Plato/Socrates & St. Augustine Essay

The realm of the conclude creation, according to Plato in his work Phaedo, is extrapolated by Socrates, that is, a worldly concern who is within reason also mustiness(prenominal) admit to the fundamental impartialitys regarding tone later death (the bandstand of Plato in this report will be disciplinen by Socrates as Phaedo was written to express Platos view bear witness through Socrates, so, henceforth, whenever Socrates is mentioned it is Platos perspective).That is to show, in Socrates translation of immortality, t here(predicate) remains the outlook that the tree trunk and the nous be not forevermore combined save the head is grounded in the tree trunk through emotions, and feral states of worldity. When the mind is released from such torpor, it wherefore(prenominal) reclines back into its old non-corporeal state to either rest, or to translate and reinvent itself in the world. The reason, according to Socrates, is that which is in us that com sympath etic raceds and it is the remains that serves. The hobby account will explore the nature of honest and atrocious as it is expressed through Plato/Socrates and Augustine. in that location will be examine and contrasting points on this issue.Augustine believes in the inwrought greatness of valet de chambreity therefrom, with the incorporation of the psyche as mentioned in Platos writing, it seems that both(prenominal) philosophers ar in agreement thus far about the nature of valet. There are however varying degrees of good and condemnable. In either philosopher it is not simply a question of good and nuisance precisely of reason in a man. It is reasong that leads to the choice of good or evil. Augustine believes for a reason able person, the pursuit of power would be a safe represention. However, one who served their cause passions would be apt to sin. By maintaining, Augustine suggests, a well managed ideology and conception of righteous value, the pursuit of p ower would be clean as viable an option as piety. Augustine intended to explain the principle kickoff of sin was, in fact, intention. Through his adaptation of the f solely of man, Augustine discerning numberized that the acts committed by ex and Eve, the eating of the apple, were not the actual sins but instead, the decision to eat the apple, and the commitment to the act was the point at which the sin occurred. However, with Platos writing, there is salvation for gentlemans gentleman. With the idea of redemption be in need, both philosophers are admitting the proneness that humanity has for evil. Plato suggests that the human brain is created out of divine will, and that anything created out of graven image is good.Thus, date St. Augustines intention tag humanity as evil, Platos thought marks them as capable of be good. Plato believes that the brain is the image of divinity in the head there is found an unending existence of transformation. The reasonable man mus t then birth the wave-particle duality of the consistency and soul, as well as accept their harmony he must distance the idea that the body and the soul are one. The body is mortal, and can succumb to dissolution, but according to Plato, the soul is indissoluble. Thus, according to Plato the human body is evil spot the soul is good making a dichotomy of good and evil and the capacity for to each one in each human.The body commands emotions, and its component part lies within those external circumstances, that is nature, but the soul, in Socrates view is above nature. The soul is a high self. As the introduction to Phaedo states, The human be alone has the sureness of truth and justice and love, which is the consciousness of God. And the soul adequate more conscious of these, becomes more conscious of her own immortality (23). The soul hinges upon the realization that she is immortal. In that consciousness, and in that state of being, there exists God, and all that is immo rtal and the goodness of humanity. Therefore, Socrates is trying to desexualize the perimeters of immortality, and the fact that a reasonable man cannot indubitably believe that the body and the soul will perish, but must in fact take credence to the soul quick at a higher level of existence, that is, at the level with God. Socrates is placing a belief system in his dialectic, and in so doing he goes into analyzing the existence of God, or the intangible being that is the divine. In Phaedo Socrates circulates his ideas about the immortality of the soul and the acceptance of this by the reasoning man on the basis of the symmetry that God portrays.By dimension, suffice it to say that God, in divine right, is perfect. It is in that nonesuch that man may find allusions to his reasoning, and by so doing, reason that since the soul is of God, then man himself is immortal, as Plato wrights, An evil God, or an indifferent God might project had the power but not the will, to cover us scarce is he is perfect, he must will that all rational beings should partake of that perfection which he himself is (23). lifespan after death then is a certainty on a airy level. On this argument in Phaedo, Cebes states, companionship is simply recollection, if true also necessarily implies a previous time in which we have learned now what we recollect. But this would be impossible unless our soul had been in some place before existing in the form of man here then is another proof of the souls immortality (Plato 60). Knowledge is something that is acquired through a previous experience. A reasoning man can deduce that because he is of a reasonable mind he gained acquaintance through previous experience. The idea of mutating and changing, and being in a semi-transcendental state while in ones body is something that is prevalent in Socrates philosophy.Augustine created this same fashion for a shift in the combine good and evil of the human body and the divine soul. By suggest ing that intent was the initiation of sin, rather than actions themselves, one would be able to absolve himself of sin by accept that he was binding a righteous path. Thus Augustines philosophy suggests, as Plato suggests that there is redemption for humanity. some(prenominal) philosophers then meet an agreement point by expressing the truth of the evil nature of humanity. Both philosophers agree that human nature is evil and it is only the soul which is found to be perfect(a) and by following that pure track of the soul/God, the evil nature, the body or intent, can be expiated. However, while Augustine admitted to redemption for humanity through following the soul he also verbalise that, apparently virtuous acts, like prayer, sacrifice, or the risk of ones life could in fact stem from vicious, self-regarding motives (Augustine).1This savvy called into question the root motivations of all people. However, look at the actions of another, one could not see these motivations, and therefore, could not place judgment on their righteousness or validity. It seems that as Augustine progressed in his philosophy he became more obscure as to whether or not humanity could be saved from their own evil intent because of their incapability of selflessness. Augustine spoke on this as well. There was no rational process by which one could value the actions of another other than ones personal reason. Reason, therefore would become the about important of the human virtues. Augustine felt that reason, in the mind of any man, could not be corrupted by the passions of evil or by the sinful motivations of others. Thus, the division point for each philosopher became whether or not humanity wanted to be good, as it were. Plato states that the soul is good and that every person has a soul and thus a pathway to goodness and God, while Augustine also admitted to their being a soul he suggests that the human race was too selfish to follow that pathway because their evil inten tions overruled their desire to be good.WORKS CITEDAugustine. Confessions. R.S. Pine-Coffin. Longman. New Impression Edition. 2005.Hundert, E.J. Augustine and the Sources of the carve up Self. Political Theory. 20 nary(prenominal) 1 (1992) 86-123Plato. Phaedo.