In this paper I will discuss the Final Argument in Plato’s...

In this paper I will discuss the Final Argument in Plato’s Phaedo. In this argument Socrates concludes, â€Å"Then, Cebes, beyond question, the soul is immortal and imperishable, and our souls will truly exist in another world (Plato, 1689).† This argument may be the most convincing of his arguments about the afterlife, but the way in which he comes to his conclusion that the soul is immortal and indestructible is flawed, and because of this, I find that Plato’s final argument is not sound and lacking validity. I feel this argument is an unsound deductive argument. In order to show evidence of this, I will examine how Plato reached his conclusion. The best way to examine this would be to pick at the individual premises that Plato makes. An†¦show more content†¦Plato parallels the idea that a burning log possesses the form of heat, because it brought upon by fire, which must only admit the form of heat, to the idea that a living body possesses the form of life, because is brought upon by something by the soul, which must only admit the form of life, and never its opposite – form of death. At this point, premises one through five all seem to make sense. My biggest issue with the soundness of Plato’s final argument however falls between premises six through eight: P6. That which does not admit of death is immortal P7. The soul brings along the immortal P8. The immortal is indestructible. From Phaedo, Socrates argues that in being characterized by life, the soul is essentially immortal. I feel there an ambiguity here in what Plato describes as being immortal. In one sense, he could be describing immortal in the sense that: A. immortal means that it is impossible for a soul to exist and be dead. Or in another sense, he could mean: B. immortal means that it is impossible for a soul to be destroyed. His earlier premises provide evidence of (A), as he states that life is an essential property of the soul, so we will never have in our hands a soul that exists and is dead, just as we will never be able to hold fire in our hand that exists and is cold. He has provided enough evidence to state premises six and seven. But then in premise eight, he describes being immortal in sense (B). He has provided no