Recollection Argument in the Phaedo
1. Have you ever had an experience where you “learned” something new, just by having
someone ask you questions, without telling you the answers? Have you ever used the
Socratic method on anyone else? Do you think the effectiveness of the Socratic method
implies that the soul existed before its birth into a human body and acquired its
knowledge before birth? What other explanation is there for the effectiveness of the
Socratic method?
2. Every instance of recollection includes four parts:
a) a person perceives one thing;
b) s/he thinks of another thing (recollects it);
c) the knowledge of the second thing is different from the knowledge of the first thing;
d) the second thing, the object recollected must have been known before.
Socrates then gives 5 examples particular recollections.
In your groups, write down how each instance is a legitimate case of recollection because
it fits all four criteria. Then explain whether or not you think the example proves the
soul’s immortality.
To take the first example:
a) object perceived: a lyre
b) object recollected: a boy who the perceiver is in love with
c) the knowledge of the beloved boy is different from the knowledge of the lyre, because
the lyre is being perceived at that moment while the beloved is being remembered
d) the beloved must have been known before, or else looking at the lyre would not have
triggered the recollection.
Does this example prove the soul’s immortality? Why or why not?
3. How does the example of seeing equal sticks and stones fit the four criteria?
4. Whenever you see two or more things and call them equal, do you recognize a
difference between the sense in which material objects are equal and your notion of
Equality as a pure concept? (74b-c)
5. Do you think of your abstract concept of Equality as entirely detached from the world
of observable objects? What do you think is the origin of this concept? What do you
think is the origin of our other abstract concepts, such as a perfect circle, a perfectly
straight line, a perfect triangle, etc.?
6. Do you think the fact that we have these concepts, and we think of all the things we
see as imperfect examples of such concepts provides evidence that the soul existed in a
world of pure concepts before it was born into a body? Do you think our abstract ideas
provide sufficient evidence that the soul is immortal? (In other words, there is no other
possible explanation.) What other explanations are possible?
7. Socrates then extends the argument for immortality to all of the Platonic forms,
“Our present argument is no more about the Equal than about the Beautiful itself,
the Good itself, the Just, the Pious.” (75c7-d1)
Does this make sense to you, that is, when you call a person or an action beautiful or good
or just or pious, do you always recognize that the person or action is not perfectly good or
just, or beautiful or pious? Is any thing, action or person perfectly good, etc.? If so, give
examples. If not, do you think the reason for this is because our souls were exposed to
perfect goodness, beauty, etc. before we were born and now when we have experiences,
we refer back to those experiences we had before birth? Why do you agree or disagree?
What other explanation could there be?
8. What is your overall opinion on the argument? Give reasons.
9. At 76a Socrates concludes,
“One of two things follows, as I say: either we were born with the knowledge
of it [the forms] and all of us know it throughout life, or those who later, we say,
are learning, are only recollecting, and learning would be recollection.”
What is your opinion of this? Are there any third alternatives? If not, which one must
one conclude?
10. Plato obviously wants to trigger doubt in his reader. For this reason, it is often
difficult to follow and confusing. Why do you think he wrote this way? What is he
trying to get at?