Piety And Impiety In Euthyphro

Amazing Essays
The text of Euthyphro is a dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphro centered around a discussion of what is pious and what is impious. Both Euthyphro and Socrates are on their ways to appear in court, Socrates for corrupting the youth and not believing in the gods of the city, and Euthyphro to prosecute his father for murder. Euthyphro was a religious prophet who claimed to possess great knowledge on what is holy. Contrastingly, Socrates was concerned with philosophy yielding practical results outside of the influence of theological doctrine and in the realm of human reason. He did not claim to possess excessive knowledge in a subject and rather believed that the more a person knows the greater their ability to reason and make choices. Thus, …show more content…
In my discussion of the Euthyphro I will be focused on a particular passage spoken by Socrates which was his main argument against one of Euthyphro’s proposed definitions of impiety. In doing this, I will briefly explain the various definitions of piety and impiety that Euthyphro suggests and Socrates subsequent arguments against each in order to accurately discuss and assess the implications of Socrates argument in passage 10e-11a. The first explanation of piety which Euthyphro posits is that what he is doing now (prosecuting his father) is what is pious and not prosecuting someone for an injustice they have committed is impious (5d). However, Socrates simply points out that this is not a definition of piety, rather it is a possible instance of piety. There after Euthyphro shifts to more refined, god-centred definitions of piety. His second offering is that what is dear to the gods is what is pious. Despite the improvement in the explanatory power of this definition from the first, Socrates still points out that this one fails a test of consistency. Euthyphro says that what is dear to the gods is what they find good and just. Naturally, the gods vary in their opinions in what they believe is good and just or bad. Therefore, this results in the same things being both pious and …show more content…
Put into other words, it seems Socrates is edging upon a cause and effect principle. Affectively he is saying that a thing’s being acted on in a certain way explains why it has an altered condition, where as a thing’s being in an altered condition does not explain why it underwent the process which resulted in that alteration. However, things being carried are altered by being carried, a necessary condition for it to be considered a carried thing, while a thing that is loved does not need to be altered by it’s being loved in order for it to be considered as being loved. Therefore, Socrates intentions are unclear. The leap Socrates makes from carried/carrying and led/leading to loved/loving seems presumptuous insofar as the first two are related to one another, where as love is not, so how may he extend the same properties onto the

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    For Socrates knows that Simonides would not agree that a crazy man should be given his weapon back simply because the weapon belong to the man. Socrates knows that Simonides must have a motive for reasoning and must mean something else, something that maybe Socrates cannot understand. Polemarchus then tries to explain to Socrates that what Simonides really meant is that the friends should only do well to each other, and not hurt each other. So then Socrates questions Polermarchus again and asks him if that means that if Simonides also mean that you should do harm to your enemies. Polermarchus says that that’s exactly what Simonides means and again Socrates does not agree with this definition of justice.…

    • 1313 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In altering the definition of god as made in Euthyphro I attempt to prove that the Euthyphro dilemma may not be as problematic as Socrates assumes. In order to fully analyze Socrates’ argument we must first define a few terms. Pious, moral and good will be used interchangeably throughout this paper; all of the terms refer to actions or characteristics that are virtuous in nature. After offering a few failed attempts at defining what piety is, Euthyphro states that piety is that which the gods love; impiety is that which the gods hate; and that which some gods love and some gods hate is neither. However, if one is focusing on monotheistic claims about the nature of morality and its links to a god, then one need not be concerned with disagreement among the gods.…

    • 824 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Socrates pounces on this as well. His argument against this one is a little more complicated and I am not sure I have it right. I believe Socrates is saying that how does one know if something is holy just because it was approved of by the gods. Did the gods approve of it because it was holy or is them approving it what makes it holy? This question perplexes Euthyphro and in desperation he just says that Socrates is manipulating his arguments and making them not get anywhere.…

    • 1534 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    When we help others is for a hope of a reward. Yet another argument is proposed by Thrasymachus, he states that, “justice is simply the interest of the stronger.” However, this is rapidly refuted and discredited by Socrates, because this principle makes Injustice superior to Justice; the stronger makes mistakes, and this deficiency makes it imperfect and ignorant. Thus this principle cannot be true because justice is superior in character and intelligence. When the stronger imposes self-interest, it is the duty of the people to overthrow the injustice. Glaucon’s powerful argument still stands and he extends his credibility when he mentions the myth of the ring of Gyges to illustrate his exact point.…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    When Socrates points out that, according to accepted beliefs, it is wicked to harm or bring disgrace on one’s father, Euthyphro counters that that makes no difference. According to accepted beliefs, harboring a manslayer is wrong and pollutes those who associate with him. This response is what leads into a discussion of the main topic of the dialogue: piety. “And what is piety, and what is impiety?” (p. 4). Since Euthyphro is an expert in religion and seems capable of finding the right course to pursue in what appears to Socrates a dilemma (the prosecution of Euthyphro’s father), and since Socrates is facing a religious charge, he proposes that he become Euthyphro’s student in religion.…

    • 2276 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    However, Socrates does not manage to explain how if a virtue makes it “natural”, it is automatically “intrinsically good”. His failure to efficiently demonstrate the truth of this proposition drastically weakens his argument, since he claims justice is the “health” of the soul to prove why it’s good in itself. While claiming his analogy of the weak connection between justice and health, he believes that justice is not only good for itself but good for other things as well, stating that justice results…

    • 1319 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Wentz, “ In the Apology Socrates is represented as condoning disobedience. First (29d) he states that he would “never stop practicing philosophy” even if so ordered by the jury at his trail. Second (32 c-d) Socrates proudly tells of his disobedience to the Thirty Commissioners when they ordered him to go to Salamis to get Leon. Thus, there is at least apparent inconsistency between the Apology and the Crito on the question of disobeying the law.”(Wentz). In The Crito, Plato illustrates Socrates in a complete contrast to the image that the reader captured in The Apology.…

    • 1240 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Plato's Symposium Analysis

    • 2328 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Socrates reminds the men at the symposium to analyze the logic of an argument, not the person making the argument. Socrates finishes asking Agathon a series of questions to set up a basis for his eulogy. After Socrates states his claim, Agathon agrees that he cannot refute Socrates. The text continues, “ ‘No,’ said Socrates, ‘it’s the truth you can’t refute my dear Agathon. Socrates is a pushover.’ ” Even as Agathon has just agreed with him, Socrates immediately tells Agathon that he is wrong.…

    • 2328 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    When Socrates asks his opponent to answer truthfully, Thrasymachus responds by asking whether or not it even matters if he says what he really believes. Anyone familiar with the Socratic elenchus would anticipate a response from Socrates explaining why it is critical for Thrasymachus to be properly involved in the conversation, and not merely a puppet who agrees with every point. John Beversluis refers to this as the “existential dimension” in which Socrates “examines his interlocutors’ lives as well as their theses”. Yet Socrates does no such thing, instead deciding to proceed with the discussion whether Thrasymachus believes him or not. There are two ways to look at this, firstly, we can again give Socrates the benefit of the doubt.…

    • 2199 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    I thought both Glaucon and Adeimantus had made very strong and serious objections against Socrates about the view of justice being an intrinsic good, but I would argue that their arguments could only apply to certain people and personalities. Glaucon suggests that there are three types of good. The first good Glaucon had explained was intrinsic good which he had described “as a kind of good we welcome, not because we desire what comes from it, but because we welcome it for its own sake-joy” (Plato.357 b). The second type of good that Glaucon had introduced in his argument with Socrates was both intrinsic and extrinsic good which Glaucon had described as a good that “we like for its own sake and also for the sake of what comes from it” an example…

    • 1085 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays