Plato and the early Church Fathers and C.S. Lewis all present a way of thinking about the human soul that indicates it has three “parts” or faculties. Parts isn’t really the right word, since the soul is a single, simple entity. But parts is the easiest word to use to describe what it does and how it interacts with the body. The three parts are the belly, the chest, and the mind.
The belly is the most animal and physical part of us. It desires physical pleasure and comfort, like food, drink, sex, sleep, etc. Money is its primary desire, because money affords us all of those other pleasures and comforts.
The chest is the linking part of us, it desires physical things, but physical things that are symbols of spiritual things. It desires honor (a spiritual thing), but it desires it embodied in physical things (medals, awards, certificates, pats on the back, though sometimes even words of praise).
The mind is the most spiritual part of us; it desires wisdom. It wants to know things, and it despises ignorance. Because it is so spiritual, it has very little control over the body. It is weak against the efforts of the belly, so it needs a helper: the chest.
The belly has to learn to live in harmony with the chest and the mind, not to dominate them but harmonize with them. The human person needs to eat, so the belly’s desire for food is a good one, a protective one. But the human person doesn’t need to only eat, so the belly’s desire to be gluttonous needs to be protected against. This is where the mind comes in. The mind, however, cannot override the belly’s desires, so it needs the chest’s aid.
The soul, as a single, simple entity, needs to be harmonized within itself, across its faculties. The belly must get its way but only when it must. It must be in harmonious submission the rest of the time. The chest must be strong enough to overcome the belly, but also submissive and concordant enough to recognize that its emotions must not rule either, for the chest uses its emotions and responds to its emotions in its pursuit of honor and its avoidance of shame. It too must submit, for it is the mind that knows what is truly honorable and must direct the chest’s pursuit of honor. With the belly and chest playing their harmonized parts, the mind can pursue wisdom, and with the attainment of that wisdom, it can direct the chest and the belly—the whole person.
If the mind is not setup to rule, but is instead operating in submission to the belly or chest, the mind’s only function will be to come up with justifications for the belly or chest, and to come up with plans for how to get what the belly or chest wants. It will assist in the person in surrendering to the appetites or the passions, rather than moving him toward greater wisdom and greater virtue.
There is some similarity, of course, to these faculties and the Freudian concept of id, ego, and superego. One obvious difference, however, is that the Freudian model calls for the suppression of the lower by the higher faculty. The ancient model does not. It requires only a harmonious yet diverse relationship within the hierarchy that is the chest, the belly, and the mind in one soul.
There is something here to be sorted out, teased out, with respect to its effect on education. Is education capable of re-establishing a harmonious relationship between the three parts of the soul? Or are we stuck with what we are born with?