The Immortality of the Soul - Essay Example

?Topic: The Immortality of the Soul Order: 768341 Outline Thesis: The soul and the body are different. Upon death, the soul lives as an assurance of life after death predestined by God, the Creator of heaven and earth. This represents two beings; that is, the mortal being and the immortal being. The former is the body that perishes upon death while the latter is the soul that lives after death thus giving assurance of unending life after death. This is a purely theistic argument. The soul does not die but the body dies. 1. Abstract: Summary or overview of the paper 2. Introduction: An expository claim of immortality of the soul upon death 3. Arguments in support of the claim; A. The opposite argument B. The “theoretic argument of recollection” C. The “affinity argument” D. The argument is that relating to “form of life.” 4. Conclusion. Abstract The purpose of this paper is to provide readers with a critical thinking about Socrates’ presupposition of the “morality of the soul.” The paper is premised on the claim that human soul is separated from the body by death and this separation is affected by a philosopher’s practice of death. In discussing the relevancy of this paper four arguments shall be considered as stated by Plato’s phaedo. These include the opposite argument that the soul is divinely eternal as opposed to death, the “theoretical argument of recollection”, the affinity belief and the argument relating to “form of life. This paper reveals Plato’s absurd revelation of the end of a Socrates life but then the Socrates was encouraged with the assurance of life after death. This therefore forms the thesis claim of this paper wherein the author underscores the morality of the soul by looking at the effect of death on the mortal being and the assurance of life by the immortality person. The author concludes with support of the claim presented in this paper that the moral belief of living after death is a total assurance God’s predestined heavenly home. That once death comes, the physical being (“mortal person”) perishes but the spiritual being (the “immortal person”) lives. Introduction Life is a metaphor and the way it changes causes unwanted sensational end. This end is death. A person’s body is made up of three segments; that is, the body, soul and spirit. This composition is the mortal being. The body is physical composition which perishes by the catastrophic appearance of death. The spirit can never die and the assurance is that the soul that lives within the spirit shall continue to dwell in the spirit after death hence the immortality. Therefore, the Socrates were outraged by the death that takes away philosophers thus engineering them to explore more about the immortal being and its benefits. When a child is born, he thinks as a child and as that child progresses in life, he or she learns to be an adult. This does not matter whether the child would be a thinker or not but every person has a thought thinking attitude on his or her mind. It differs depending on your intellect and genetics (Weiss63). One school of thought argues that good thinking people should never perish but an opposing school of thought believe that there is no good person and therefore, whatever happens is absurdity. If this was the yardstick in measuring that lives and who doesn’t, then some class of people would not be considered useful. However, before God, every human creature is useful and important. It is your character and evasion which will determine your ultimate home; that is, hell or heaven. Whom man would consider useless, God considers him important (Weiss60). . This is a clear revelation why death does not distinguish. Good, bad, murderers, hypocrites and people of various sins face death. Death is a unifying factor to all by the justifiable end of life. This is what worried the Socrates until the revelation of the claim about life after death. The author takes a philosophical journey in analyzing this claim upon which the following arguments are premised in defense of this claim (Weiss66). The arguments A. The opposite argument. This opposite argument presupposes that the soul is divinely eternal, consistent and brings life to the mortal body. For this reason, it shouldn’t face death or perish. The fact that the soul lives in the body does not take away its immortality but it’s factual that the body is the facet of mortal being, and thus, should face death. In combing this argument Socrates gave the example of fire with cold. They related the soul to cold and mortal body to fire. Frede conclude with an example that if fire can disappear due to coldness, it doesn’t mean that cold has died with fire. No, the cold continues to live immortally and so, is body with the soul. The body can disappear by death but the soul will live after death within the spiritual being. The soul just withdraws from the mortal body and interconnects with the spirit upon death (Frede 1978). It should be remembered that at the time the Socrates were waiting for their execution in prison due their good moral teaching and the encouragement of people to think and appreciate living and why certain things are the way they are, they feared death and wondered why their mortal being would perish by death. Phaedo visited them and made an account of their experience. It was upon this encounter that the Socrates developed the moral thinking of life after death. They pondered and stated that body is just a component keeping the spirit and the soul out of which we possess the spiritual being and the physical being (Frede 38). The spiritual being is the invisible-unknown known that gave them assurance of immortal being. This life after death continues with the soul and spirit with the soul living in the spirit. The physical being is the human body that is claimed and affected by death. It feels the pain of dying and once death comes, the physical role of that person ends. They never wished to die but because it was predestined by God, they had to open the minds of their followers to have belief in the assurance of life after death according to Bostock’s literature (1986). Therefore, the living of the soul that dwells within the spirit is the opposite death that forms the basis of this argument. B. The “theoretic argument of recollection” Under this presupposition, the Socrates states that humans do possess non observational knowledge- somehow abstract where upon, the soul is created before a person is born and carries on that knowledge into the mortal body at birth. In this way, prior understanding by the soul about this “non-empirical Knowledge” of the mortal and immortal being is everything in life. It is therefore my considered understanding that the soul is often time with the creator during the creation process to take knowledge that would be useful after birth of a human being (Weiss 57). Therefore life starts at that point and when death robs such life, the soul cannot be left to die but to live within the spirit. Even though this has been opposed by the secular humanist as a fallacy of moral teachers, it remains true with the Socrates thinking and human metaphor. This was the time when the Socrates were bidding farewell to Phaedo. They stated that whoever loves philosophy cannot fear death but should take his life because of the assurance of “life after death.” It is God’s ultimate design to meet him because after death, the philosopher