If you want to quibble over the difference between 'again and again' and 'repeat' then go ahead. — Fooloso4
According to Liddell and Scott:
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. — Fooloso4
You must sing to him every day until you drive it [the fear] away
If the soul is not like those examples then the argument still fails because the cases used in the argument are not comparable. — Fooloso4
[105c]“What causes the body in which it is to be alive?”
“The soul,” he replied.
[105d] “Is this always the case?”
“Yes,” said he, “of course.”
“Then if the soul takes possession of anything it always brings life to it?”
“Certainly,” he said.
“Is there anything that is the opposite of life?”
“Yes,” said he.
“What?”
“Death.”
“Now the soul, as we have agreed before, will never admit the opposite of that which it brings with it.”
“Decidedly not,” said Cebes.
“Then what do we now call that which does not admit the idea of the even?”
“Uneven,” said he.
“And those which do not admit justice and music?”
[105e] “Unjust,” he replied, “and unmusical.”
“Well then what do we call that which does not admit death?”
“Deathless or immortal,” he said.
“And the soul does not admit death?”
“No.”
“Then the soul is immortal.”
“Yes.”
“Very well,” said he. “Shall we say then that this is proved?”
“Yes, and very satisfactorily, Socrates.”
Yes, "sing to one so as to soothe him". — Apollodorus
sing to one so as to charm or soothe him — Fooloso4
Socrates' intention is to soothe or comfort his friends with a narrative that he believes in, not to tell them lies and also them them that he is telling them lies. — Apollodorus
Of course the soul is special, being unlike anything else. — Apollodorus
However, as Sedley and Long point out, the proof is already provided at 105c - e — Apollodorus
The question is whether or not the soul is immortal. — Fooloso4
"Then the soul is immortal.”
“Yes.”
“Very well,” said he. “Shall we say then that this is proved?”
“Yes, and very satisfactorily, Socrates.”
... since the soul turns out to be immortal ... these are the reasons why a man should be confident about his own soul ....
This is not a proof it is an assertion. — Fooloso4
Your objection was to the terms 'incantations' and 'charms'. — Fooloso4
Of course no one tells you lies and at the same time tells you that they are lies! — Fooloso4
Socrates answers that question in the affirmative — Apollodorus
"Incantations" and "charms" are not in the Greek text — Apollodorus
Hence you made them up for the purpose of Straussian esotericism and sophistry. — Apollodorus
https://iep.utm.edu/phaedo/and repeat such a tale to ourselves as though it were an “incantation” (114d).
-so one should repeat such things to oneself like a spell;
and a man should repeat this to himself as if it were an incantation
...not to tell them lies and also them them that he is telling them lies. — Apollodorus
Socrates clearly states that the soul is immortal and urges his companions to have confidence in their own souls.
This is not a proof it is an assertion.
— Fooloso4
It is an assertion that is accepted by Socrates and Cebes as proof. What atheists and sophists believe is not the issue. — Apollodorus
The tuning of a lyre exists apart from any particular lyre. — Fooloso4
It is this relationship of frequencies that is used to tune a particular lyre. — Fooloso4
Analogously, the Tuning of the body exists apart from any particular body, it is the relationship of bodily parts, but the tuning of any particular body suffers the same fate as the tuning of any particular lyre. — Fooloso4
The harmony argument shows that 'how to tune a lyre', the principle concerning the relationship between tones, is prior to 'the tuning of a lyre'. So the soul is prior to the body, by having that principle of how to create harmony within the parts of the body. — Metaphysician Undercover
The argument against the soul as a harmony, is not intended to say anything about the existence of the soul after death. — Metaphysician Undercover
The tuning does not tune the lyre or body, the lyre or body is tuned according to the tuning. It must exist in order to be tuned. — Fooloso4
The tuning does not tune the lyre or body, the lyre or body is tuned according to the tuning. It must exist in order to be tuned. — Fooloso4
But if the argument is accepted then the soul is not immortal. The destruction of the lyre means the destruction of its tuning, and analogously the destruction of the body would mean the destruction of its tuning. How a lyre or body is tuned according to the relationship of its part is not affected, but the tuning of this particular lyre or body certainly is when the lyre or body is destroyed, — Fooloso4
It is your assumption that incantations and charms are lies. — Fooloso4
“Whether or not the soul has been shown to be immortal is a basic question of my essay. I show how and why each of the arguments fail. It is because the arguments fail that he used myths to persuade, charms and incantations.” — Fooloso4
“Then the soul is immortal.”
“Yes.”
“Very well,” said he. “Shall we say then that this is proved?”
“Yes, and very satisfactorily, Socrates.”
“There is a need to sing such things to oneself [as to soothe oneself] wherefore I myself have been prolonging my story for long [presumably, to overcome his own fear]”.
But the harmonies, which are ratios, don't come into existence when the lyre is tuned. — Wayfarer
It's those that represent 'the immortal'. — Wayfarer
I really don't think you understand universals. — Wayfarer
This is what you are implying. — Apollodorus
You are using weasel words to imply that Socrates has failed to demonstrate the immortality of the soul and is resorting to “charms and incantations” to persuade his companions — Apollodorus
You need to show more respect for people and not constantly try to take us for a ride with unwarranted Straussianist sophistry. — 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.
From the IEP:
and repeat such a tale to ourselves as though it were an “incantation” (114d).
https://iep.utm.edu/phaedo/
And Gallop:
-so one should repeat such things to oneself like a spell;
and Grube:
and a man should repeat this to himself as if it were an incantation — Fooloso4
The failure of the argument is the result of the limits of argument. No argument can determine the fate of the soul. — Fooloso4
Then the soul is immortal.”
“Yes.”
“Very well,” said he. “Shall we say then that this is proved?”
“Yes, and very satisfactorily, Socrates (105e).
As it is, however, since the soul is evidently immortal ...
However, since the soul turns out to be immortal ...
mention of charms and incantation occurs several times throughout the dialogue. — Fooloso4
It is because the arguments fail that he used myths to persuade, charms and incantations. — Fooloso4
There is a need to sing such things to oneself [as to soothe oneself] wherefore I myself have been prolonging my story for long
One must chant such things to oneself (no mention of "charms" or "incantations")
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
The immortality of universal Soul does not tell us what happens to Socrates' soul. The myths in the Phaedo are about particular souls not universal Soul. — Fooloso4
“The fact is,” said [Socrates], “in some such cases, that not only the abstract idea itself has a right to the same name through all time, but also something else, which is not the idea, but which always, whenever it exists, has the form of the idea." — Phaedo 103e
The characters accept the argument? Maybe, but Socrates merely uses that assent as grist for his mill. All he really has proven is that they should continue the discipline of dialectic. /quote]
At the risk of providing grist for your mill, I agree. — Gary M Washburn
Might want to look at Charmides. — Gary M Washburn
All he really has proven is that they should continue the discipline of dialectic. — Gary M Washburn
I do not know the tuning of the lyre, but let's say the strings are tuned in 4ths or 5ths. The standard is independent of any particular lyre, but whether this particular lyre is in tune cannot be independent of the tension of the strings of this lyre, and that tension cannot be achieved when this lyre is destroyed. — Fooloso4
So the fact that this particular instance of being in tune (a harmony) is destroyed when the lyre is destroyed, is irrelevant to what Socrates is arguing, because he argues that the soul is not like a particular instance of being in tune (a harmony). — Metaphysician Undercover
The analogy with the lyre is not with a lyre that needs to be tuned but that is tuned, that is, in harmony. — Fooloso4
Likewise, there is a very clear need to assume that there is something which causes an organism to be organized. That's the soul. — Metaphysician Undercover
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.