what are the differences between Plato's concept of human nature and Descartes concept of human nature?

Answer 1

It could be said that this question is too general to be considered personally and informally here, or that it give an impression of a quesion being posed in an formal acedemic examination. But it is a question nevertheless and like most other questions deserves a response. Here is mine:

Plato took a conception of reason and examined life that he learnt from Socrates and built both a metaphysics and, more to our point, an anthropology around it. There was an intellectual soul, resident in the human head, and there was an appetitive beast, resident in the belly and genitals. The duty of the former is to keep the latter tamed and, in time, to welcome death as an escape from this uncomfortable co-habitation.

In one disguise or another, Plato's dualism was immensely influential. It insinuated itself deeply into Christian theology — a process that began, perhaps, as early as the Gospel of John. Descartes' famous contrast between the soul that thinks and the body that is extended is a distinctive take on Plato, as is Kant's contrast between the noumenal and the phenomenal aspects of human nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Answer 2

funny, when I took my first philosophy class I got asked the same question almost verbatim. The difference is that since I was there to learn I tried to answer the question on my own through careful reading of the texts and analysis of my notes.

Answer 3

even if you do the easiest, most basic internet search and spend 10 minutes reading up on either of them, you would actually learn it for yourself rather than asking such a generalized question hoping for a spoon fed answer.