We accept

Platos TAKE ON The Soul Beliefs Essay

Plato was a Greek philosopher. He previously many views on life and existence. Platos views on the mind body distinction have been the mark of several criticisms since his time. In the republic, he designed ideas on the allegory of the cave and the theory of the varieties. He believed our existence on earth was merely a shadow of an increased spiritual plane, our bodies only a vessel, or even looked upon as a cage trapping the soul and restricting it out of this higher plain. Plato was a dualist and so believed that when the materials body dies the heart lives on. Plato's views, are best described in his analogy of the cave in which it depicts a "prisoner" that escapes the cave - metaphorical because of this life- and goes on to find everything he once believed in was only a small percentage of the reality: - Plato's main beliefs stemmed from the cave and was about knowing the theory of the forms. Here, he thought that the spirit is a element and is also immortal, however the body- being physical- could be doubted as it was part of the empirical world.

On the one palm, Plato's ideas about the soul were revolutionary and extremely advanced for his time, much like almost all of Plato's philosophies, yet on the other hands they appear to be both self-conflicting and flawed.

Plato's idea of the heart and soul is his dualist position, believing that body and heart and soul are fundamentally particular. His theory on the soul was stated in his book Phaedrus. In it Plato was most worried about demonstrating the immortality of the heart and soul and its potential to survive physical death. He proposed the idea that, like Aristotle's idea of action, whatever is the source of its own motion or computer animation must be immortal. Plato was writing at a time in Greek school of thought where popular opinion assumed that the heart and soul didn't survive death, which it dispersed into nothing at all, like breathing or smoke cigarettes. Plato presumed that the heart must be immortal by the nature of being the foundation of its own animation, for it is only by way of a psyche that things can be living rather than deceased. The souls are both animated and at the same time the source of its animation. Plato also claims that the heart can be an intelligible and non-tangible article that cannot be damaged or dispersed, much like his ideas about forms of non-tangible realities; such as beauty or courage.

The discussion from affinity, as Plato posited in Phaedrus, areas that because the spirit is an unseen and intangible entity, instead of a sophisticated and tangible body; both must be different and split. Plato believed that which is composite must be divisible, smart and transient; and whatever is easy must be invisible, indivisible and immutable. Forms keep a resemblance to the simple, immutable entities, such as beauty; however a lovely painting is transient and palpable. Your body shows an affinity to the amalgamated naturally of its mortality and mutability; equally as the soul shows a similar affinity to immortality and indivisibleness. To help expand emphasise the idea, Plato creates ". . . when the soul investigates by itself it passes in to the realm of what is pure, ever before existing, immortal and unchanging". He argues that equally as the body's primary function is to understand the materials and transient world, the working of the heart as an entity of logical and self-reflective thought shows its affiliation with a straightforward and immutable world; showing that the two are different. However Plato does not explore the criticisms of the argument that just because an entity portrays an affiliation, does not necessarily want it to be as that which it affiliates.

Plato presumed that the heart, if it were to be the animator of most living things, must be responsible for a person s mental or internal activities and reactions. For the heart cannot be the reason behind life, yet at the same time limited in its influence over the bodies where it animates. However this gives one of the very most serious and potentially defeating criticisms of Plato's views on the soul. He fails to address the issue of the interrelationship between body and spirit, if they are indeed distinct. He doesnt point out if the spirit act as controller of the lifeless body, or will there be more to your body than simply the material. Additionally the argument from affiliation indicate that the body is concerned with the materials, composite world whilst the soul can be involved with the unseen and simple world. If this is actually the case then the soul cannot, pursuing from Plato's debate, have any relationship with the materials, bodily world; for then it ceases to be simple and immutable.

An debate from recollection, which Plato first put forward when speaking about his theory of the world of the varieties, also functions his theory of the heart. Perfect varieties, such as equality, are knowable a priori; we've no need for experience to tell us whether two lines are equal length. We must, therefore, know these exact things through recollection of the perfect varieties. Therefore, the heart and soul must have pre-existed your body to know these facts a priori.

Plato's argument from opposites was based on his idea that everything in the observable world comes with an opposite effect. As Plato writes in his work Phaedo; "If something smaller involves be it will result from something greater before, which became smaller". In other words everything we can know comes with an complete opposite; asleep and awake; hot and frigid. Similarly these are reversible, just as one goes from a state of sleeping to a state of being awake, you can do the contrary. Plato argued that if this were the case, then your same should apply to life and loss of life. Just as one can go from life to fatality, one must be able to go from fatality to life; of course, if this assertion is correct, then your soul must make it through this move and as a consequence own immortality and separation from the body. He believed that animation and life was important to the very notion of the heart and soul, just like high temperature is a part of hearth; thus it cannot be destroyed which is eternal.

A separate discussion from his theory of opposites was that of a similar theory of the forms and their opposites. He stated that no entity can contain contradictory forms, and thus one form must always are present and the other not in any particular entity. The number five cannot have both the form of even and unusual; by adding or subtracting one; the form of unusual is displaced by even. Plato had written: "so fire as the wintry approaches will either go away or be damaged; it will never project to say coldness and continue to be what it was, fireplace and chilly" The heart must share by means of life, for we know that those living have a heart and soul. Therefore, it cannot support the form of fatality also, for this would maintain direct issue of life. The soul must ontologically always are present, and must therefore be immortal.

Contemporary research of Plato's views on the heart and soul produces many criticisms; there's a clear chronological distress as his work progresses; with the heart starting as an unintelligible and non-tangible item, yet progressing to where in fact the soul becomes a complicated tripartite entity that is trapped in the material body, but still longing to go into the world of the forms. Plato shows a contradictory and muddled way of thinking that attempts to find resolutions for flaws in his thinking. The idea of an imperfect entity entering the perfect world of the varieties is one such logical fallacy in his discussion; and he does this by seeking to find reason and justification for his bottom line, alternatively than seeking a finish based on most of his own logic.

More than 7 000 students trust us to do their work
90% of customers place more than 5 orders with us
Special price $5 /page
Check the price
for your assignment