Analysis Of Euthyphro's Theodicy

According to Dr. Youngs’ lecture, piety is a term that refers to what it means to be good or holy in the eyes of the gods. Within Plato’s Euthyphro dialogue, Socrates is looking for a definition of piety in order to better develop his knowledge as a philosopher. Euthyphro tries to give Socrates several definitions of piety. Euthyphro gives five different definitions of piety, all of which I feel were all subpar definitions. I will argue that Euthyphro does not give Socrates a satisfactory definition of piety. I will argue this by pointing out several instances in the text in which Socrates disputes Euthyphro’s definitions and why I think he disputes them.

In this paper, I argue that, in Plato’s Euthyphro, Euthyphro’s defense of the view that his father is a murderer is not cogent enough to effectively prove his point. I will present the argument that Euthyphro spends more time talking about himself and his decision to prosecute his father than he does discussing the actual crime. I will then present the argument that Euthyphro does not use specific, factual evidence to bolster his judgement.

Socrates and Euthyphro cross paths one day at the courts of Athens. At the time, Euthyphro was there to prosecute his father for murder. Socrates takes the opportunity to ask Euthyphro what the meaning of piety is. In this paper, I exam the issue at hand, how Socrates uses his question to doubt Euthyphro’s thesis, and give an explanation as to what this question means for someone who maintains that God is the origin or foundation of morality.

Socrates was put to death in Athens for subverting the youth of the city. He was indicted by Meletus and awaiting his trail on the porch of the King of Archon when he met Euthyphro. It was at this point he engaged in a debate about piety. In this paper, I will examine that debate and present my own conclusion about its purpose as well as my own definition of piety.

The origin of Euthyphro’s Dilemma began with a discussion between Socrates and Euthyphro, Socrates wanted to learn the nature of piety in order to tell the court his action of corrupting the young with impiety was wrong and had come to a realization. With Socrates many lines of questioning for Euthyphro, one specific question lead to the creation of Euthyphro’s argument, known as Euthyphro’s dilemma, an argument that refuses the Divine Command Theory. To better understand Euthyphro’s argument, I will present the similarity between Euthyphro’s Dilemma and the Divine Command Theory, along with the two types of DCT and lastly, explain the version I believe is the most plausible.

The literary work entitled Euthyphro, attempts to define the word piety, or justice before the Gods. This leads to a dilemma pertaining to one who thinks that morality comes from God. Euthyphro is looking for the definition of the word piety, as the word itself seems to be incapable of being restricted to one understanding. In this essay I will describe the different given definitions of piety, argue the best definition given by Socrates, and analyze and criticize the definitions.

The question that arises as Euthyphro encounters Socrates at the court of Athens is that of piety. Socrates questions Euthyphro by asking “Is it pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods?” (Euthyphro, 10a2). This question comes about through the discussion between Socrates and Euthyphro in regards to the prosecution of Euthyphro’s father due to a crime he committed. This discussion ultimately ends in the departure of Euthyphro due to not being able to come up with a definition that satisfied Socrates.

After Euthyphro proclaims himself an expert in piety, which also serves as his justification for prosecuting his father, Socrates concurs that piety is of the utmost importance. Socrates claims that if Euthyphro could educate him on what is considered pious, then he could adequately defend himself in his trial that, at least in part, is based on religious

In Euthyphro, Socrates discusses with Euthyphro about what the “piety” is. The conversation leads to what most modern philosophers now define as Euthyphro’s dilemma. It is stated that” Is something pious because the gods love it or the gods love it because it is pious?” This dilemma is also known as the “Divine Command Theory”, which has puzzled many Christian philosophers throughout the years. Socrates’ account seems to disagree with Euthyphro’s. This paper will argue against the dilemma in Socrates’ account.

The dialogue Euthyphro, written by Plato, has many functions. The rational discussion urges us to question the ultimate problems of the human existence; to examine human life. The conversation between Socrates and Euthyphro, begs the question: are we to follow what society tells us is right or “pious”? Can Euthyphro bring his father to justice for an evil deed without fear of he himself committing an impious deed? Can we show proper respect to the gods with pious acts because it is what the gods love? Socrates argues that independence, from both the gods and a society that conforms ethics to religion, is the right path. He also argues that a traditional life dedicated to the gods may eventually result in impious behavior. The dialogue is much like a parable or a fable; a simple story used to

Socrates’ cross examination of Euthyphro’s beliefs on what constitutes as pious and impious explicates the the argument, “is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?”. In demonstrating how this aligns as a real dilemma for Euthyphro in that the gods are not the source of morality, and how it is a false dilemma for Socrates because he believes morality to be ambiguous, would be to further analyze the question in where morality stems from. In this paper, I will be analyzing the five points of piety that is exemplified and how these come into effect as the crux of the dilemma that is presented in the dialogue.

The Trials and Death of Socrates by Plato is known for the “Euthyphro Paradox” because it talks about one of man kinds age old questions about god and morality. In this essay I will addressing the paradox along with my opinion on what I think Socrates would have done if he was in Euthyphro’s shoes. Euthyphro decided to put his father up for trial because he is wrongdoer and killed a man. Socrates talks with Euthyphro for some time about his case, but he never says which side he’s on. This is going to be the objective of this essay is to figure out what Socrates would have done.

Euthyphro’s dilemma has major consequences on the Divine Command Theory of Morality (DCTM). In its essence, the DCTM is the idea that morality

Euthyphro did not allow special affiliations to interfere with executing his responsibility; to which Socrates understood but did not agree with the answer that he had about piety. Euthyphro’s definition of piety merely presented a claim that a particular act is pious rather than a definition of what acts are pious. Socrates wanted to understand the form itself that made all pious actions pious. His assertion was that “everything that is to be impious presents us with one form or appearance insofar as it is impious”. Socrates analytically contradicted Euthyphro's suggestion that what makes right actions right is that the gods loves and approves of it. The problem that Socrates had with this suggestion was that since inquiries of right and wrong often created never-ending disputes, he felt that the gods were likely to cause problems among themselves about ethical matters just as often as we do, making some actions both right and

As Euthyphro is essentially a self-righteous man, he asserts that piety is to do as he is doing, "that is to say, prosecuting any one who is guilty of murder, sacrilege, or of similar crime whether he be your father or mother, or whoever he may be that makes no difference; and not to prosecute them is impiety" (Plato, 5e). Euthyphro's definition of piety contains many implications, the biggest of which is that Euthyphro considers himself to be a good example of piety in action.