Philosophy Diaries, Volume II: The Mind in Plato's Theory of Immortality

Moral Ambivalence in the Body and the Mind: a Refutation of Platonic Holy Mind

    The concept of pleasure in ancient philosophy is commonly depicted as some sort of yielding of the soul to the body, an erasure of the spirit, a complete abandonment of the self to the senses, a latching onto earthly matters, an ode to the ephemeral. As the soul waddles on a lengthy, skinny string inside the body, ordinarily oscillating up to the brain and down to the feet, it rises more to the mind in a philosopher, and drops below the ground in a hedonist; according to Plato, it all comes down to a the will to undertake a quest toward absolute truth, thus conduct a mildly ascetic life by living virtuously, meaning disengaging from bodily pleasures altogether and fueling the soul by dedicating to philosophy. But reducing the experience of pleasure to simple bodily sensations and cravings is wrong and superficial, as ecstatic bliss may especially originate from sole mental, intellectual urges and wrongdoings.

“Liberation from the tyranny of the body contributes to greatness, but just as much to greatness in sin as to greatness in virtue” (Russell, 135)

    According to Plato, pleasure can only be experienced in the body, most likely referring to sins such as gluttony, lust and laziness. In his History of Western Philosophy, Bertrand Russell provides a brilliant explanation of his contradictory thesis, proving why pleasure isn’t solely bodily but most importantly mental. Russell claims that envy, cruelty, and love of power are all manifestations of mental pleasure, mentioning examples of figures who engaged in chaste lifestyles but nonetheless indulged in impure, immoral mental pleasures, among which are Milton’s Satan, Hitler and various historical ecclesiastics. The author’s thesis debunks Plato’s claim that all evils in the world originate from bodily whims, which is a statement that would support his theory of the soul’s immortality; the statement reads as such:

“Whence come wars, and fightings and factions? Whence but from the body and the lusts of the body? Wars are occasioned by the love of money, and money has to be acquired for the sake and in service of the body.” (Plato, Phaedo)

Plato’s argument relies on three premises: 1. All evil can be traced back to the body; 2. The mind is holy and pure in itself; 3. By being holy and pure, the mind may only be tainted by the body’s needs. These premises, which are not only implied by this statement, but also taken from his ideals and previous arguments, show how Plato thinks of the body and the mind as two very distinct, separate forms of identity of one being, endowed with a conflicting nature. While cultivating the mind, home of the intellect, may bring us to a wiser, holier, mystical way of life (mild Orphism), wallowing in grounding, sense-stimulating pleasure may lead us toward a life of delusion and stupidity. Subsequently, the individual’s afterlife will look different according to their chosen path on earth: while a philosopher will pass eternity in company of the gods in the world of ideas, the hedonist will either become a ghost, destined to roam the earth desperately, or reincarnate as an animal.

I find the idea of treating the body and the mind as two entities of different nature (one pure, one sinful) simply untrue. This may not only be demonstrated by Russell’s enlightening claim, but also by a series of behaviors of the human mind and body; my claim would like to refute the ideal of the mind as a sole highly mystical entity, present it as a container of ‘humanity’, and discuss the existence of a moral dualism in both entities, which may coincide or present discrepancies.

    The first error I would like to take into consideration is believing the mind to be pure and holy. According to Plato’s ideals, the mind is a sacred place which may bring one to absolute truth if worshiped; in other words, intellect is to be stimulated and incentivized through the study of mathematics, philosophy, logic, music (...); in exchange, it will guarantee wisdom and an immortal soul. The mind was thought to be close to God, a gateway to the world of ideas, divine and flawless, but if tempted and corrupted by the body, it could lead to a miserable afterlife. This claim raises the question: if the mind is considered holy (in its denotative and Platonic sense) then why should it possess the weakness of yielding to the body? If good and inherently right, why should the mind partake in such a wrong act such as that of surrendering to the body’s temptations? The tentative answers to these questions cannot fulfill them logically in any way. Since the argument functions both Platonically and in regards to the Catholic doctrine, one may address human imperfection, free will and original sin, but these concepts would still imply a choice of good and evil residing in the mind, rather than it being holy and flawless. The individual’s ability to choose concerns the choice to use the intellect positively, to use the moral dualism rightly (according to the doctrine, because otherwise, what would we classify as good?), and not whether to let the intellect win instead of the body. Even if it did refer to this last statement, one would wonder why the mind, as pure and holy, should even possess in itself the possibility of losing to the body. These answers fundamentally do not correlate to the questions at all. Sure, an individual may have the choice of being evil, but that renders the mind impure regardless.