goes eternal. That is the reason why man should not kill himself for it only appear when God calls him home as observed by Rowe (1986). Besides we live as adopted children and ultimately go home after death where we are naturally predestined to live forever. You can never face the physical challenges of living. However, death comes after accomplishing the will and purpose for which you were created. It is not accidental though some would think so. Humans are God’s properties and God owns body components of the soul, mind, spirit and the physical realm although the body is separate from the soul. The body disputes truth but the soul and spirit will always feel the conviction when the body evades the truth. God is the author of everything and that is the reason supporting His separation and saving of the soul from the body upon death (Weiss 59). The soul is vested with knowledge and that knowledge is predestine to return to the creator upon death. Therefore, death is not bad although is feared. The rationale behind this is that at creation, the body is not with God and it comes after the design creation process has been accomplished and when death takes the body, then the soul and the spirit returns to the creator, hence an extension of the above opposite argument(Weiss 62). C. “the affinity argument” This is based on the belief that things which are immortal, incorporeal as well as invisible are different from corporeal, visible and mortal. In this case, the body is corporeal, visible and mortal while the soul is immortal, incorporeal and invisible. This is a clear distinction of the mortal being and immortal being. It is easy to know the body, physically see it, touch it and live it while as the soul cannot be seen or touched though felt within the physical being. When a person speaks, he who is speaking is the spirit; the struggles within the body in adhering to the truth and evading evil and accepting both, is the battle ground of the body is the soul and cannot be seen (Frede 40). Therefore the unseen emotions and feelings of the body is what make up the soul. God created the soul with supernatural wisdom that it distinguishes between good and evil. However, this soul lives within the spirit. Therefore as the mortal being is seen, the immortal being is unseen and their works is different. You cannot know the immortal being and upon death, the soul continues to live as the body decomposes. The affinity argument is all about the composition of the soul and the body observed byAppolloni (1996). D. The argument is that relating to “form of life.” Life is dynamic, it’s changing, and it has ultimate beginning and end like any other thing. If compared to beauty, beauty lasts for a specific period of time and thereafter, it perishes. It is within this form of body that the soul, beauty and all other components making up the mortal being lived and will one day disappear by the untimely death. However, the soul can never die even after death. Whereas by nature, the soul participates actively in the mortal life, it does not die by the eventful death (Weiss66). Furthermore, the fact that philosophers love wisdom and disprove bodily desires, it cannot be confused by the mortal being which perishes upon death. He lives there after and his actions while living will determine a philosopher’s ultimate destiny. Death comes as a purifying factor of the body-marred with a lot of physical infection. So, all these infections end with death and will never be felt at all justifying the argument that death should not be feared in any way. Death allows the noble soul to live without the emotional body infections that battles both the soul and the spirit. It is the mirror of hope, joy, gentleness, peace and love after death. These are the virtues attained by the soul after death per Morgan (2000). As the Socrates feared death, this assurance provided comfort and peace of mind as they prepared themselves for the guillotine Conclusion In conclusion, it is my considered findings that the above arguments are symbiotic. They all support the claim that there is the soul and the body and upon death, the soul lives as an assurance of life after death predestined by God, the Creator of heaven and earth. This is a purely theistic argument. The soul does not die but the body dies. Life is a metaphor and as it changes, it gives mankind different option of living and enjoying it. It presents at birth the body which coagulates with infections of the human mind thus making it impure but the soul will always live. However, it is also correct that at creation, the soul was vested with knowledge which lives in the spirit and can help humans distinguish between good and bad. When death comes, the soul is separated from the impure body and is interconnected with spirit hence making a new life after death. This is what distinguishes the mortal being from the immortal being. The mortal being is the body that lives until death takes it and decomposes completely without living. The Immortal being is the soul that gets out of the body upon death and dwells within the spirit, continuing life after death. Therefore, there is no fear of death because of this assurance. This claim was premised on four arguments and these include the “opposite argument” stating that the soul is divinely eternal as opposed to death, the “theoretical argument of recollection”- which presupposes that humans do possess non observational knowledge. The soul is created before a person is born and carries on that knowledge into the mortal body at birth. The affinity belief-based on the certainty that things which are immortal, incorporeal as well as invisible are different from corporeal, visible and mortal. In this case, the body is corporeal, visible and mortal while the soul is immortal, incorporeal and invisible. These arguments are correct. It is further my findings that this claim is a clear distinction of the mortal being and immortal being, and the argument relating to “form of life- Life is dynamic, it’s changing, and it has ultimate beginning and end like any other thing. If compared to beauty, beauty lasts for a specific period of time and thereafter, it perishes. It is within this form of body that the soul, beauty and all other components making up the mortal being lived and will one day disappear by the untimely death. Therefore, whereas the body can come to an end by death ending body life, the soul continues to live. It is also my finding that the unseen emotions and feelings of the body is what make up the soul. God created the soul with supernatural wisdom that it distinguishes between good and evil. However, this soul lives within the spirit. Therefore as the mortal being is seen, the immortal being is unseen and their works is different. You cannot know the immortal being and upon death, the soul continues to live as the body decomposes Works cited CJ, Rowe. Plato; Phaedo. Cambridge: Cambridge University press, 1993. D, Apolloni. "Plato's affirnity argument for the immortality of the soul." Journal of the History of Philosophy (1996): 5-32. D, Bostock. Plato's Phaedo. Oxford: Oxford University press, 1986. D, Frede. "The final proof of the immortality of the soul ." Plato Plato's Phaedo 102a-107a, volume 23 1978: 27-41. Ka, Morgan. Myth and Philosophy from the pre scorates. Cambridge: Cambridge university press, 2000. Weiss, R. "The right exchange." Journal of Ancient Philosophy (1987): 57-66. Read More