Upload to Google Docs

In the sixth chapter of Plato: A Very Short Introduction, titled "My soul and myself," author Julia Annas, starts the chapter with defining the soul and the problems with it. She tells us in Greek thought, the soul is what causes the living thing to be alive. She challenges us to think of the relationship between the body and soul. Is the body live because of the wonders of the physical body or does something else control it like the soul? Who are we? Are we the body, the soul, or both? If we are the soul, how does it work and what happens to it when the body dies?

 These questions have been pondered from the beginning of time. Plato offers answers to these questions, but they lack consistency. He is consistent in that he believes in the model of dualism where the soul is separate from the body. Not only are they different, but they are radically different. He thinks he was the soul and when the body dies, he will still be alive utilizing the soul. As he reminded his friends on his deathbed, they would not be burying him, only his body. The inconsistencies lie in further questions of the soul. In his writings, sometimes the soul is simple other times complex, the soul sometimes controls the body other times its trap by it. Some scholars explain this inconsistency as the development of Plato's thought on this subject.

 In the Republic, Plato divides the soul into three parts. He tells us the body works together as a unified body, but the soul has three distinct parts or motivations. They are desire, reason, and passion. He uses an example of thirst to make his point. Desire is the part that addresses the immediate need, with the reason being the part that considers the consequence of treating this pressing need. The passion which he also calls spirit is the part that allows us to override desires without having a good reason for doing so, as in the example of a soldier's loyalty to his country. The good life is achieved when reason, the motivation which guides the whole soul, achieves success with the other parts. In Phaedrus, this is illustrated as a two-horse chariot whose driver is reason trying to control the chariot with one horse being cooperative (spirit) and the other rebellion (desire) dragging the whole chariot in the wrong direction.

In the Republic, Plato talks of the simple soul. This simplicity is based on the arguments that the soul is immortal, and if it's made up of multiple parts it's liable to be dissolved into those parts, and if something is liable to be terminated, it can't be immortal thus the soul is simple. The soul itself is simple, but the embodiment and association with the body explain the divisions and how the motivations can be in conflict.

 In some of Plato's passages, this contrast is described as the difference between the senses and the soul. Annas tells us the senses give us the information, but the soul is stimulated not just to receive it, but to process this information and reflect on it as well. Plato makes it clear through his passages the soul is what we know of as our mind and understanding. Another important point she brings up is the mind goes beyond the input the senses provide to include an independent part of the mind that opposes our sensory experience. This kind of thinking is what allows us to understand mathematics and is what Plato calls Forms.

In Phaedrus, the soul is said to be immortal because it's always in motion. The soul is supposed to be self-moving in that it moves and is the force that drives everything else. This self-moving idea is later developed by Aristotle which discusses living as well as non-living things and their sources of movement.

 In Plato's view, the soul is superior to the body, but the demands of the body make the soul a prisoner. In Phaedo, he tells us we should try to purify ourselves from the body, and one should understand philosophy correctly for when the body dies one can successfully escape the prison of the body. The evil entity brings the soul down to its incessant demands and death is a welcome release. This reasoning of a problematic relationship between body and soul is known as Platonic dualism. Annas writes that Plato makes things complicated by not telling where the distinguishing line between body and soul is drawn. Because this line shifts, the picture of the body-soul relationship is not clear.

 The soul survives the death of the body, but what happens to it? Plato is conflicted with this issue. At times, he describes post-mortem judgment as punishment for the wicked and rewards for the virtuous, at other times reincarnations give the present life as rewards from experience and consequences from a future encounter. These ideas of judgment on the way a person lived his life were essential to Plato. As with most of Plato's writings, we pull ideas from different dialogues and put them together to form our view. It's no different in regards to the soul. He sticks firmly with some points and gives us multiple options for others. With this abstract subject, it's a wonder that he was able to articulate this problematic topic the way he did in his dialogues.

Questions:

What is the purpose of the phrase ‘true nature,' when spoken regarding reconciling the soul's division of parts?

I see what Plato is saying about dualism. What do modern philosophers say about it?