    As a consequence of the acceptance of the mind’s tendency to surrender to the body, it can be stated that the mind contains a moral dualism, it is not inherently and absolutely good, but it is also capable of desiring strife and inciting contempt, and most importantly it is capable of selfishly yielding to the body. In fewer words, not every action of the mind can be attributed to a biological purpose, it does not yield for the body, but rather it yields for its own pleasure. As Russell said, the mind’s whims can exist outside of the body’s cravings, and because of this they can often result in contrasting reactions from both elements; this demonstrates the equal amount of evil present in both the mind and the body, which does not only manifest itself through abstract thoughts but also through concrete human behaviors. The most banal biopsychological example would be sexual arousal and pleasure, specifically the phenomenon of kinks. Masochism is a broad umbrella term which refers to a part of BDSM that concerns itself with taking pleasure in the infliction of pain to oneself. It would seem contradicting that the mind would take pleasure in something that physically hurts the body, and it is. It clearly shows the mind’s capability of acting counterintuitively to the body’s needs. Although one might argue that pain play contributes in some way to the arousal of the body, it is not the act itself that procures that reaction (as it provides genuine harm to the body) but the idea of it, the mind’s distorted conception of such an act; this not only confirms that the two entities both possess impure sides, but also demonstrates the mind’s capability of manipulating the body. 

Another common fault is that of mistakenly confounding sexual arousal with sexual pleasure. Firstly, it is illogical to make such a statement, because sexual arousal is not a demonstration of pleasure, but a mere response to a physical stimulus, which can be independent from mental desire. In fact, it has been studied and reported that oftentimes victims of rape or sexual assault experience arousal despite the traumatic event solely because it is a direct response to a stimulus; for this reason, victims are often blamed and shamed. This demonstrates thoroughly that the mind can override the body and hold conflicting positions.

    Through the argument presented I refute Plato’s conception of the mind as devoid of flaws and faults. In turn, I offer a new view on the mind as a container of an individual’s ‘humanity’, here meaning a tendency to commit ethical/moral errors. As the mind is stripped of its divine quality due to logical incoherence, it becomes the host of a dualism, which is a vessel of good and evil intentions. In light of this, I would add to Plato’s general advice of living with temperance, to exercise virtue to its highest and most noble form: emotional intelligence and moral wisdom.

Works Cited

Russell, Bertrand. History of Western Philosophy. Psychology Press, 2004.

Plato. Plato’s Phaedo. MacMillan Publishing Company, 1955.

Meston, Cindy M., and Amelia M. Stanton. “Understanding Sexual Arousal

Subjective–genital Arousal Desynchrony in Women.” Nature Reviews Urology, vol. 16, no. 2, Jan. 2019, pp. 107–20.

Vandervoort, Mariève et al. “Victim Sexual Arousal During Nonconsensual Sex: A Scoping Review.” Archives of sexual behavior vol. 53,6 (2024)

Kamping, Sandra et al. “Contextual modulation of pain in masochists: involvement of the parietal operculum and insula.” Pain vol. 157,2 (2016)

Philosophy Diaries, Volume I: Nihilism and Existentialism

Dante, Nihilism and Existentialism: the Dilemma of the Absurd

The second ledge of Dante’s ante-purgatory hosts souls who perished due to a violent death, and inevitably, Dante starts an extensive discussion on the movement of the absurd occurrence in human life, covering questions concerning the reason of the phenomenon and its origin. The poet states that the absurd is moved by ‘necessity’, partly alluding to the presence of chance; despite this statement, Dante doesn’t provide a definitive conclusion about the origin of the event and doesn’t lay out a clear thesis on its driving force (chance, fate, divine providence). He only declares that the solution to this mystery is to place trust in providence and put into practice our good will, which saves the soul from failure to repent in case of violent death. Not by any chance does the poet enhance the concept of vigilance in numerous chants of the Comedy. The matter of the absurd also appears in the VI chant, in the apostrophe to God in the long digression on the situation of Italian politics at the time:

E se licito m’è, o sommo Giove

che fosti in terra per noi crucifisso,

son li giusti occhi tuoi rivolti altrove?

