For an old dead guy, Plato continues to have an influence on the modern thought. In his writing of Phaedo, Plato goes into great depths about life and the perspective of being and becoming. He describes “becoming” as flesh and the tangible aspects to humans, and “being” as the ever-lasting soul or spirit which belongs to each individual. To a degree I agree with Plato, but I have modifications to his analysis. When I think about “becoming” I think about the physical and tangible outcomes impacted by our development and personal growth over a life-span. I also think about becoming as physical evolution. Our “being” is the soul attached to individuals that remains static in its form, but continues to learn and gain knowledge throughout a life. …show more content…
Similar to Aristotle's Metaphysics I view the world as energy that is used for continuous motion and development. Although I do not know for certain of what caused the motion to begin, I presume that the big bang was an active ingredient which began evolution and life as we know it. Like Aristotle's billiard ball example, the energy formed from the big bang started a reaction similar to the movement of the ball. The law of inertia states that an object will preserve its velocity and direction so long as no force in its motion's direction acts on it (Newton's First Law of Motion). An object in motion stays in motion unless it is interrupted. As that motion continued on, reactions started occurring and evolutionary theory took place. Along with the evolution of Earth and our universe, ever lasting souls began forming and took hold of physical forms. However, the souls could not remain in the same flesh because the becoming is only temporary vessels built by weak matter, and the force caused by the motion of the universe provided energy for souls to enter into a new living organism. With that being said, our souls are strong matter physically, but they cannot continue on while holding the same identity from the past