from their sickness. It seems that the spirit heals me every time I pray to be healed from sickness. The spirit gives me strength at a time of weakness. When I feel at my lowest point in life I call on the spirit to pick