O è preparazion che ne l’abisso

del tuo consiglio fai per alcun bene

in tutto de l’accorger nostro scisso?

In these tercets, in a moment of doubt and anguish due to Italy’s decay, Dante asks God if the evils and injustices which reigned in Italy at the time were sent by His will or were the result of His indifference to man, product of the lack of divine intervention in the world, therefore assuming the existence of another driving force in charge of the absurd, and the human tendency to discord (as suggested by Hobbes). Like so, Dante questions the presence of the absurd in the world once again (this time on a universal scale instead of particular), providing the term with a new connotation, equaling it to discord: war crimes, tragic innocent deaths, the degeneration of an empire, absurd universal events like these, do they have their own meaning, or are they completely arbitrary and uncontrollable?

During periods of anguish as in Dante’s time, the birth of such questions is spontaneous, naturally resulting in the immediate reaction of existential doubt and vacillation of faith. The philosophical currents of nihilism and existentialism (and absurdism) are based on this, supporting the idea which suggests the absence of an inherent meaning of life. Both springing from this general premise, the movements change route according to their own specific conceptions of human reaction before such truth, but no philosopher will answer Dante’s question; Nietzsche, for instance, states that the right reaction of man to the meaninglessness of life is the acceptance of its tragedy and ephemerality through artistic expression, which gives the possibility of catharsis and redeem. The philosopher theorizes, moreover, of a long lost balanced way of living, which ceded its place to western decadence: it’s the harmony between the Dionysian and Apollonian. It’s the balance between the intuitive impulse, the creative exhilaration which produces the acceptance of becoming (whose artistic expression is music), and rationality, order (whose artistic expression is sculpture). Through the course of history, the second philosophical impulse prevailed over the first, suffocating it and giving way to western decadence

, in which values contrary to life prevailed, thus atrophying vital energy. Sartre, on the other hand, wondered how to escape the absurd, and came to the conclusion that to act, man needs to possess responsibility and awareness, because man is the creator of essence. Everything is founded on the relation between existence and essence applied to mankind, according to which, subsequently to the inexistence of God, existence precedes essence; from these premises, Sartre deduces that human beings don’t have a predetermined nature (as for example an object, which is created according to pre-planned purpose), and therefore, they must commit to gain moral values during their life, to mould it and shape it as best they can. In fewer words, according to Sartre, the individual is the architect of their own destiny, along with humanity’s. According to Camus, formalizer of absurdism, life is a constant fight between human desire for order and the indifference of the universe; simply, one cannot fill their sense of void through the invention of an artificial meaning. Camus believed that to escape nihilism or suicide, an awareness and rebellion before the absurd is needed; and while this revolt doesn’t have the ultimate purpose of canceling the phenomenon, it permits the individual to live in the present with dignity.

It is evident then, that no interpretation finds clear and precise conclusions to Dante’s question, only circling around the man-absurd relation. One can understand, therefore, that they are faced with an unanswered question, a dilemma, which only generates further questions. In light of this, the sole verified statement in which one can confide is the following: life is absurd.

Introducing a New Series: Philosophy Diaries

Hello dear readers!

I haven't directly spoken to you since my very first introductory post, and I feel as though I should do it more often. Although there aren't many of you, I'd like to thank you for reading my articles, it means a lot to me; I don't care about numbers, so long as there is one person who enjoys reading my blog, I will be delighted and honored.

