Comparing Socrates Phaedo-A Quarrel Of Soul And Body

519 Words3 Pages

Phaedo- A Quarrel of Soul and Body
The Phaedo is a platonic dialogue that relates the conversation between Socrates and his friends on the day of his execution. Given the circumstances, the conversation naturally turns to questions concerning death the soul and the afterlife. The friends of Socrates are sad about his impending death but Socrates tells them that he is cheerful at the thought of death. In this argument, Simmias, a friend of Socrates, rises a fine argument which conflicts Socrates theory about soul, body, and death. Socrates claims to believe that soul is eternal and immortal; therefore it never dies. He then claims that body is just a carrier of soul and when body weakens and die, the soul remains. However, Simmias, who is also a philosopher put forwards the view that the soul is a harmony and the body is like instrument; Therefore, when the instrument (body) is weakened by illness or disease then the harmony would also perish. In response to Simmias' quarrel, Socrates presents two arguments which include the existence of the soul (harmony) before the body (instrument), and the soul's direct ability to control itself, unlike harmony which is controlled by the instrument. …show more content…

His argument is legitimate since it directly refers to Simmias theory of harmony and instrument. Simmias before said, that if the instrument of life which plays the attunement is weakened by illness or a disease, the attunement will be lost forever. However, Socrates claims that attunement was always there, even before the instrument was created which roughly translates to the soul existing way before human body ever coming to life. After listening to Socrates rebuttal, Simmias immediately surrenders. He understands that even though the instrument is broken, the harmony will always exist. Maybe in another form, but harmony exists and will continue to resonate