69e - 72e

Sabe agrees with the majority of what Socrates said about the soul, but I do not believe that the soul will condense and continue to be active and intellectual after death. For example, he suggests that when the soul leaves the body it may dissipate like breath or smoke, so it no longer exists as a coherent unit.

The Socrates' answer first considered the myth that the soul existed in other worlds after death, and after a period it returned to another institution in the world. If this is the case, Socrates suggests that the soul must condense after death, otherwise it can not return to animations of other bodies. So the mission of Socrates is to show that the soul of the dead can return to the world with other bodies.

Socrates introduced controversy from the other side. He insisted that everything came from the opposite. For example, for large objects, you need to make them smaller in advance, and you need to make them larger because of their small size. In addition, there are two generation types between the facing faces, each of which is generated between different forms. For example, there is a dual process that increases and decreases between sizes.

Then Socrates pushed his view to the house by asking if Sebes was against his life. Sevez said that death is the opposite of life. From the argument opposite to this discussion, you can see that the life from death to death, the creatures themselves from the process of death, must change from death to life.

Socrates also pointed out that the world will die soon if this is not the case. In other words, even though all living things are dead, if the new creature is not made from a dead creature, the number of dead is quickly replaced and overwhelmens the number of lives. If life can only be made by other living things, only a limited amount of biological resources will be used up.

Discussion from the opposite is relatively easy to understand, but it is expressed in a number of sovereignty philosophies that are ambiguous and have many problems to be discussed. The majority of this discussion will cover both issues, but this discussion may be clarified immediately before beginning. Because nothing can be formed or stopped naturally, the idea is that all ideas are formed from the other's. If death is the reverse of life, death and life must be in a certain cycle, one at a time from the other cycle. At the end of our lives, we are dead, as well, this means that at the beginning of our life we ​​are born from the underground world of the dead soul .

When Socrates insisted on the immortality of the soul, that form appeared again. One of his arguments is that when considering the doctrine of recollection, the soul must exist before it is born and therefore must be able to exist after death (72e - 73a). By this, Sèvez called for advocacy of recollection. Socrates first gave two arguments corresponding to Meno: although the discussion is not intended to prove the existence of the form, steps (1) - (5) can thus be interpreted I will. Basically, Socrates believes that sensuous experience does not explain our possession of concepts such as equality, beauty, goodness. Since these concepts are not "given" by experience, there must be other ways to get them.

Before entering the correct arguments it is useful to point out what was accepted before the first argument begins with 69e. All Socrates listeners admit that philosophers are those seeking true wisdom and truth and know that the body in which he lives opposes the higher tendencies of these philosophers. The body and the body are really different. They are two separate substances and the soul obviously is superior to the body. The soul is seeking something higher: shape, truth itself and so on. However, the body interferes with these pursuits and brings down the soul from these great heights. This is metaphysical anthropology, recalling the basis for discussion

The second argument about the immortality of the soul can be seen in the memory argument (72e - 76e). Plato believes that learning is memory, and that the soul exists even before birth. If you encounter two identical things, such as two identical stones, you will see that the stone itself is not "equal". Therefore, knowledge of "equality" is something we have never learned, but it is remembered. If the understanding of "equality" is memorable, the soul must exist before its execution.