Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The Phaedrus argument for immortality applies only to sel... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→All soul, including irrational and vegetative soul, is immortal

    The Phaedrus argument for immortality applies only to self-moving soul, a property Aristotle and his tradition explicitly deny to nutritive soul.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Plato's immortality argument in Phaedrus explicitly requires self-motion as the defining essence of soul, which is metaphysically distinct from life-giving.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aristotle systematically denies self-motion to nutritive soul, treating it as a passive capacity dependent on external matter and bodily organization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If nutritive soul lacks self-motion, Platonic immortality arguments that depend on self-motion cannot validly extend to vegetative functions or their souls.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's nutritive soul may possess a form of intrinsic activity (energeia) distinct from Platonic self-motion, making the distinction less absolute than claimed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates Aristotle's specific metaphysical framework with the logical scope of Platonic arguments, potentially attributing Aristotle's conclusions to Plato unfairly.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even granting Aristotle's denial, this shows Aristotelian incompatibility with Platonism rather than proving the original Phaedrus argument's logical structure unsound.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Personal Identity1 linkedAfterlife & Death1 linked

    Related

    All soul, including irrational and vegetative soul, is immortalAristotle systematically denies self-motion to nutritive soul, treating it as a ...Aristotle's nutritive soul may possess a form of intrinsic activity (energeia) d...Even granting Aristotle's denial, this shows Aristotelian incompatibility with P...
    +3 moreShow less
    If nutritive soul lacks self-motion, Platonic immortality arguments that depend ...Plato's immortality argument in Phaedrus explicitly requires self-motion as the ...The claim conflates Aristotle's specific metaphysical framework with the logical...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit