Pros And Cons Of Socrates Piety

My thesis is that Socrates does not present good arguments. In Socrates’ argument that piety is dependent on the gods, Socrates uses a series of analogies that are relatable to piety. Socrates describes the physical state of carrying or leading objects and that to be carried or led, they must have been put into that state by something carrying them. Thus, the things being carried are in a state of being carried and since piety is a mental state, it is parallel to the state of being carried. Therefore, something must put piety into the state of being pious and Socrates looks at the gods to do so. Socrates describes that which is holy is dear to the gods and thus if it is dear to the gods it is also holy or pious. Socrates then asserts the claim in a different order where that which is dear to the gods is loved and is thus holy or pious. Therefore, if that which is dear to the gods is due to the state of it being loved by the gods then therefore, if something is loved by the gods then it thus must be holy or pious. This justifies Socrates’ argument that piety is dependent of the gods because the gods put piety in a state of being pious. This is done by that which is pious is thus dear to the gods and …show more content…
Socrates’ perception of the afterlife is where “all the dead are (pg. 16) therefore he will be able to meet with other famous philosophers and warriors and will continue to debate philosophy for eternity. Socrates asserts that the ruling is a blessing and does so to justify this claim through an association fallacy: death is either an afterlife or eternal rest. Since the afterlife is good and eternal rest is good, then therefore, death must inherently be