I think you are using the wrong translation.
Socrates says:
“… when death attacks the human being, the mortal part of him dies, it seems, whereas the immortal part departs intact and undestroyed, and is gone, having retreated from death […] And so, more surely than anything, Cebes, soul is immortal and imperishable, and all our souls really will exist in Hades” 106e -107a
Cebes replies :
“For my part, Socrates, I’ve nothing else to say against this, nor can I doubt the arguments in any way”. 107a
Simmias agrees, but still has some doubts:
“… I’m compelled still to keep some doubt in my mind about what has been said” 107b
Socrates has the final word:
“As it is, however, since the soul is evidently immortal, it could have no means of safety or of escaping evils, other than becoming both as good and as wise as possible”
Concerning the myth he tells of Hades, Socrates says:
“… since the soul turns out to be immortal, I think that for someone who believes this to be so it is both fitting and worth the risk – for fair is the risk – to insist that either what I have said or something like it is true concerning our souls and their dwelling places” 114d
For some strange reason you keep leaving out "However, since the soul turns out to be immortal". — Apollodorus
I think you got it all wrong. As I said, I'm here to learn. — Apollodorus
we must follow the argument wherever, like a wind, it may lead us (Republic 394d)
we must follow the argument wherever, like a wind, it may lead us (Republic 394d) — Fooloso4
To say "Socrates says 'one must chant such things to oneself' (Phaedo 114d), therefore he indicates that he is telling myths or lies" is not really rational, evidence-based argument. — Apollodorus
...we must follow the argument wherever, like a wind, it may lead us (Republic 394d)
The second allows the dialogues to open up, to give a view of a complex terrain of interrelated questions and problems, or in some cases leading the reader into a labyrinth, and in all cases aporia. — Fooloso4
Immediately following this story Socrates says:
No sensible man would insist that these things are as I have described them, but I think it is fitting for a man to risk the belief—for the risk is a noble one—that this, or something like this, is true about our souls and their dwelling places … (114d)
Myths do not reveal the truth. And yet Socrates tells them myths. They are not a substitute for arguments, but argument has its limits. Simmias was not fully convinced by Socrates’ arguments. He was no longer distrustful of the arguments, but still has some lingering distrust within himself. (107b) Throughout the dialogue Socrates has referred to myth as a means of self-persuasion. Here again he says that one should “sing incantations to himself, over and over again”(114d)
....
Socrates seems to have persuaded himself and wants to persuade others that what is best is to be persuaded that what is is best. — Fooloso4
Socrates says 'one must chant such things to oneself' — Apollodorus
I think that's a reference to 'mantrayana', repetition of a sacred word of phrase — Wayfarer
“ 'Greece is a large country, Cebes, which has good men in it, I suppose; and there are many foreign races too. You must ransack all of them in search of such a singer, sparing neither money nor toil, because there isn’t anything more necessary on which to spend your money. And you yourselves must search too, along with one another; you may not easily find anyone more capable of doing this than yourselves.' “(78a)
I have already discussed Plato's use of myths. — Fooloso4
It is about your claim that Socrates at 114d is telling his friends that "one should “sing incantations to himself, over and over again”, which is not true. — Apollodorus
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0170%3Atext%3DPhaedo%3Apage%3D114... and he ought to repeat such things to himself as if they were magic charms ...
mythos can perfectly well mean "story" — Apollodorus
which is the reason why I have been lengthening out the story so long.
It is a direct quote. Here's another translation:
... and he ought to repeat such things to himself as if they were magic charms ... — Fooloso4
Isn't it just as plausible to say that the soul, which is immortal, is withdrawn from the body at death, meaning that, the body is what perishes? — Wayfarer
In their Introduction, Sedley & Long say:
“… in this concluding moment Socrates and his companions are in no doubt as to what it amounts to: soul must leave the body and go to Hades.” — Apollodorus
The main proof now ensues at 105c - d. Another member of the same class is soul: it always imports life to what it occupies, and is itself incapable of being dead. This is already enough to show that it is “deathless” or “immortal” (105e), in the strong sense that its death is as impossible as an even trio or a hot snowball …
The point of the argument’s continuation at 105e - 107a … is to establish a strictly supplementary point, one that at last puts to work the ‘retreat or perish’ principle … the snowball can (a) retreat from the heat or (b) stay and melt, but cannot (c) stay and become a hot snowball.
Soul, however, is a special exception. If upon the approach of death it were (b) to perish, it would also (c) take on the opposite property to the one it bears, that is, become a dead soul. Therefore in the special case of soul, perishing is ruled out, and on the approach of death there is only one thing left for it to do: it retreats …
So "again and again" is not in the Greek text! — Apollodorus
The text simply says "sing to oneself". And the verb used is ἐπαείδω epaeido "sing to" which is the same verb used at 77e in the sense of “sing someone’s fear away”. — Apollodorus
2 sing as an incantation, ἃ αἱ Σειρῆνες ἐπῇδον τῷ Ὀδυσσεῖ X.Mem.2.6.11; χρὴ τὰ τοιαῦτα ὥσπερ ἐπᾴδειν ἑαυτῷ Pl.Phd.114d, cf. 77e; ἐ. ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς τοῦτον τὸν λόγον Id.R.608a; ἐ. τινί sing to one so as to charm or soothe him, Id.Phdr.267d, Lg.812c, al.:—Pass., Porph.Chr.35: abs., use charms or incantations, Pl.Tht.157c; ἐπαείδων by means of charms, A.Ag.1021 (lyr.), cf. Pl.Lg.773d, Tht.149d.
Soul, however, is a special exception. If upon the approach of death it were (b) to perish, it would also (c) take on the opposite property to the one it bears, that is, become a dead soul. Therefore in the special case of soul, perishing is ruled out, and on the approach of death there is only one thing left for it to do: it retreats … — Apollodorus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.