Plato's final argument in the Phaedo for the immortality of the soul is one of the most interesting arguments of all time. It goes hand in hand with the application of the theory of forms to the question of the immortality of the soul, as Plato constantly reminds us, the theory of forms is the most certain of all his theories. The Phaedo is Plato's attempt to convince us of the immortality of the soul using several main arguments. These include the argument from forms and the law of opposites. In the final passage of the Phaedo, Plato provides his final proof, although it may be his last attempt to state his reasoning, it is not very convincing. Plato has some good points and reasoning for believing in the immortality of the soul, but his arguments often seem to make big assumptions without any concrete evidence. In this essay I will try to expose some flaws in Plato's argument by showing how the conclusion can still be convincing to some. According to Plato speaking through Socrates, whenever a soul occupies a body, it always brings life with it. This means that the soul is connected to life, and therefore cannot admit its opposite which is death. If, according to Socrates, it does not admit the form of equality and is unequal, it follows that the soul, which does not admit death, cannot die. It must retreat or disappear as death approaches. If the soul is immortal, it cannot disappear and perish. All he has to do is simply run away as death approaches. Socrates concludes that the soul does not die with the body, but simply leaves it, living, eternal and indestructible. Cebes admits in Phaedo that he is completely convinced by Socrates' argument. Some important premises throughout the Phaedo within Socrates' argument are...... center of paper ...... table, how can we accept this idea of ​​the soul? In conclusion, it is necessary to accept the hypotheses in order for Plato's arguments to work. The first assumption is that the soul gives life to the body. The second is that the principle of life is immortal, indestructible and eternal. It would be difficult to think of the soul as a material thing, so if the soul were brought to death, it would have to transform into an immaterial thing. However, it doesn't seem right that there are parts of intangible things lying around. It should therefore dissolve into nothingness, but nothingness cannot be destroyed into nothingness. The idea that a soul could die seems impossible to me, so Plato in some sense makes sense in his belief that the soul is immortal. However his arguments show no concrete evidence to prove this belief, even today we cannot prove whether souls exist.