Argument Analysis Of Phaedo By Plato

In the sections 64-67 of “Phaedo” by Plato from Athens provides argues why a person that has practiced philosophy should be pleased and hopeful when approaching death. The arguments are presented through a dialogue between Socrates and two characters (Cebes and Simmias) while imprisoned, as the three await for the recently ingested poison to take full effect. Plato provides support to the main argument through five points: first, a definition of death; second, matters that concern philosophers; third, an argument against the body through three sets of premises; fourth, an argument for the isolation of the soul; and fifth, clear criteria for the acquisition of wisdom. The passage ends with a hopeful recommendation after a dilemma is presented. …show more content…
The following are synthesised from the actual premises followed by their respective conclusion. Death exists. [1.] Death is the separation of body and soul. Philosophers are unconcerned with food and drink. Philosophers are unconcerned with sex. Philosophers are unconcerned with clothes, shoes, and bodily ornaments. Philosophers are unconcerned with the services of the body. [2.] Philosophers are concerned with the services of the soul. Sight and hearing are inaccurate and imprecise. Sight and hearing are deceptive. Other senses are inferior to sight and hearing. Other senses are deceptive. Senses are deceptive. Senses are experienced through the body. The body is deceptive. That which is deceptive is inadequate for the acquisition of wisdom. Therefore, [3.a.] the body is inadequate for the acquisition of wisdom. Through reasoning the soul will acquire wisdom. Being inadequate for the acquisition of wisdom, the body interferes with reasoning. Reasoning is improved for the soul when separated from the body. [4] The acquisition of wisdom will improve for the soul when separated from the body. Abstract concepts (e.g. Strength, Good, and Health) fail to be