In the philosophical point of view, Plato is a dualist who believes that soul and body are two different entities. The soul is regarded as the immaterial form of human existence that belongs to the “world of the forms.” He believes that soul is part of human existence that characterizes every human being; it is generated by an individual believes in the natural occurrences. The body applies senses to develop opinions concerning the physical world where they belong. According to Plato, the development of the body is dynamic, and therefore, it is not truly real. According to Aristotle, soul and the body are two mutually dependent parts of the human body that support each other. Human existence is characterized by the body parts that operate under different senses as well as the soul that controls their existence. For instance, the movement of the body is controlled by the soul that directs it on what to do unless there is an accident that involuntarily destroys the body atoms. Aristotle further stipulates that without the body, the soul cannot operate as directed and consequently, lack of body organs renders the soul useless; it is, therefore, true that soul and body are interdependent and when an individual dies, they both disappear. In other words, Aristotle is expressing that the two entities, body and soul are entwined; they belong together and cannot exist separately. Plato argues that the morally good part of an individual or perfect form of being exists within the person while Aristotle stipulates that the good form of human being depends wholly on the soul and the orientation of body atoms.

Both Plato and Aristotle agree that mind is the link that connects the soul and the body. Plato argues that soul defines the whole part of an individual while Aristotle relates it to specific organs of the body that are interdependent of each other. According to Plato, the soul is developed according to the experiences in the environment while Aristotle argues that soul is acquired in the process of development, it starts at the early formation of different parts of an individual. According to Aristotle, the soul is an ideal realization or perfect expression of the natural body. In the same note, it can be concluded that there is a close relationship between the physiological processes and psychological states of the body.  Additionally, Aristotle stipulates that human mind or soul refers to the truth of the body, the substance whereby the only body conditions obtain their real meaning[1]. Additionally, Plato argues that soul continues to exist even after death while Aristotle believes that soul seizes to exist after the death of an individual. Plato argues that the portion of the soul that is connected to the body is considered irrational, this is the point where the material for sense exists and it is developed in the course of development and human growth. On the other hand, Plato disagrees with this idea arguing that soul is not connected to the physical world; the physical desires are destructions from the essential human needs.

In response, Melissa should argue that soul is strongly supported by the physical existence; Mathew’s physical existence should, therefore, be extended although he will not be active in terms of physical capability. In other words, the idea of the soul is not a subject of proof; from the scientific point of view, the brain controls almost all the activities of the body, the destruction of one section of the brain cannot render an individual useless. There is no need for an individual to die when there are mechanisms that can be used to support life. In many instances, the concept of impending death and majorly depending on the continuous changes in the substantial circumstances. Death and depending merely on the dissociation and association of atoms. Applying the above idea to soul may be reasonable. In the same note, the dissociation of the human atoms or death is solely the obliteration of human body, a scenario that does not allow the soul to continue existing; Plato dismissed the above objection as the speculation; this again supports the idea of Melinda. Humans are immortal and death is only a passage of life from one state to the other, the idea of life after death, according to Plato is a valid concept since the antiquity.

There are several weaknesses that exist in Melinda’s perception of the natural existence. First, the existence of the soul is not a fact, it is clear that there is no substantial proof that can support the claim. Consequently, death is a natural process of dissociation of body atoms; it should not be done in an artificial manner to forcefully end one’s existence. Additionally, Melinda’s argument does not take into consideration, the scientific proofs; they are mere allegations from the religious and traditional points of view, which in many cases, may be misleading. Plato’s defense of existence is, therefore, an elaborate an ideological option of explaining Melinda’s thought.

