Socrates was a great promoter of ethical values among the Athenians and genuinely believed that our inner beliefs and considerations comprise the core of human ethics. According to Plato, Socrates saved the souls of Athenians for decades through his public speeches and lectures. In particular, he showed Athenians the true direction towards ethical life. He would rather die than refuse his ideals of soul-saving: Men of Athens, I honor and love you; but I shall obey God rather than you, and while I have life and strength, I shall never cease from the practice and teaching of philosophy (Crooks 117).
These considerations by Socrates made Plato think that the only way to stop Socrates from further promoting his ethical ideals was to kill him. Athenians refused to acknowledge their moral weaknesses so deeply argued and so masterly disclosed by the great philosopher and moral teacher. Nonetheless, Socrates reacted to their trial and condemnation by stating that by killing him they would not harm him, but they would harm themselves. After all, by killing Socrates the Athens just showed ethical immaturity and moral weakness of the state and its people. This presents us with the valuable conclusion that is relevant to all times and peoples – the mightiness of the State is valueless providing it is not based on ethical and moral foundations (Gill 25-26).
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Evaluate the arguments for the immortality of the soul in the Phaedo".
Within dialectic discourse, Socrates pursues the ways of proving that the soul is immortal. Ultimately, he aims at the possibility of an afterlife wherein the soul dwells following death. To this end, Socrates forwards four arguments to prove that the soul is immortal.
His first assumption is the ‘cyclical argument which he explains by using his own method of opposites. This way he attempts to persuade others that the nature of forms is eternal while they do not change. While the soul is imperishable and gives us life, it should never die, he claims. The soul is therefore an opposite of mortal body prone to physical death “now if it be true that the living come from the dead, then our souls must exist in the other world, for if not, how could they have been born again?” (Plato). Further, he forwards the theory of recollection to argue that humans possess non-empirical knowledge. This implies that the soul exists prior to death and enables us to grasp that knowledge. His affinity argument is that mortal things differ from immoral ones. Thus, as an immortal substance the soul will live after a body’s decay. Eventually, Socrates refers to the form of life to argue that forms are static determining everything in the world. While the soul is within the form of life, it is eternal.
Further, Socrates comes to a conclusion that the virtuous man’s soul is immortal. His success of getting into the underworld will ultimately depend on how he lived his life. At that, Socrates shows that virtuous man does not fear death and does not take an earthly life as a paradise. Instead, virtuous man pursues truth and wisdom; thus, his soul will live forever in wealth and goodness.
At this point, Socrates holds that a ‘form’ is an as absolute beauty. He compares it to the soul that has its own form. Forms, he argues, do not have opposites, while the opposite of life is death. Just like form, the soul will never tolerate the opposite (death), and while the soul does not recognize death, it is immortal.
Given these arguments, Socrates confides himself in the immortality of human soul before his death, even though he knows that his listeners are ready to criticize his courageous remarks. Death does not upset him and he encourages others to share their concerns with him with respect to his arguments. Initially, Simmias claims that the soul is like a lyre being invisible and divine in its harmony. There is no harmony when there is no lyre, assuming that the soul fades way after one’s body dies. After there is no body, the soul will dissipate just like the lyre losing its harmony. However, Socrates objects to his argument stating that it contradicts the theory of recollection. The soul cannot be a part of an instrument as it existed long before the material body.
While voicing his objection to Socrates’ arguments, Cebes holds that admits the existence of the soul prior it gets into a body, though he rejects that the soul may exist after death. As well as this, Cebes acknowledges that a soul prevails over body as man’s better part. Socrates concludes with the following statement: “then, Cebes, beyond question, the soul is immortal and imperishable, and our souls will truly exist in another world. Once dead, man’s soul will go to Hades and be in the company often departed, better than those whom I leave behind” (Plato).
Within this comprehensive debate, Socrates does everything possible to explain a genuine perception of death by a philosopher. As a great philosopher, he strives to free the soul from the body and its needs. Thus, prior his death, Socrates is confident that the soul will survive death and remain immortal.
Argument from Opposites enables us to see the correlation between everything in the world. He explains that while life and death are the opposites, they pass through a perpetual cycle, and therefore death cannot be an ultimate end of living. Socrates further claims that true knowledge is about unchanging and eternal forms. He argues that people live because we they have souls. Thus, Socrates ultimately connects the soul to the form of life That concept suggests that the soul is intimately connected to the Form of Life. He eventually makes the soul eternal and immortal.
The theory of forms pursued by Socrates is central to explaining the immortality of the soul. The physical theory explains that we live in the unsatisfying world full of injustice. Thus, he refers to various forms like beauty ad justice to highlight the essence of forms in life. However, such approach seems ambiguous as the philosopher explains only abstract traits of forms.
Conclusion
Each Socrates’ argument related to the immortality of the soul serves its own function as the dialogue continues. The provided arguments assume that the soul after death involves intellect. The argument from affinity explicitly distinguishes the body and the soul. Socrates asserts that we should anticipate the fates for our souls depending on how we lived our lives.
Socrates revolutionized the cognition of the body and the soul. Thus he came with the notion of dualism assuming that the body and the soul are separate substances while their natures are different (Dannhauser 28).
- Crooks, J. “Socrates’ Last Words: Another Look at an Ancient Riddle” in Classical Quarterly, Vol. 48, No.1 (1998), pp.117-125.
- Dannhauser, W. Nietzsche’s View of Socrates. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1974.
- Gill, C. “The Death of Socrates” in Classical Quarterly, Vol. 23, No.1 (May, 1973), pp.25-28.
- Plato, Phaedo, Plato. Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 1 translated by Harold North Fowler; Introduction by W.R.M. Lamb. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London
