The theory of Soul as brought out by Plato argues that soul consist of three basic energies: emotion reason and appetitive components. Reason is considered to be of higher value while emotion and appetitive components are said to of lower passions. Plato argues that the soul that brings happiness is the one that is ordered and must allow the reason to prevail over the emotion and appetites, that is, emotion and appetites must submit to reason. He derived this theory from the analogy of the city and the soul, he argues that individuals ought to have same values and perform similar tasks as a city. Therefore, just like a city, an individual is a complicated whole but each part in the whole has its unique role. Plato argues that happiness is only possible when the three energies are ranked in order of importance, that is, reason must supersede emotion and appetites. This argument allowed him to conclude that tyrant are usually not happy because of their displace reasons with emotions.
Morality is undoubtfully important in bringing happiness to a human being. A moral person according to Plato is a just person and therefore this happiness brought about by morality motivates immoral people to be moral. Plato argues that tyrant seems to be happy but in the reality they are not, this is because they are ruled by the emotions but not reason, they displace reasons with appetites and emotions. It is therefore conclusive to say that tyrant is not truly happy. Contrary to this, saints are guided by reasons and therefore despite the suffering they undergo they remain happy. According to plato, happiness springs from inward qualities of the Soul and therefore not subject to external factors .It is therefore important to ensure the three energies of the Soul are prioritized properly to bring about happiness. In conclusion therefore it brings no gain to human beings for being unjust and consequently unhappy
Theory of form
Plato argued that there exist no material forms of items in the universe; he believed that the objects and ideas are all reflections of the objects. This was further illustrated in his argument of the allegory of the cave. Through his argument, it was clear that items cannot be the same in all aspect. This theory of the forms was clearly postulated by the epistemological, metaphysical, moral and semantical arguments. Plato’s theory was highly mathematical and all items were explained in terms of numbers. Plato’s theory of the form can be categorized into three. To start with all objects save physical manifestation, the highest form is that of the good and knowledge is ever knowledge of the form. The objects he described have epistemological and ontological aspects. The former explains the relativism of the objects. For example justice and cleanness while the later explains that nothing exist without the manifestation of the objects. From the theory therefore, similar universal terms can refer to vey many things or events i.e. something is called according to what it resembles in particular. For example the term justice can be used in many aspects because they have something in common maybe in appearance or participation.
An individual is human to extent that he or she participates or acts in manner of humanness and when humanness is associated with rationality then individuals can then be said to be rational. An item is beautiful if it participates in the idea or the form of the beauty. Everything is what it is by virtue of its resemblance and participation in the universe. The ability to define an item therefore gives an idea that somebody understands the form to which that item refers. This theory therefore, was linked to the myth of the cave where the sun illuminates all other ideas.