Explain the First Three Arguments Socrates Gives for the Immortality of the Soul

...

Socrates then combines the argument from recollection with this argument from opposites to argue both that the soul is immaterial and intelligent (recollection) and that the soul is immortal (argument from opposites)[25]. When the cyclic argument from opposites is combined with argument from recollection it becomes an argument for the immortality of the soul that is fit for his philosophical purpose of liberating the soul from the body to allow it to perceive the forms and so become knowledgeable [26]

The Argument from Affinity

In response to his interlocutors fears that the soul will cease to exist at some point after the body’s death, Socrates presents the argument from affinity. Socrates points out a likeness of the soul to the invisible, unchanging and incomposite forms. Through analogy Socrates thinks it likely that the soul shares other features of the forms. Other likeness to the forms the soul is ascribed by Socrates are: divine, deathless and intelligible. Therefore, with this analogy Socrates establishes another argument for the immortality of the soul. Whether this argument adds strength to Socrates claim that the soul is intelligible and immortal and so to his overall philosophical purpose is debatable. [27]

Conclusion

In the Phaedo Plato puts forward arguments for the immortality of the soul in pursuit of his overall goal to give the philosopher the knowledge of a “king” allowing him to perceive the forms directly. The three arguments that have been discussed are the arguments from recollection the argument from opposites and the affinity argument. The first two arguments work together to establish an intellectual, immaterial, immortal soul which is required for his philosophical purpose mentioned above. The argument affinity adds to this philosophical purpose by once again attempting to establish that the soul is immortal.

Bibliography

Annas, J. Ancient philosophy: a very short introduction. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) pp 55-75

Bedu-Addo, J. T. “Sense-Experience and the Argument for Recollection in Plato's "Phaedo"”. Phronesis, 36 1 (1991), pp 27 - 60.

Dimas, P “Recollecting Forms in the Phaedo Phronesis” Phronesis, 48 (3) (2003), pp. 175-214

Elton M. ‘The Affinity Argument in Phaedo’, Phronesis, 42 (1997), pp 313-16 70C-72E 89B-107A

Franklin, Lee “Recollection and Philosophical Reflection in Plato's Phaedo”, Phronesis, 50 (4) (2005), pp 289-314

Gallop, D. The Phaedo Plato. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975) pp 1-226 78B-80D

Melling D.J Understanding Plato. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987) pp 55-73

Nehamas A. “Predication and Forms of Opposites in the "Phaedo" “ The Review of Metaphysics 26 (3) (1973), pp. 461-491

Robins I.N. “Recollection and Self-Understanding in the Phaedo” The Classical Quarterly 47 2 (1997), pp. 438-451

White F.C. “The Compresence of Opposites in Phaedo” The Classical Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 2 (1977), pp. 303-311

CEBES CLOAK ARGUMENT

---------------------------------------------------------------