Introduction
The question of the existence of the soul and its fate after a person’s death occupies the minds of many philosophers. One of the dialogues introduced by Plato, “Phaedo”, contains his view of the soul, presenting it as indestructible and the opposite of death. The philosopher provides dialectical evidence to support his final argument that the soul is immortal. Even though the philosopher convincingly constructed his statements, one can challenge his claims by accepting different views on the critical properties of the soul.
Understanding the Concept of Forms
The understanding of Plato’s arguments builds on his concept of Forms presented in the Five Dialogues. Forms can be considered as ideas that indicate things: “It was agreed that each of the Forms existed and that other things acquired their name by having a share in them” (Plato 102b). That is, one can describe any objects through their relation to specific Forms. Their examples include Justice, Beauty, Warmth, and many other characteristics. The Form can be essential if it is always inherent in an object and accidental if it is not its constant attribute. At the same time, the philosopher believes that Forms cannot admit their contraries and should retreat from meeting them. He gives examples of the opposites of Hot inherent in fire and Cold, the characteristics of snow (Plato 102d-e). If the fire takes the Cold, its Form retreats and it dies, and if the snow accepts the fire and the Form of Hot, it will no longer be snow.
A Final Argument about the Soul’s Immortality
Further, Plato discusses the soul, arguing that it brings Life to the body and, therefore, Life is the Form of the soul. The opposite of Life is death, and the soul possessing an essential Form of Life cannot accept death – it must retreat or perish. However, since the soul cannot accept death, it is immortal and must leave at the approach of death, making it indestructible. Plato (105e) presents these arguments as follows:
Very well, what do we call that which does not admit death?
The deathless, he said.
Now the soul does not admit death? – No.
So the soul is deathless? – It is.
Thus, by adopting the concept of Forms and Life as Form for the soul as premises for the final argument, Plato proves that the soul is immortal and imperishable.
Challenging the Final Argument
One can challenge the arguments presented by Plato since one can question that Life is necessarily manifested as the Form of the soul. In particular, considering the idea of Cold and snow proposed by the philosopher, cold as Form is not tied only to snow but may be among other phenomena. Similarly, Life as a Form does not have to be attached to the soul, which casts doubt on the soul’s essence as a phenomenon that brings Life and is the opposite of death.
Plato’s Response and Its Evaluation
Plato could change this argument to debate and say that as snow necessarily refers to the cold, the soul will bring Life. One may doubt this response because the answer and the whole argument’s fairness about the soul’s immortality come from the adoption of Plato’s view of the soul as a living substance. If consider the soul from a different perspective, for example, as a person’s consciousness originating from experience, Plato’s arguments will not be so convincing.
Conclusion
Thus, Plato proposes the concept of Forms that give a particular characteristic to the phenomenon and bases his final argument on the soul’s immortality. He believes Life is the Form of the soul, and opposite Forms cannot admit and tolerate each other. Therefore, the soul cannot accept the opposite of Life – death and must be immortal and indestructible. However, his arguments can be challenged since Life can be a Form of other phenomena besides the soul. Moreover, Plato’s evidence may be challenged when accepting a different view of the soul and its essence.
Work Cited
Plato. Five Dialogues. Translated by George Grube, 2nd ed., Hackett Publishing Company, 2002.