Aristotle and Plato: Contradicting Theories with a Connection

Delainey Spicher

Philosophy 201

Professor Tullius

Paper #1

September 30, 2015

Aristotle and Plato: Contradicting Theories with a Connection

Ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle both had theories concerning the soul.  Plato believed that the soul was immortal but that body was not, and overall that body and soul were two separate parts to a person.  However, Aristotle’s theory was that the soul was not immortal and that the body and the soul were two interdependent parts to a human, and that they supported and relied on each other, therefore not being able to exist on their own.  Although differing and sometimes contradicting theories, Aristotle does in fact appropriate a certain foundational concept from Plato’s theory; they both agree that the mind is the connection between the body and the soul.

Each philosopher theorized different structures in relation to the soul.  In Plato’s Phaedrus, he explains how the soul has three elements, each are an element in a charioteer metaphor.  The black horse is mortal and represents man’s appetitive tendencies, which include desires for things like food, drink, wealth, and sex.  The other horse is immortal, white, and represents the spirited/hot-blooded part, and seeks out glory, honor, and recognition.  Lastly, the charioteer represents the rational part of the soul.  The charioteer is the section of the soul that loves truth and knowledge, and reins over the two horses using reason and rationality.

According to Aristotle a living creature is substance.  Aristotle also mentions “the soul is, so to speak, the first principle of living things.  We seek to contemplate and know its nature and substance.”^[1]  The two parts of substance are form and matter.  Form is the notion of the soul, and body is the notion of the body, or, matter.  Aristotle thought that the soul is the form of the body.  Meaning that the soul is the epitome of the functions of a human being.  For Aristotle the psyche, or soul, controlled reproduction, movement and perception.

The division into the three parts suggested by Plato is rejected because it is a division according to the sources of motivation only, whereas Aristotle seeks a division into more fundamental parts, one that will be taxonomically informative of the souls of all types of living beings.  Aristotle theorized that life at a basic level, meaning all living things, have: the capacity for self-nourishment, growth, and reproduction.  The nutritive soul, possessed by plants, has only these three capacities.  The sensitive soul, which is the animal soul, has these three plus the capacity for sensation, desire, and imagination.  The rational soul, or the human soul, has all of the previous and the ability to be reasonable and intellectual.

...