Ethics And Moral Reasoning In Plato's Euthyphro

Register to read the introduction… This is the first definition that Euthyphro offers to Socrates as a definition of piety. Although Socrates says this is a definition of what piety is, he says that it is inadequate because it only states one instance of piety. Socrates states that he did not want Euthyphro to tell him one or two of the many pious actions but the form itself that makes all pious actions pious. With the statement, all impious actions are impious and all pious actions pious proves that this is not a valid definition and deemed unworthy as sufficient for a definition.
The second of Euthyphro's definitions is, what is dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious. Socrates says that an action or a man dear to the gods is pious, but an action or a man hated by the gods is impious. But since the gods are in a state …show more content…
This is the third definition offered by Euthyphro. Although that this definition is closely related to the last definition Socrates gives the point in which is to understand whether the pious or holy is beloved by the gods because it is holy, or holy because it is beloved of the gods. The refutation is the loving of something because it is holy, doesn't explain/define what holiness is, only that "whatever it is" is loved. And being holy because something is loved by all gods, still doesn't tell you what that "something" is. Thus Socrates says: Thus you appear to me, Euthyphro, when I ask you ‘what is the essence of holiness, to offer an attribute only, and not the essence --- the attribute of being loved by all the gods. But you still refuse to explain to me the nature [a.k.a. essence or definition] of holiness”. At this point Euthyphro is lost and they agree to not "quarrel" about “what is "dear/loved" by the gods or not”. Socrates try to have Euthyphro explain to him the relationship of piety to