Paste your essay in here… Plato and Aristotle were renowned philosophers who left great impacts on this world through their teachings. Although both philosophers were very respected for their contributions to society in fields such as science, chemistry, and math, they both had contrasting views in regard to their philosophies surrounding the soul and the body. Plato felt that the soul and body were separate from one another. While Aristotle felt they were fused together and inseparable. What is a soul? Can it be seen, felt, experienced, grown, taken? These are common questions readers ponder over before reading about Plato and Aristotle and their own distinct views on what a soul is and its relationship to a body. Plato and Aristotle are seen as the fathers of philosophy when it comes to the topic of soul and body. While one played teacher while the other played pupil, this bond did not aid in their opposite beliefs regarding the soul and body. After thousands of years of comparison between these two philosophers, many people are still torn between which philosophy values are more robust. After careful examination of the material A Plato Reader: Eight Essential Dialogues, Reeve where the voice of Plato is interpreted through his pupil Socrates, and Nicomachean Ethics, Irwin who translates Aristotle’s views, I have come to the determination that I can relate to Plato’s teachings on what the soul and body is more than I could to how Aristotle discussed it.—be specific in saying how and why you relate more. List one or two reasons why in specific detail. I am certain that even if more knowledge is discovered to support each philosopher’s stand on the topic, that no one will ever truly be able to accept what happens to the soul and body until we move on from this life and experience this matter first hand.
The renowned philosopher Plato produced a rather unique view of what the soul was and how he analyzed it. He believed that the soul endured immortality and claimed that is was a common wonder among many people. According to C. Reeve, who edited the book A Plato Reader: Eight Essential Dialogues, suggests Plato said, “Have you ever sensed that our soul is immortal and never dies?” This quote can be considered to be a common questioned that has been asked among many people. What I believe Plato was doing when he asked the question was, he etched the possible answer to his audience within the question. Plato hinted that the soul was immortal within his question about whether the soul was immortal. Plato also thought that while linked to the body the soul inhabited, it would also learn and grow from the body’s experiences. Plato says, “The soul takes nothing with her to the next world but her education and her culture.” This quote can be interpreted as the soul not only being a female but rather that when the soul leaves the body to move on, it takes with it the education and culture that is learned and acquired while in the body. Plato portrays the soul as a host and the body to a vessel. The great philosopher states in Book IV of the Republic, the three parts of the soul as a reason, spirit, and appetite. Plato feels that the part of the reason is simplified to emotions, spirit is explained as irritation and anger, and appetite is as it is commonly associated for hunger or craving but in this case a hunger for gratification. Plato’s closing argument is simply put that the soul is still a soul without the body, yet without the soul, the body is nothing.
On the other hand, Aristotle came up with a rather compelling theory about the soul that was opposite to which his former teacher had considered it to be. Aristotle believes that the soul dies with the body and that it, the soul, is inseparable from the body. Aristotle compares the attachment of the soul to the body to an imprint on wax. He says, “We must no more ask whether the soul and body are one than ask whether the wax and the figure impressed on it are one”. I would better analyze his concept of how the soul operates to that of a car battery. The soul is like the battery of that to a car, when the battery dies, the car dies. Aristotle tells us that there are three degrees of the soul: nutritive- refereeing to plants, sensitive- all animals, rational- human beings. Furthermore, he proclaims that anything that grows and is able to recognize has a soul. He appears certain that the soul is not the body, but part of the body. Aristotle says, “The soul neither exists without a body nor is a body of some sort.” This statement can be interpreted to the soul is nothing without the body, and when the body dies, the soul dies.
The controversy of Plato’s and Aristotle’s beliefs on the soul will always oppose the other. It is impossible to determine which one is right or wrong because no one who has experienced either is alive to tell anyone about it. Through my beliefs and understanding, I was swayed more toward how Plato believes the soul is immortal. Comparing this principle to what Aristotle believes, then not only would a rotting corpse be stuck in the ground after death, but a soul as well. More importantly, the most distinctive difference between both philosophers’ views on the soul is how they each believe it is broken up. Even though they both can agree the soul is connected to a sense of three, Plato strongly thinks it is into three parts while Aristotle thinks it is three types of souls altogether. The two renowned philosophers also share the same beliefs that the soul exists and that has some connection to the world we live in as well as the body. Additionally, they both believe that the soul dies whether in the body (Plato) or as the body (Aristotle). The greatest distinction between Aristotle and Plato when arguing about the concept of the soul is that Plato sees the soul to be in the body while Aristotle’s concept is that the soul is the body.
Plato and Aristotle both have compelling views about why their philosophy on the soul is justified over the other; however, because of my beliefs on what the soul is due to a religious background. I agree with what Plato argues about what the soul is and what happens to it after death. It is interesting to have learned that there was a coloration between Plato’s view on the soul being split into three parts and how there are similar tenses with how religion ties a spirit into the Trinity, one being the spirit, or a soul. What makes Plato’s argument about the soul so strong is that it makes the most logical sense to me. Plato talks about how what someone does throughout their life affects their soul and how it will be upon death. “For all good and evil, whether in the body or in human nature, originates in the soul, and overflows from thence, as from the head into the eyes” (Plato-The Apology, Reeve, 2012).
Plato believes in the concept of dualism when he refers to the human soul and body. He ensures he explains that the material portion is the physical body, while the immaterial is the soul and it’s three parts. He further explains how the body is a vessel for the soul, according to Reeve, he compares the body to a tomb, “The body is the tomb of the soul”. Plato’s greatest argument about the body is that it is nothing but flesh without the soul. The soul is life to the body like a battery is a power to a car. Plato links the three parts of the soul to three parts of the body. The first is rational, Plato believes that the rational equivalent in the body is the mind. The second is spirited, Plato’s beliefs would indicate that the human heart is the corresponding part. Lastly the appetite, which with no confusion, compares to the stomach and the bodies hunger.