Plato's Republic introduces a host of important and interesting concepts, on topics ranging from music to gender equality to political rule . For this reason, many philosophers and scholars still look to The Republic despite its age. Yet one part that particularly stands out is Plato's discussion of the soul in the fourth book of the Republic. Not only is this section interesting, but it was also extremely important to all moral philosophy, because Plato's definition has always been used as a standard. Plato's confabulation of the soul contains three main parts: the definition of each of the three parts and the explanation of their functions, the description of the interaction of the parts, and then the way in which the parts and their interaction motivate action . This essay will examine each segment and seek to explain their importance. For Plato, the soul is considered to have three parts: the appetite or passions, the spiritual part or will, the reasonable part or intellect. The appetitive takes care of bodily needs and desires. Appetite is often considered vile, even sinful, but this is clearly not the case for Aristotle: the passions only demonstrate the fundamental necessities of a person, which cannot be considered without considering the human person of the same way. The spiritual part reacts to injustices or mistakes in the environment, and it is often described as the "angry" part, because anger also addresses the perception of injustice. The reasonable part is concerned with finding truth and distinguishing it from falsehoods, and is often considered the part of the soul that is both the highest and the most difficult to perfect. Each part has its own subtleties and specifics, which allows them to help the human...... middle of paper ...... uh fun later. However, this view does not take into account appetite-excluding acts performed at the end (or even causing the end) of life, such as giving one's life for that of a loved one. In this case, the person would intentionally give up their passion forever in search of something else. Hume's argument does not foresee this. In fact, the only objection one could make to this last example is to say that a man who gives his life for his friend has an ill-educated or depraved soul, but no one seems to make this argument. Works Cited: Cooper, John M. “Plato’s Theory of Human Motivation.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 1. (1984): 3-22. Philosopher's Index. Internet. December 8, 2013.Stocks, JL “Plato and the tripartite soul”. Mind, new series ns 24.94 (1915): 207-21.Jstor.Web. December 9. 2013. .