Aristotle’s understanding of the soul and body is more coherent than Plato’s - Discuss.
49 views 0 purchase
Course
G581 - A2 Philosophy of Religion
Institution
OCR
An A** 40-mark A-Level Philosophy essay comparing the coherency of Aristotle and Plato's contrasting views on the nature of the soul and body. From the Soul, Mind and Body topic within the OCR RS curriculum.
Written by an A-Level student who achieved an A* in A-Level Religious Studies (a.k.a Philo...
‘Aristotle’s understanding of the soul and body is more coherent
than Plato’s.’ Discuss. (40 marks)
Aristotle’s (384-322BC) philosophical views differ drastically from those of his
teacher, Plato. This is especially true in examining both of their beliefs regard-
ing the relationship between the soul and body. Aristotle’s hylomorphic view
that the soul is the form of the body and inseparable from it, is a result of his
emphasis on empiricism, thus it would be simpler to facilitate the argument
that Aristotle’s understanding is more coherent. However, though Plato’s dual-
ist beliefs surrounding the soul are a priori and based on his Doctrine of Two
Worlds, it could be argued that this does not necessarily mean that Plato’s
ideas lack explanation nor coherency.
A highly convincing argument for the statement is that Aristotle’s understand-
ing of the soul and body is far more coherent and comprehensible than Plato’s,
because it is based upon logic. Aristotle’s beliefs pertain to empiricism and thus
centre upon human experience. Naturally, therefore, Aristotle’s ideas can be
logically understood by humans, whereas Plato’s a priori ideas are less compre-
hensible. In ‘De Anima’, Aristotle explains his view of the soul using three illus-
trations, one of which is stamping a wax tablet, as the impression made cannot
be separated from the stamp, just as the soul cannot be separated from the
body. An axe is also illustrated to demonstrate how the soul is closely related
to purpose as the soul of an axe is chopping, and a dead eye is illustrated to
show that the soul does not live on after death, because an eye that is dead
can no longer fulfil its purpose of sight. This argument is therefore convincing
as Aristotle gives an intelligible, coherent explanation as to how how an imma-
terial thing such as a soul can be linked to a body. Furthermore, Plato can be
criticised for failing to do this, as Aristotle’s criticism of Plato’s dualism high-
lights the vagueness and incoherency of Plato’s beliefs. The World of Forms,
which Plato argues that the soul comes from and will return to after the physi-
cal death, is “nonsense talk” according to Aristotle, as it allows for there being
forms of trivial, unnecessary things such as colours. Moreover, Aristotle’s Third
Man argument shows that Plato does not address the fact that there are surely
forms of forms, which would lead to infinite regress. In contrast, the logicality
of Aristotle is only strengthened by Peter Geach, philosopher and Professor of
Logic, as he supports the Aristotelian belief that the body and soul are insepa-
rable, as he believes the body is essential in defining one’s identity, and that
the soul alone cannot represent the entire self.
However, a strong argument against the statement is that Plato’s understand-
ing of the soul being the real self, and the body being the “cause of wars and
factions and battles” (‘Phaedo’), is thoroughly evidenced and explained, thus it
is coherent despite being a priori. This can be seen through the notion of innate
ideas, evidenced by concepts like equality and justice, which humans have
never experienced yet can still understand and envision, thus ideas must exist
innately within humans, and come from the eternal World of Forms. This is sup-
ported by the mathematician Sir Roger Penrose, who argues that “whenever
the mind perceives a mathematical idea, it makes contact with Plato’s world of
mathematical concepts”, affirming that ideas like maths are innate and from
the World of Forms. This strengthens the argument as it shows that Plato’s du-
alist thought has evidence and even gives explanations for debated aspects of
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller hannahdobson. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $11.25. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
