Study Guides (248,018)
Canada (121,232)
Philosophy (31)
PHIL 1F90 (16)

PHIL 1F90 Fall Exam Questions & Notes

4 Pages
Unlock Document

Richard Brown

PHIL 1F90 Fall Exam Questions &Answers These are the four questions on the Progress exam 2013. Remember that one of the four will be compulsory and you will need to answer two questions in total. Each question will be worth 50%. 1. Give a detailed account of Socrates’ Theory of Recollection argument for the immortality of the soul which he bases on the theory that learning is just recollection of the Forms. Make certain that you give a detailed account of the relationship that Plato thinks exists between the Form ofAbsolute Equality and some equal sticks or equal stones. Do you think that this argument would work just as well for the Form ofAbsolute Beauty and a couple of beautiful particulars? Explain. Socrates’ Theory of Recollection argument 72e-78b • Socrates states that if one sees a body (lyre) or clothing of someone they will immediately be reminded of that person • Socrates introduces the theory of forms stating that there is such thing as equality itself such as equal sticks or equal stones. He points out that equal sticks and equal stones may look equal from one point of view but different from another point. Equality itself should never be suggested as unequal. So as a result sticks or stones that are equal can’t be the same as equality since they can sometimes be unequal but equality itself can never be. • Socrates predicts that the soul didn’t learn equality through senses but was obtained through knowledge before birth. If this holds true equality then it should hold true to all other forms. So it seems that this knowledge of forms is lost at birth and through the process of learning that life recollects them and knows them again. Thus, Socrates states all learning comes from recollection. 74a – 76a • Yes, this argument can work just like the form of absolute beauty. The form of beauty doesn’t possess ugliness at all. In contrast, a beautiful person might be beautiful compared to others but not beautiful compared to god so is not perfectly beautiful. The form of beauty itself is invisible, eternal, unchanging unlike the visible objects like in the world, like the body for example can grow old and lose their beauty. So the form of beauty is always absolute beauty. PHIL 1F90 Fall Exam Questions &Answers 2. Give a detailed account of Socrates’ Kinship argument or the Argument from Affinity. Then give a detailed account of Cebes’ Weaver's Cloak argument. Make certain that you explain exactly how Cebes uses the conclusion of the Kinship argument to his own advantage. Whose argument, Socrates’KinshipArgument or Cebes’Weaver’s CloakArgument, do you think is the less convincing argument? Why? 84c – 88b • Socrates Kinship Argument states that a correspondence in two or more respects between otherwise dissimilar things. The soul is invisible just like the forms, constant and the body is visible just like the particulars can disintegrate. The argument of Affinity differentiates between those that are invisible and immortal from those things that are visible and perishable. As discussed earlier, the soul belongs to the form category and the body to the particulars. The soul is then immortal which may take different forms. The soul is a kin to the form since it is invisible and can’t be destroyed. The soul is like the master and the body is the slave. Moreover, the body is the instrument and the soul is the harmony so without the harmony there’s no instrument. • Cebes Weaver Cloak Argument states that a cloak is far more fragile and short lived than a man. He suggests that a weaver will create and wear out many cloaks over the course of his life. The weaver will eventually die but his cloak will live longer than him. The same could be said about the soul and the body. The body is constantly changing and is constantly being remade by the soul. So when the soul dies the body can no longer be remade and quickly disintegrates. Cebes argument is supported by Hercalitus theory that one can never step in the same river twice. This states that for every instant the world is destroyed and remade in a slightly different form. So according to Cebes argument, the bodies that the soul may live in are not bodies of different people but the many bodies of one person, each being remade at every instant. • Cebes argument is less convincing. The argument of affinity makes clear distinction between the soul and the body. But in Cebes argument, the weaver is constantly remaki
More Less

Related notes for PHIL 1F90

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.