Recollection. Socrates - Essay Example

Phaedo Essay. Recollection. Socrates Introduction In Phaedo, which the final dialogue that Socrates had, Plato details the views which Socrates had about the soul. His views perpetrate the dualism of the mind of body theory by placing forth an argument that shows that the mind, soul, and body are separate and that the soul existed before the body was formed. According to Socrates, the body acts as a prison confining the souls. In this state, the soul is limited in its quest to explore knowledge which is unchanging, unpredictable, and eternal. This is because when the soul is imprisoned within the body, it is forced to explore truth through the reception organs of the body which has its deficiency that prevents the soul from seeing what is real (Plato and Jowett 70). This article presents a critical response of the argument that Socrates puts forth for supporting his premise - since learning is a by-means of recollection, the soul must have existed separately before being joined to the body. Step in Socrates Argument Socrates shows that it is possible for the soul to exist before the body. He explains this through the theory of recollection. He bases his argument on the fact that it is possible for a person to give a correct answer when asked a question which he may not have had prior knowledge about the issue. This implies that people are born with some knowledge within them, and this means that the soul or the mind existed before birth. He illustrates this in a number of steps. First, he gives his opinion on how it would be wonderful if the soul is dissipated to nothingness in death. This is because death would be an eternal sleep undisturbed with worrying dreams; death would be a big blessing to humankind. But he argues that this is not the case. He illustrate that the soul is immortal existing before birth, and it continues to live even when the mortal body dies. He says that the belief in dispersion of the soul is a childish belief. He initially shows the immortality of the soul by outlining the cynical argument. He asserts that if it is true that the living originated from the dead, then it must be that the souls of people live in the other world. If they did not, then it would not be possible for them to be born again. He further gives examples of how opposite originates from the opposite (Plato and Jowett 71). For example, hot from cold, awake and asleep, up and down. One has to fall asleep in order to wake up, cold things can become hot and vice versa. This means that opposite must come from the opposites. This means that for the life to come from the dead there should be some aspect of life in the dead. He thus concludes that the dead are generated from the living through the process of death. The living, on the other hand, is generated from the dead through the process of birth. It is therefore prudent to conclude that the soul of the dead must exit somewhere when the person dies and they come back to the living when a new child is born. From this Socrates affirms his theory of learning through recollection. This is due to the fact that the soul has been reborn several times and has lived in this universe for many years; therefore, it has amassed a lot of knowledge. He concluded that all learning is just but recollection and no new knowledge is added to the mind since the soul knows it all. He further illustrates this through the use of the Mono slave boy who showed to have geometric knowledge even though they had not had this kind of learning before. He thus asserts that the body and soul are two separate entities. The body, he says, is mortal and after death is seen as the corpse. The soul, on the other hand, is divine, immortal and invisible; therefore, it outlasts the body. During the period when the soul is separated from the body (after death before rebirth), the soul is able to see life in its fullness without being limited by the body (Plato and Jowett 72). Socrates therefore sees death as a form of liberation which, for a philosophical mind, is a major blessing as he would be able to understand truth more clearly. Socrates last argument on the existence of soul before birth is based on the form. He asserts that the soul is immortal since it is the cause of life. Since the soul is life itself, any living thing must have the soul within it in order to be living. Since it is a form, it can never accept to take the shape of opposite the same way number three cannot become any other number. He therefore implies that whereas the body can take the opposite of being either dead or alive, the soul cannot change its form and is consistent in its state (Plato and Jowett 72). This implies that the soul is eternal and is the only aspect in a human that does not succumb to death. Criticism of Socrates’ Argument The concept that the changing from one opposite to another is unidirectional does not hold any truth. Take the example of youth and old age. It is natural for one to grow old slowly when one had youthful looks. But once one is old and wrinkled, it is not possible to get the youthful look again. Growing old has been a great force of nature that man hate. In this case, man has tried all means to reverse the process and have terribly failed. Even science being the solution of many problems has failed in doing this. All living things must age with advancement in age. There has been a research in biotechnology that plans to develop some anti-aging pills. However, this would only work when a person is still youthful without any signs of old age. This means that once a person gets old, it is not possible to get the youth back. Moreover, substances do not have opposites. In any case, even though it would be true that opposite arise from the opposite, this does not actually show that life comes from the union of the body and the soul which is said to be immortal. The theory does not explain this union. Moreover, even though the illustration with the Meno slaves showed that the souls may have existed before, it did not have evidence to show that the soul would continue to exist. Although it may be true that the soul may have existed in different lives before, there is not enough proof that it will exist in subsequent deaths. However, it proves that knowledge was gained before birth. But the fact that it was in existence before birth does not mean that it would not be dissolved in death. The recollection theory is not based on enough amount of evidence. To infer the existence of prior knowledge through induction - as it was done in the case with the Meno slaves - is not enough proof. The last premise that Socrates gives for his argument on the immortality of the soul is that it is the cause of life. Although this argument did not get opposition from the philosophers such as Cebes who participated in the dialogue, it does not mean that it is right. There is no proof that the soul is actually the source of life. How would we know whether life originates from another source? Unless there is evidence that show that soul is life itself, this theory cannot be taken as a true one. Socrates would respond to this criticism by saying that his argument gives a more plausible explanation of the mortality of the soul. He would ask me if I thought that there was another source of life other than the soul itself. Thus, I should offer some sound evidence to support the argument. Then, since I have not produced any plausible evidence to support my position, his argument would remain as the most practical one despite its existing flaws. In conclusion, the phenomenon of life and soul has been an area of philosophers’ concern in all ages. Socrates theory of learning through recollection is put forward to support the idea of duality in life. Socrates supports his argument through several thought out arguments for these premises. Although these arguments have been refuted by modern philosophers on several grounds, they have given a great insight on the separation of mind and soul. Work Cited Plato, and Benjamin Jowett. Phaedo. Fairfield USA: 1st World Library, 2008. Print. Read More