What are the four arguments Socrates offers for the immortality of the soul?

The Phaedo gives us four different arguments for the immortality of the soul: The Argument from Opposites, the Theory of Recollection, the Argument from Affinity, and the final argument, given as a response to Cebes’ objection.

What is the central theme in the Phaedo dialogue?

Existence, Reality, and the Forms

Socrates’s primary goal in Phaedo is to prove the immortality of the soul, but in doing so he also meditates on the very nature of existence.

What is Socrates final argument in Phaedo?

The Phaedo’s final argument ends at 106e-107a with the conclusion ‘a soul is something immortal and indestructible, and our souls really will exist in Hades‘. It began at 95e, with some prolonged criticism of various wrong theories about how to explain coming into and going out of existence.

What is the Theory of recollection which Cebes and Socrates discuss in Phaedo?

The Theory of Recollection shows that the soul existed before birth, and the Argument from Opposites shows that it must have been born from out of death. Bearing in mind that the soul has to be re-born after it dies, Simmias and Cebes are forced to acknowledge that it must continue to exist after death.

What is the main point Socrates is trying to make in the Phaedo?

Socrates draws a distinction between those things that are immaterial, invisible, and immortal, and those things which are material, visible, and perishable. The body is of the second kind, whereas the soul is of the first kind. This would suggest that the soul ought to be immortal and survive death.

What argument is offered for the soul’s immortality?

The lecture focuses exclusively on one argument for the immortality of the soul from Plato’s Phaedo, namely, “the argument from simplicity.” Plato suggests that in order for something to be destroyed, it must have parts, that is, it must be possible to “take it apart.” Arguing that the soul is simple, that it does not …

Why is the theory of recollection wrong?

One of the flaws of Socrates view of the recollection theory of learning is that he says the soul has knowledge of absolute forms that can be recollected if asked the right questions, but it does not always seem to be the case with such abstract, nonmaterial forms such as beauty or justice.

What is Socrates argument regarding recollection and equality What is this supposed to demonstrate?

Socrates’ argument for theory of recollection and that one cannot acquire knowledge of absolute equality through empirical means does succeed despite some minor issues with it. Socrates first proves that there is no example of absolute equality in one’s own experience.

How does Socrates argue that knowledge is recollection is it a good argument?

Socrates affirms that the ability to recollect knowledge must prove a souls existence before the human form . Through recollection, a person can be reminded by something of another entity that is similar or dissimilar . Socrates gives the example of a lyre bringing to mind the image of the youth to which it belongs .

What is recollection in the Phaedo?

In Phaedo, Socrates introduces the Theory of Recollection as his second. argument for the immortality of the soul. Upon the acceptance of the theory, he argues. that the soul has necessarily existed before birth, and hence that it has a life span. separate from that of the body.

What is the relationship between recollection as a theory of learning and virtue?

While the theory that learning is recollection suggests that an essential basis for wisdom and virtue is innate, Socrates also reminds Meno that any such basis in nature would still require development through experience (89b).

What is the paradox of inquiry in the Meno?

The argument known as “Meno’s Paradox” can be reformulated as follows: If you know what you’re looking for, inquiry is unnecessary. If you don’t know what you’re looking for, inquiry is impossible. Therefore, inquiry is either unnecessary or impossible.

What kind of question is Meno asking in other words what is the nature of the question Meno asks?

The Meno is probably one of Plato’s earliest dialogues, with the conversation dateable to about 402 BCE. The dialogue begins with Meno asking Socrates whether virtue can be taught, and this question (along with the more fundamental question of what virtue is) occupies the two men for the entirety of the text.

What is Socrates response when Meno asks if virtue can be taught?

Socrates’ response: The ability to rule men is only good if the rule is just. But justice is only one of the virtues. So Meno has defined the general concept of virtue by identifying it with one specific kind of virtue.

What is the debater’s argument in the Meno?

So, (4): For all x, inquiry into x is impossible. A Debater’s Argument? The argument seems fallacious: we need only distinguish between two sense of ‘know’: know = know everything about know = know anything about If (2) is true, then (3) is false.

Adblock
detector