Socrates is revered for his shifting of Greek philosophical thought from the contemplation of the nature of the universe, which occupied the philosophers before him, to the examination of human life and its problems. He was the first to study ethics as a science—that is, to study morality in a systematic, consistent manner.
Summary[ edit ] The dialogue is told from the perspective of one of Socrates' students, Phaedo of Eliswho was present at Socrates' death bed.
Phaedo relates the dialogue from that day to Echecratesa Pythagorean philosopher. Socrates offers four arguments for the soul's immortality: The Cyclical Argument, or Opposites Argument explains that Forms are eternal and unchanging, and as the soul always brings life, then it must not die, and is necessarily "imperishable".
As the body is mortal and is subject to physical death, the soul must be its indestructible opposite. Plato then suggests the analogy of fire and cold. If the form of cold is imperishable, and fire, its opposite, was within close proximity, it would have to withdraw intact as does the soul during death.
This could be likened to the idea of the opposite charges of magnets. The Theory of Recollection explains that we possess some non-empirical knowledge e. The Form of Equality at birth, implying the soul existed before birth to carry that knowledge.
Another account of the theory is found in Plato's Menoalthough in that case Socrates implies anamnesis previous knowledge of everything whereas he is not so bold in Phaedo. The Affinity Argument, explains that invisible, immortal, and incorporeal things are different from visible, mortal, and corporeal things.
Our soul is of the former, while our body is of the latter, so when our bodies die and decay, our soul will continue to live. The Argument from Form of Lifeor The Final Argument explains that the Forms, incorporeal and static entities, are the cause of all things in the world, and all things participate in Forms.
For example, beautiful things participate in the Form of Beauty; the number four participates in the Form of the Even, etc. The soul, by its very nature, participates in the Form of Life, which means the soul can never die.
Introductory conversation[ edit ] The scene is set in Phlius where Echecrates who, meeting Phaedo, asks for news about the last days of Socrates.
Phaedo explains why a delay occurred between his trial and his death, and describes the scene in a prison at Athens on the final day, naming those present. He tells how he had visited Socrates early in the morning with the others.
Socrates' wife Xanthippe was there, but was very distressed and Socrates asked that she be taken away. Socrates' relates how, bidden by a recurring dream to "make and cultivate music", he wrote a hymn and then began writing poetry based on Aesop's Fables.
Socrates then states " He asks, "Why do you say He says, "I too believe that the gods are our guardians, and that we men are a chattel of theirs". While the philosopher seeks always to rid himself of the body, and to focus solely on things concerning the soul, to commit suicide is prohibited as man is not sole possessor of his body.
For, as stated in the Phaedo: Body and soul are separate, then. The philosopher frees himself from the body because the body is an impediment to the attainment of truth. Did you ever reach them truths with any bodily sense?
Is the truth of them ever perceived through the bodily organs? Or rather, is not the nearest approach to the knowledge of their several natures made by him who so orders his intellectual vision as to have the most exact conception of the essence of each thing he considers?
In life, the rational and intelligent functions of the soul are restricted by bodily senses of pleasure, pain, sight, and sound. As the philosopher practices death his entire life, he should greet it amicably and not be discouraged upon its arrival, for, since the universe the Gods created for us in life is essentially "good," why would death be anything but a continuation of this goodness?
Death is a place where better and wiser Gods rule and where the most noble souls exist: This argument is often called the Cyclical Argument.Essay on Analysis of Socrates in Aristhphane´s Clouds and Plato´s Apology - With little more questioning he was being initiated and the Clouds were shown to him, and Socrates was telling him of the their properties and disproving the existence of the god Zeus (Clouds ).
The ethics of Socrates is briefly outlined. philosophy What one truly knows is the dictates of one's conscience or soul: these ideas form the philosophy of the Socratic Paradox.
Socrates' ethical intellectualism has an eudaemological character. Socrates presupposes reason is . The Phaedo is usually placed at the beginning of his “middle” period, which contains his own distinctive views about the nature of knowledge, reality, and the soul, as well as the implications of these views for human ethical and political life.
Socrates on the Concept of Soul Words Jan 29th, 2 Pages The argument comes from opposites; death is the opposite of life, and death comes from life and life comes from death.
In another way, the conception of soul that is in evidence in the Phaedo is significantly narrower than our concept of mind, in that the soul, as conceived of in this particular dialogue, is not, in fact, responsible.
Plato's Study Guide. Plato's REPUBLIC. BOOK I. 1: The Conversation with Cephalus Socrates concludes that the presence of injustice in a soul will always disrupt the potential for collective achievement. If there is any collective achievement, it must surely be due to the presence of justice, as when thieves band together to practice their. Socrates draws a distinction between those things that are immaterial, invisible, and immortal, and those things which are material, visible, and perishable. The body . Unlike most editing & proofreading services, we edit for everything: grammar, spelling, punctuation, idea flow, sentence structure, & more. Get started now!
Plato's Study Guide. Plato's REPUBLIC. BOOK I. 1: The Conversation with Cephalus Socrates concludes that the presence of injustice in a soul will always disrupt the potential for collective achievement.
If there is any collective achievement, it must surely be due to the presence of justice, as when thieves band together to practice their.