The Argument from Recollection

Simmias asks to have the argument from recollection laid out explicitly — Cebes mentioned it, but he wants to hear it from Socrates directly. Socrates agrees. The argument begins with a question: is there such a thing as Equality itself, distinct from any two equal objects we might point to? Yes, they all agree. And do the equal objects perfectly embody that equality? No — the same two sticks appear equal from one angle and unequal from another.

Yet when we see the sticks, we recognize them as approximations of Equality itself. We compare them to the standard and see that they fall short. But to compare them to the standard, we must already know the standard. Since we never encountered Equality in pure form in this life — only these imperfect instances — we must have known it before we were born. The same holds for all the Forms: Beauty, Goodness, Justice. We recognize their imperfect instances because we knew their originals.

Learning, then, is not the acquisition of new knowledge but the recovery of old knowledge — recollection. We are reminded by the particulars of what the soul already knew before it entered the body. The conclusion follows: the soul must have existed before birth. If it existed before, the argument that it will also exist after becomes less strange. Cebes and Simmias are persuaded by this — but they note it only proves pre-existence, not post-existence. Socrates says: combined with the argument from opposites, both are needed.