The dialogues of Plato in five volumes, Vol. 2 (of 5) : $b Translated into English with analyses and introductions
Plato · en
[Sidenote: _The immortality of the soul._]
4. Modern philosophy is perplexed at this whole question, which is
sometimes fairly given up and handed over to the realm of faith. The
perplexity should not be forgotten by us when we attempt to submit the
Phaedo of Plato to the requirements of logic. For what idea can we form
of the soul when separated from the body? Or how can the soul be united
with the body and still be independent? Is the soul related to the body
as the ideal to the real, or as the whole to the parts, or as the subject
to the object, or as the cause to the effect, or as the end to the means?
Shall we say with Aristotle, that the soul is the entelechy or form of
an organized living body? or with Plato, that she has a life of her own?
Is the Pythagorean image of the harmony, or that of the monad, the truer
expression? Is the soul related to the body as sight to the eye, or as
the boatman to his boat? (Arist. de Anim. ii. 1, 11, 12.) And in another
state of being is the soul to be conceived of as vanishing into infinity,
hardly possessing an existence which she can call her own, as in the
pantheistic system of Spinoza? or as an individual informing another
body and entering into new relations, but retaining her own character?
(Cp. Gorgias, 524 B, C.) Or is the opposition of soul and body a mere
illusion, and the true self neither soul nor body, but the union of the
two in the ‘I’ which is above them? And is death the assertion of this
individuality in the higher nature, and the falling away into nothingness
of the lower? Or are we vainly attempting to pass the boundaries of human
thought? The body and the soul seem to be inseparable, not only in fact,
but in our conceptions of them; and any philosophy which too closely
unites them, or too widely separates them, either in this life or in
another, disturbs the balance of human nature. No thinker has perfectly
adjusted them, or been entirely consistent with himself in describing
their relation to one another. Nor can we wonder that Plato in the
infancy of human thought should have confused mythology and philosophy,
or have mistaken verbal arguments for real ones.
[Sidenote: _The immortality of the soul._]