Phaedo is a dialogue by Plato, which explores the subject of the immortality of the soul. It contains Socrates’ reflections on life and death expressed in the conversation with his friends in the last hours before his death. One of the arguments for the immortality of the soul provided by Socrates is based on his belief in its divine nature, which allows the soul to outlast the mortal body.
Socrates starts to explain his argument with an exploration of the nature of the soul. The philosopher claims that composite entities are more likely to be split up, and ones which are non-composite and always remain the same are less likely to be scattered. Things that people can see and perceive are never in the same state, while immaterial entities are more stable. The body is an example of a visible and tangible entity, while the soul is not, and when it “passes into the realm of what is pure, ever-existing, immortal and unchanging, […] it always stays with it whenever it is by itself and can do so” (Plato, 1977, 79d). The soul is similar in its nature to the divine and is indissoluble, while the body is mortal and dissolves easily (Plato, 1977). Therefore, the soul continues to live when the body ceases to exist.
The second part of this argument refers to the conditions under which the soul reunites with the divine or is dragged back into mortal life. According to Socrates, if a person leads their life pursuing simple physical pleasures, their soul will not be able to free itself from its connection with the body. It will be forced to wander until it is imprisoned in the body again (Plato, 1977). Only the souls of philosophers and lovers of learning are able to break from this imprisonment and join the divine, pure, and uniform (Plato, 1977). Leading a virtuous life and studying philosophy is perceived as a way to immortality.
To this argument, Simmias, a friend of Socrates, objects that the soul can be perceived as a mixture of bodily elements. As an example, he uses the lyre, which is a physical object that produces musical harmony, and asks whether the harmony also dies when the lyre is destroyed. He claims that the soul is a mixture of harmonically combined physical elements and, therefore, is also destroyed at death (Plato, 1977). Socrates contradicts Simmias by proving that the soul is not the same as harmony and, therefore, his example is irrelevant.
Overall, Socrates’ argument for the immortality of the soul is strong and relies on a set of logical devices. Its main flaws are the lack of basis for his initial assumptions and the subjective nature of his reflections. Socrates claims that the soul is non-composite and is essentially unable to change, which is a suggestion that is hard to prove. Then, he divides the souls of people into inferior and superior, arguing that only the souls of educated and virtuous people are worthy of immortality, and inferior souls are destined to suffer (Plato, 1977). It is a subjective division that raises the question of who determines the criteria of worthiness and decides the destiny of the soul after death. Overall, although Socrates’ argument is strong and logical, it can be questioned and improved upon further reflection.
Reference
Plato. (1977). Phaedo (2nd ed.). Hackett Publishing.