Journal Entry #1
Book IV 435d-445e seems to be Socrates’ argument about the three parts of the human soul and how the human soul with its three parts are parallel to the republic and the three different kinds of citizens. What I am interested in is the methods that Socrates implements to come to his conclusions. More specifically, I would like to talk about Socrates’ analogies that he uses to come to his conclusions.
Very interesting, to say the least, analogies that Socrates uses is physical actions to explain opposing parts of the soul working together(153). To begin his argument about a three part soul, Socrates first tries to explain that opposing parts of the soul can work together. To explain this conclusion, Socrates uses two analogies using physical actions. The first analogy is about a man who is standing still but moving his head and hands (153). He makes a reasonable conclusion that one could say that he is moving and still at the same time or part of him is moving and part of his is still. So, two opposing forces, moving and not moving, can explain one person. I agree with this completely. Then, Socrates goes on to a second analogy of a spinning top that is spinning and remaining in the same place at the same time. It is true that spinning tops can spin and stay in the same place but not for a long time. Socrates also talk about how the top is moving in a circular and linear motion at the same time. So, Socrates is using a top and a person moving his hand and head to explain that the soul can have two opposing parts that work together (153).
Using physical actions to explain how the soul works does not seem logical at all. No can really say that there is a relationship between how physical actions work and how the soul works. So, Socrates idea that the soul has three parts and two opposing parts of the soul can be working at the same time does not hold at all. I really cannot understand how someone would think to use physical actions as an...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document