The eternal soul and the Forms in the Phaedrus

Socrates ends the introductory part of the Palinode by restating the task of the proponent of love without eros. The proponent of sex without eros has shown that a man not disturbed by the madness of eros should be preferred to the one disturbed by that madness. Socrates maintains that such a proponent is to carry the prize of victory only ‘if he proves on top of it’ (pros ekeinȏi deixas): that eros ‘is not sent from the gods for the benefit of lover and beloved’ (Rowe).

Against the background of “his” first speech – Socrates vociferously denies his authorship of it, blaming for it Lysias and Phaedrus (242d-e, 243d, 257a) – Socrates is going to prove that Erȏs is ‘a gift of the gods, fraught with the highest bliss’ (Hackforth).

***

Let me note that Socrates in this passage can see only one Eros, the Eros of the Palinode. On that basis, the first speech is found not only wanting, but reprehensible. Later on, in his outline of dialectic, he profoundly revises that view: ‘the first speech discovered the sinister love on which it very properly poured abuse (266a5-6).’

***

Socrates says that ‘to begin with, we must comprehend the truth about the nature of the soul, divine and human, by observing its experiences and its activities. Here then our proof begins.’

‘All soul is immortal (Psuchȇ pasa athanatos). For that which is ever in motion (to gar aeikinȇton) is immortal (athanaton) … Only (monon dȇ) that which moves itself (to hauto kinoun), because (hate) it does not abandon itself (ouk apoleipon heauto), never stops moving (oupote lȇgei kinoumenon); moreover (alla kai) to all other things that move (tois allois hosa kineitai) it is source (touto pȇgȇ) and first principle (kai archȇ) of movement (kinȇseȏs). First principle (archȇ de) is uncreated (agenȇton i.e. ‘does not come into being’) … first principle of motion (kinȇseȏs men archȇ) is that which moves itself (to auto hauto kinoun) … and since immortal has been shown to be (athanatou de pephasmenou) that which is moved by itself (tou huph’ hautou kinoumenou), soul’s (psuchȇs) essence (ousian) and definition (te kai logon) this itself (touton auton) a man proclaiming (tis legȏn) will incur no shame (ouk aischuneitai). For all body (pan gar sȏma), to which from outside (hȏi men exȏthen) comes motion (to kineisthai), is soulless (apsuchon), but to which it comes from inside (hȏi de endothen), to itself from itself (autȏi ex hautou), is ensouled (empsuchon), this being the nature of soul (hȏs tautȇs ousȇs phuseȏs psuchȇs); and if this is so (ei d’ estin touto houtȏs echon), that that which moves itself is nothing other than soul (mȇ allo ti einai to auto heauto kinoun ȇ psuchȇn), necessarily (ex anankȇs) uncreated (agenȇton) and immortal (te kai athanaton) soul is (psuchȇ an eiȇ).’ (245c2-246a2)

Prior to their first incarnation all human souls saw ‘some of the Forms’ (ti tȏn alȇthȏn, 248c3) in the revolutions in which they followed their god up (pros anantes, 247b1) to the ‘meadow of truth’ (alȇtheias pedion, leimȏn, 248b6-c1), which lies ‘outside the heavens’ (eksȏ tou ouranou, 247c2). Whichever soul is made heavy by its forgetfulness, and fails to see any Form in the circuit in which it follows its god, loses its wings (248c5-8). In their first incarnation they all are planted in human seeds, but in the next and following incarnations ‘a human soul’ (anthrȏpinȇ psuchȇ) ‘may pass’ (aphikneitai) ‘into the life of a wild animal’ (eis thȇriou bion), ‘and from an animal (kai ek thȇriou) whoever once was a man (hos pote anthrȏpos ȇn) back into a man (palin eis anthrȏpon). For a soul which has never seen the truth’ – i.e. has never seen any of the Forms – ‘will not enter this shape (ou gar hȇ ge mȇpote idousa tȇn alȇtheian eis tode hȇksei to sȏma). For a man must understand (dei gar anthrȏpon sunienai) in accordance with a form (kat’ eidos) what is said (<to> legomenon), coming out of many perceptions (ek pollȏn ion aisthȇseȏn), collected into one by reasoning (eis hen logismȏi sunairoumenon); and this is recollection (touto d’ estin anamnȇsis) of those things (ekeinȏn) which our soul once saw (ha pot’ eiden hȇmȏn hȇ psuchȇ) as she journeyed in company with god (sumporeutheisa theȏi), having looked with contempt down upon the things which we now say are (kai huperidousa ha nun einai phamen), and risen up (kai anakupsasa) to being that really is (eis to on ontȏs).’ (249b3-c4)

It is essential for all human souls to have seen Forms prior to their incarnation, for it is the recollection of Forms that makes human speech possible.