Socrates And Plato's Understanding Of The

Soul

Without question, Socrates and Plato were

among the greatest minds and philosophers of
all time, and their ideas and ways of thinking
have had a massive impact on western
philosophy and the world of the west in
general. Their conceptions of the soul are still
talked about and reviewed even to this day.
Socrates and Plato were close and had a
teacher-student bond, so it should come as no
surprise that they would have similar thinking
on the conception of the soul. In this essay, I
will be evaluating Socrates and Plato’s
understanding of the soul, how Socrates
makes the care of the soul the main focus, and
more.
Plato sees the soul and body as two different
things; he believed that the soul existed before
the body was alive and continues to exist after
death. He believes the soul has three parts,
which are appetite, spirit, and reason. Appetite
is the part that holds our desires for many
things, ranging from simple necessities like
food, water, sleep. It also contains the desire
for pleasures like sex and other pleasurable
things. Spirit is the part of the soul that holds
our sense of ambition to achieve the goals we
want to achieve. Think of it like the part that
makes you want to stand out or win at a
competition, so it should come as no surprise
that it is the part that values honor and winning
above most things. Reason’s description is in
the name; it is the intellectual part of the soul
which sought out the truth and regulated the
other two aspects of the soul, appetite, and
spirit. Plato says that it is imperative that
reason is in control of the soul because spirit
and appetite are only out for themselves. He
continues by saying it is important for the
reason to be in control because it is better to
live a life searching for the truth than seeking
the other parts’ desires.
Without question, Socrates and Plato were
among the greatest minds and philosophers of
all time, and their ideas and ways of thinking
have had a massive impact on western
philosophy and the world of the west in
general. Their conceptions of the soul are still
talked about and reviewed even to this day.
Socrates and Plato were close and had a
teacher-student bond, so it should come as no
surprise that they would have similar thinking
on the conception of the soul. In this essay, I
will be evaluating Socrates and Plato’s
understanding of the soul, how Socrates
makes the care of the soul the main focus, and
more.
Plato sees the soul and body as two different
things; he believed that the soul existed before
the body was alive and continues to exist after
death. He believes the soul has three parts,
which are appetite, spirit, and reason. Appetite
is the part that holds our desires for many
things, ranging from simple necessities like
food, water, sleep. It also contains the desire
for pleasures like sex and other pleasurable
things. Spirit is the part of the soul that holds
our sense of ambition to achieve the goals we
want to achieve. Think of it like the part that
makes you want to stand out or win at a
competition, so it should come as no surprise
that it is the part that values honor and winning
above most things. Reason’s description is in
the name; it is the intellectual part of the soul
which sought out the truth and regulated the
other two aspects of the soul, appetite, and
spirit. Plato says that it is imperative that
reason is in control of the soul because spirit
and appetite are only out for themselves. He
continues by saying it is important for the
reason to be in control because it is better to
live a life searching for the truth than seeking
the other parts’ desires.
Socrates builds up the idea of the soul, and it
offers life to the body. He accepts that the soul
is undying, while the body is merely mortal,
and that after the soul leaves the body at
death, the soul still mulls over certainties. He
says the body is only a substance to hold the
eternal soul. Socrates takes the spirit offering
life to the body to demonstrate that an animal’s
passing includes the proceeded with presence
of the soul being referred to, which continues
through a time of partition from body, and after
that profits to quicken another body in a
change which is the partner of the past
change, kicking the bucket. Socrates
expressly requests to the possibility that the
spirit animates the shape of a living thing. In
such a manner, the soul gives the life to the
body, and that makes the body and the spirit
reliant on one another, yet their striking
contrast uncovers that they are two unique
substances, which are joined in the body when
the spirit offers life to it. Socrates’ thinks the
primary focus should be to take care and
make the soul as healthy as it can be to
achieve happiness. Socrates says that we
should strive for excellence in all areas, even
things in caring for the soul. He thinks that
happiness lies in exercising all the soul’s
powers. That it is better to suffer from
wickedness than to commit it, and also
believes that materialism, pleasure-seeking,
and being unreflective damages the soul. He
thought that in the process of exercising all of
the soul’s powers, it would make someone
obtain moral excellence and make them a
good man. The way Socrates makes the care
and well-being of the centerpiece of his moral
and ethical philosophy is to try to make good
men. He wants the people of Athens to gain
the wisdom and virtue to make the correct
decisions as good men. This ties in with what
Socrates said about how an unexamined life is
not worth living. Goodness is related to
wisdom, making the life of the philosopher, the
admirer of intelligence, the most alluring
existence of all. If we don’t address ourselves
and the world, we will act without reason, unfit
to recognize great activities and awful
activities. Without theory, Socrates may
contend, people are no happier than
creatures. Easy street is one in which we
make both ourselves and people around us
more joyful and more content, and the best
way to seek after that life is to find after
astuteness and self-information. If Socrates
somehow happened to quit any pretense of
philosophizing, he would relinquish the