I'm writing to announce a brand new series; "Philosophy Diaries" will cover the main ideologies of philosophy and some of their core themes, the digressions will spring from any outer source which sparks curiosity and raises philosophical inquiries: literary writings, primary and secondary philosophical texts, and even some of my own reflections. The first volume will be dedicated to 'the absurd', a concept which I already explored briefly in the article about Kafka; the essay will decipher the connection between Dante, Nietzsche and Sartre, introducing nihilism and existentialism. I can't wait for you to read it!

I'll see you very soon, stay tuned :)

Love, 

Vittoria

Thoughts on Kafka's short story 'The Judgment': pacing, narration, and magical realism

Franz Kafka's The Judgment: A Perpetual Quest for Answers; or a Contemplation of Absurdity

Imaginary Scenario

"The flicker of the candle's flame illuminated the bare table slightly, creating a play of shadows on the walls confining the kitchen; the door to the yard showed a dark-tinted light from outside, so bleak it made me forget whether I should dine or have breakfast. The rain battered on the glass-door displaying the immitigable storm and the bright black, drenched soil; cold drops splattered on the door so harshly that, had the rain been blood-colored, a crimson mess would be staining the surfaces for evermore, leaving me testimony of a dire tragedy. A thunder echoed in the sky, an aggressive flash of white appeared and faded rapidly, I witnessed all this from the chair I sat in; the rain soaked the thousand and one thoughts that heavily burdened my mind, but each came from one: I had to free myself from the wicked heirloom."

On 'The Name of the Rose' by Umberto Eco

'The Name of the Rose': A synthesis of Aristotelic influence on the Medieval Catholic Church

Umberto Eco’s Il Nome della Rosa is considered to be one of the most illustrious pieces of contemporary Italian literature, and although it is commonly mistaken as a simple crime thriller set in the 12th century, the narration conceals a much deeper meaning than that captured in the façade of the story. In fact, the work presents a profound history that unravels a variety of paradoxes and controversial themes; it is a novel that encaptures mystery, ambiguity and fascination, combined with philosophical doubt and mysticism.

In 1327, tension arose within the Catholic Church due to the conflict between the new monastic orders regarding the reform of the doctrine. During that time period, Adso of Melk, a young novice and his preceptor William of Baskerville (an English Franciscan friar) are encharged by the Abbot of a Benedictine abbey in northern Italy with the arduous work of resolving the enigma of the unexplained assassination of one of the monks, Adelmo of Otranto. Within the span of the seven days in which the two stay in the abbey, the unfathomable happens: from peccaminous encounters and heretic discourse, to bloody murder and prohibited paths, William and Adso find themselves stuck in an endless labyrinth (quite literally). The narration, full of twists and turns, ends in tragedy, depriving the reader of a satisfying closure, but leaving them with a scarring doubt that will torment them for the rest of their life.

The author concludes the work by quoting the ancient book ‘De Contemptu Mundi’ written by Pope Innocent III, revealing the hidden message of the story and finally clarifying its title:

Est ubi gloria nunc Babylonia? Nunc ubi dirus / Nabucodonosor, et Darii vigor, illeque Cyrus / Qualiter orbita viribus incita praete-rierunt, / Fama relinquitur, illaque figitur, hi putruerunt.

By quoting these verses, which question the disappearance of the great Babylonia, Eco clearly explains the real meaning of his novel, introducing the theme of caducity and ephemerality of being. In the end, all things come to a conclusion, and the only things that will survive are our nude, empty names - as the famous latin phrase ‘Stat rosa pristina nomine, nomina nuda tenemus’ implies.

I conclude by recommending the reading of this novel to whoever is passionate about Aristotle, Medieval Christian symbolism, mysticism and esoterism, but most importantly, I recommend this novel to whoever is searching for the experience of an existential crisis and is constantly craving an intellectual challenge.

From my Diary (Captured, a vision slipping away)

08/9/2024 (18:07)

- Writing this down quickly to not let it slip out my mind, the only object left for me to write with is a pencil, sorry.

Blue Moon - Paul Evans

In the strangest but truest way every version of myself exists inside my being and shapes it every day to be as it is. Every old version of me is stacked upon the latest, previous one as a brick of stone held in place by a batter of water, sand, and cement. I wake up and I'm new, reborn, and occasionally repulsed or resentful of the person I was before (yesterday).