According to Aristotle, the soul is an ideal realization or perfect expression of the natural body. In the same note, it can be concluded that there is a close relationship between the physiological processes and psychological states of the body.  Additionally, Aristotle stipulates that human mind or soul refers to the truth of the body, the substance whereby the only body conditions obtain their real meaning. The soul marks its activities in specific parts of the body organs, a scenario that corresponds to the various stages of biological development. As the human body undergoes development, the soul becomes more prominent in an individual existence.  The mind often remains in unity throughout the lifetime; therefore, when an individual dies, the soul that manifests in different body organ seizes to exist; this invalidates Melinda’s reasoning and supports Melissa’s thoughts. The body organs share diverse forms of senses which may be regarded as souls. Mathews being a human being with a brain and all the functioning body organs have soul which is interconnected to the organs, destroying his life will, therefore, means destroying the soul. The Melissa’s point of view is therefore valid according to Aristotle philosophical point of view. Destroying the life will lead to the subsequent destruction of the soul. Mathew’s life should be preserved at all cost even if it means using advanced artificial methods to sustain his existence. Aristotle perceives life in the scientific approach, most of his orientations are based on the factual ideas about the existence of every human being. According to Melissa’s argument, soul seizes to exist to exist the moment a person is dead; this thought is consistent with Aristotle’s philosophies. On the other hand, Melinda’s argument is consistent with the traditional and religious approaches; her ideas are therefore deeply rooted in the beliefs and faith without the substantial proofs. In response, Melissa should demand the proof of the existence of the soul in the body organs. According to the biological point of view, the physiological growth is only characterized by the atoms that are defined by various biological processes. During the formation of life, individual cells do not entail soul but rather, primitive components that only define life. Further, Plato may argue that every living thing has atoms i.e., they develop from primitive cells yet only human beings have the soul. Melinda should, therefore, make the comparison between human beings and the rest of creature in order to draw a meaningful reasoning about the Mathews situation. In defense to the Mathews situation, Melissa should stick to the evidence that Aristotle try to elaborate; the development of body organs is characterized by the presence of soul or senses that defines an individual. Mathews is still alive and the only section affected is the brain which controls some parts of the body, the rest of the organs are still functional, meaning that he still has the ability to live and even approach different life circumstances without necessarily using the damaged part of the brain. According to the above scenario, Melissa’s reasoning is consistent with Aristotle’s philosophical stance.

 

Melissa and Melinda are in a state of confusion on what to be done to Mathews, their brother. Melinda is arguing in a religious point of view while Melissa is stuck on the scientific thoughts about Mathew’s situation. Melissa is deeply concerned with the ultimate realities of the world, according to her, life is controlled by the specific organ in the body, brain and nobody can exist without it unless an individual is artificially supported to live. Melinda, on the other hand, argues that human life is a complex system that extends beyond the physique; according to her, life extends beyond the brain unto the soul, it is the soul that controls what humanly is and consequently, it is the soul that defines the identity and true nature of an individual. Melissa argues that so long as Mathew still exist, even without the brain, he is still human and still have the power to live and controls his natural perception. In the philosophical point of view, different people have different perceptions about life; this solely depends on the belief and social orientation of an individual. In most instances, there are people, who can only view the biological aspect of someone; while on the other hand, there are individuals who may tend to add extra understanding of life in order to support the human nature which most people perceive as precious. Melinda in the above case cannot explain the relationship between the soul and the body while Melissa is able to substantiate the biological point of her argument. To save Mathews, it is necessary for Melinda to apply Plato’s defense of the necessity of the soul and the existence of freewheel, while Melissa should apply the Aristotle philosophical stance to support the idea of life.

Plato applied Socrates decisions express the dualistic understanding of the body and soul. The soul is a separate entity which exists even after death; it is not connected to the physical body organs, it is connected to the thought, intellect, and emotion of an individual. However, even though the body may seize to exists, the souls will still exist forever. In the above case scenario, Melinda should argue in the context of Plato; when Mathew dies, his soul will still linger around, he will not seize to exists, and his spirit will continue to persist. Life starts when an individual is born and continue to exist forever; it is, therefore, true that Mathew will not disappear even if the soul separates from the body.  Plato believes that the existence of soul often arises from the traditional beliefs and faith other than the philosophical reasons. There is a firm hope that the dead still exists; the above ideas have existed right from the antiquity, in most instances, most people have a strong belief in the life after death and there are always many events held in their remembrance. In the above case scenario, according to Melinda, Mathew is suffering from pain and supporting his life by the artificial means will not restore his life.