Simmias And Cebes In Plato's Phaedo
The purpose of this paper is to prove that Socrates is successful in replying to the objections of Simmias and Cebes in Plato’s Phaedo, and in proving the soul to be immortal.
Simmias’ objection basically challenges Socrates’ claim that the soul is immortal. Simmias inquires why the soul is not similar to a lyre and its harmony, the soul representing the harmony, and the body representing the lyre. Simmias points out the fact that when a lyre becomes old, the harmony suffers, and eventually ceases to exist (Phaedo, 82a). He claims this occurrence to be the same relationship as between the soul and the body. Socrates, however, is quick to prove Simmias incorrect. Socrates’ first claim is that the soul possesses knowledge at birth, and therefore the soul only recollects what is previously known. Simmias and …show more content…
Cebes both agree to this statement.
Therefore, Simmias must choose the case he prefers: that the soul recollects, or that the body and soul are comparable to a lyre and its harmony. Simmias selects the argument of recollection, realizing that a harmony can only exist if the lyre is created, and that a soul is previously created, and fills the body at birth. The second argument made by Socrates outlines the fact that in order for a harmony to exist, it must be perfectly attuned. Simmias, however, realizes that some souls are evil, while others are good. In a comparison of the soul to the harmony, some harmonies would be attuned, while others not attuned. If this were the case, a true harmony would not exist. The final argument Socrates makes describes that the lyre produces harmony. If the soul were in fact like a harmony, then the body would have full control over
the operation of the soul. However, Simmias realizes that the soul directs the body, not the inverse. Therefore, the three arguments prove the fact that the soul does not die with the body.
Cebes objection outlines the fact that he believes the soul to outlive many bodies, but eventually the soul will die with one particular body. He does not believe the soul to be immortal. Cebes uses the example of a weaver wearing out many cloaks before he dies, to compare the soul to wearing out many bodies before dying. His fundamental argument exists on the basis that the body our soul presently exists in may be the last. Socrates however, easily dismantles this claim. He explains to Cebes that the “mind should be the cause of all” (97c, Phaedo).
The last point brought up by Socrates is that all souls are pure. The fact that some lyres are perfectly attuned, and others are not, once again disproves the fact that the body and soul are similar to the lyre and it’s harmony. Therefore, from those deductions, it becomes clear that the soul does not immediately die with the body.
Simmias’ objection basically challenges Socrates’ claim that the soul is immortal. Simmias inquires why the soul is not similar to a lyre and its harmony, the soul representing the harmony, and the body representing the lyre. Simmias points out the fact that when a lyre becomes old, the harmony suffers, and eventually ceases to exist (Phaedo, 82a). He claims this occurrence to be the same relationship as between the soul and the body. Socrates, however, is quick to prove Simmias incorrect. Socrates’ first claim is that the soul possesses knowledge at birth, and therefore the soul only recollects what is previously known. Simmias and …show more content…
Cebes both agree to this statement.
Therefore, Simmias must choose the case he prefers: that the soul recollects, or that the body and soul are comparable to a lyre and its harmony. Simmias selects the argument of recollection, realizing that a harmony can only exist if the lyre is created, and that a soul is previously created, and fills the body at birth. The second argument made by Socrates outlines the fact that in order for a harmony to exist, it must be perfectly attuned. Simmias, however, realizes that some souls are evil, while others are good. In a comparison of the soul to the harmony, some harmonies would be attuned, while others not attuned. If this were the case, a true harmony would not exist. The final argument Socrates makes describes that the lyre produces harmony. If the soul were in fact like a harmony, then the body would have full control over
the operation of the soul. However, Simmias realizes that the soul directs the body, not the inverse. Therefore, the three arguments prove the fact that the soul does not die with the body.
Cebes objection outlines the fact that he believes the soul to outlive many bodies, but eventually the soul will die with one particular body. He does not believe the soul to be immortal. Cebes uses the example of a weaver wearing out many cloaks before he dies, to compare the soul to wearing out many bodies before dying. His fundamental argument exists on the basis that the body our soul presently exists in may be the last. Socrates however, easily dismantles this claim. He explains to Cebes that the “mind should be the cause of all” (97c, Phaedo).
The last point brought up by Socrates is that all souls are pure. The fact that some lyres are perfectly attuned, and others are not, once again disproves the fact that the body and soul are similar to the lyre and it’s harmony. Therefore, from those deductions, it becomes clear that the soul does not immediately die with the body.