Plato And Hume's Arguments For The Existence Of God

429 Words2 Pages
Both Plato and Hume present compelling analogies from opposite sides of the same topic. Neither analogy can be proven, because the soul is something we as humans cannot conceive nor can we know if the soul exists as an eternal object or if it exists as a perishable object. Although I tend to agree more with Plato, believing that it is possible for the soul to exist as an eternal object, Hume’s analogy is more compelling. Plato offers multiple arguments on the immortality of the soul: the argument from opposites, the argument from recollection and the argument from affinity and his final argument. Hume presents his arguments as metaphysical, moral and physical. Each one of their arguments has their shortcomings, but because Hume’s arguments do not stand on the basis of the souls existence, his arguments, although not necessarily true, are more convincing.…show more content…
Although it is impossible for things to exits as both dead and alive, it is possible for something to be neither dead or alive, for example, a piece of chalk. The problem here is that the argument states that life is the opposite of death, but it is not its exact opposite. This is not an argument for immortality as it only proves that we existed before birth in a state of non-life (because you cannot be dead before you are ever even born). We still only know that after we are born at a certain point we will die and not know if we can exist independently from our bodies in the world of forms

    More about Plato And Hume's Arguments For The Existence Of God

      Open Document