analyzed life, and without shrewdness or self-
learning, he would be in an ideal situation
dead.
As we already stated, Socrates mainly centers
on the concept of becoming a good man to get
virtue and make the right decisions. Even
though Plato views the soul in some different
ways, he does agree with Socrates on the
care and well-being of the soul. Plato’s view of
the soul in relation to ethics is his discussions
of justice. When Plato discussed justice, he
sees what a good man is and how he is made.
When he discusses justice, he doesn’t look at
the good of the individual as much as
Socrates, but he instead sees it as a way to
construct a city to produce a good man. I do
believe that Plato is right when he gives the
counterargument to Thrasymachus’ claim that
morality is only for losers and that being
immoral is much more beneficial.
Thrasymachus provides examples were being
an immoral person would be helpful; for
example, when a charity or church asks for
money, a moral person would give away all
they have with them, while an immoral person
would keep their money and not lose anything.
He says that being immoral has many more
benefits than a moral person in a variety of
situations. Plato’s counterargument to this is
that when the three parts of the soul come to
be in harmony with one another, resulting in a
just soul. After reaching this harmony, the
person will have enduring happiness, that this
happiness is unaffected by misfortunes or any
mishaps like it. Plato says that an immoral
person has the three aspects of the soul
clashing and creating a disharmony, that an
unjust life in unbalanced and will cause
psychological pain. He says that the unjust life
will provide temporary satisfaction, but never
allow true happiness and that a moral life will
provide true happiness, no matter the
misfortunes of life.
Socrates builds up the idea of the soul, and it
offers life to the body. He accepts that the soul
is undying, while the body is merely mortal,
and that after the soul leaves the body at
death, the soul still mulls over certainties. He
says the body is only a substance to hold the
eternal soul. Socrates takes the spirit offering
life to the body to demonstrate that an animal’s
passing includes the proceeded with presence
of the soul being referred to, which continues
through a time of partition from body, and after
that profits to quicken another body in a
change which is the partner of the past
change, kicking the bucket. Socrates
expressly requests to the possibility that the
spirit animates the shape of a living thing. In
such a manner, the soul gives the life to the
body, and that makes the body and the spirit
reliant on one another, yet their striking
contrast uncovers that they are two unique
substances, which are joined in the body when
the spirit offers life to it. Socrates’ thinks the
primary focus should be to take care and
make the soul as healthy as it can be to
achieve happiness. Socrates says that we
should strive for excellence in all areas, even
things in caring for the soul. He thinks that
happiness lies in exercising all the soul’s
powers. That it is better to suffer from
wickedness than to commit it, and also
believes that materialism, pleasure-seeking,
and being unreflective damages the soul. He
thought that in the process of exercising all of
the soul’s powers, it would make someone
obtain moral excellence and make them a
good man. The way Socrates makes the care
and well-being of the centerpiece of his moral
and ethical philosophy is to try to make good
men. He wants the people of Athens to gain
the wisdom and virtue to make the correct
decisions as good men. This ties in with what
Socrates said about how an unexamined life is
not worth living. Goodness is related to
wisdom, making the life of the philosopher, the
admirer of intelligence, the most alluring
existence of all. If we don’t address ourselves
and the world, we will act without reason, unfit
to recognize great activities and awful
activities. Without theory, Socrates may
contend, people are no happier than
creatures. Easy street is one in which we
make both ourselves and people around us
more joyful and more content, and the best
way to seek after that life is to find after
astuteness and self-information. If Socrates
somehow happened to quit any pretense of
philosophizing, he would relinquish the
analyzed life, and without shrewdness or self-
learning, he would be in an ideal situation
dead.
As we already stated, Socrates mainly centers
on the concept of becoming a good man to get
virtue and make the right decisions. Even
though Plato views the soul in some different
ways, he does agree with Socrates on the
care and well-being of the soul. Plato’s view of
the soul in relation to ethics is his discussions
of justice. When Plato discussed justice, he
sees what a good man is and how he is made.
When he discusses justice, he doesn’t look at
the good of the individual as much as
Socrates, but he instead sees it as a way to
construct a city to produce a good man. I do
believe that Plato is right when he gives the
counterargument to Thrasymachus’ claim that
morality is only for losers and that being
immoral is much more beneficial.
Thrasymachus provides examples were being
an immoral person would be helpful; for
example, when a charity or church asks for
money, a moral person would give away all
they have with them, while an immoral person
would keep their money and not lose anything.
He says that being immoral has many more
benefits than a moral person in a variety of
situations. Plato’s counterargument to this is
that when the three parts of the soul come to
be in harmony with one another, resulting in a
just soul. After reaching this harmony, the
person will have enduring happiness, that this
happiness is unaffected by misfortunes or any
mishaps like it. Plato says that an immoral
person has the three aspects of the soul
clashing and creating a disharmony, that an
unjust life in unbalanced and will cause
psychological pain. He says that the unjust life
will provide temporary satisfaction, but never
allow true happiness and that a moral life will
provide true happiness, no matter the
misfortunes of life.