Plato proves the tripartition of the soul in Republic IV by first defining what the three parts of the soul are. Reason, spirit, and appetite are the defining qualities of the soul. In order to better understand what he is talking about is easier to see it in your own human experience. What is happening when a person is hungry but refuses to eat. Why is this so? According to this theory, there are at least two desires acting simultaneously. One stems from the appetite, which is a natural reaction occurring in the body. Usually if a person is hungry they will feel motivated to eat something to satisfy their need. But it might be the case that the ‘reason’ part of the soul has the belief that eating should not be done. If reason rules, the connection between the appetitive desire and action conflict with each other. Reason overrides appetite. "Is there something in the soul of those who are thirsty but refuse to drink, something bidding them to drink and something different, something forbidding them, that
…show more content…
desire and aversion are opposite motions of the soul. The main point of this argument is what is called the principle of non-opposition “the same thing will not be willing to do or undergo opposites in the same respect, in relation to the same thing, at the same time” (436b8–9). Desire is something you want, and aversion is something you don’t. If someone is hungry, he has a desire to eat. If he thinks that eating is not in his best interest, he also has a motivation not to eat. If this desire and aversion are opposite forces, then given the principle about non-opposition, it follows that this desire and aversion are forces of different things conflicting in the person. Socrates concludes that the human psychology has at least two parts. The appetitive part of the soul has the desire, and the part of the soul that reasons has the
desire and aversion are opposite motions of the soul. The main point of this argument is what is called the principle of non-opposition “the same thing will not be willing to do or undergo opposites in the same respect, in relation to the same thing, at the same time” (436b8–9). Desire is something you want, and aversion is something you don’t. If someone is hungry, he has a desire to eat. If he thinks that eating is not in his best interest, he also has a motivation not to eat. If this desire and aversion are opposite forces, then given the principle about non-opposition, it follows that this desire and aversion are forces of different things conflicting in the person. Socrates concludes that the human psychology has at least two parts. The appetitive part of the soul has the desire, and the part of the soul that reasons has the