Euthyphro-Plato: What is Holiness? Essay

Socrates uses a cause and effect method throughout the argument. As Socrate is asking Euthyphro to approve along the way down his points he gets certainly confused. Ending their argument with a point that, piety and what is pleasing to the gods are simply not the same. By the end of the argument Euthyphro is contradicted and can no longer identify what he thinks. Socrates makes a point of the difference of a fact and an opinion. The definition of a moral quality is not a matter of what people think. You cannot determine what goodness, or piety is by asking people around you. Consequently, whether something or someone has a given moral quality is also not a matter of their opinion. Whether an act or a person is good, or pious, for example, is not to be settled by a

In the excerpts from Plato’s dialogue, Socrates asks Euthyphro “Is what is holy holy because the gods approve it, or do they approve it because it is holy? (Socrates, pg. 52)”. Socrates, seems to want to learn the nature of holiness but produces a contradiction of the question “what is holy” when Euthyphro responds with “what is pleasing to the gods is holy, and what is not pleasing to them is unholy (Euthyphro, pg. 52”. Socrates tells Euthyphro “ Come, now, and let us scrutinize what we are saying (Socrates, pg. 52)”. Socrates begins to asks Euthyphro for definitions, clarifications, and implications based on what has already been stated.

In his First attempt to justify his actions Euthyphro explains holiness is “what he doing prosecuting a criminal regardless of whether that person is his father, mother or anyone else, but not prosecuting them is in fact unholy”. He also brought the example the story of Zeus one of the gods who indeed imprison his own father for eating his own his sons. Euthyphro try’s to use the story of Zeus to prove to Socrates the similarity of his situation and the gods are

At the core of Socrates’ argument is the need to break down the definition of holiness into smaller coherent characteristics. Socrates uses a series of question that are consistent with Euthyphro’s argument to ensure that he [Euthyphro] offers a consistent flow of definitions of the word holy.

Plato's "Euthyphro" introduces the Socratic student both to the Socratic Method of inquiry and to, or at least towards, a definition of piety. Because the character of Euthyphro exits the dialogue before Socrates can arrive at a reasonable definition, an adequate understanding of piety is never given. However, what piety is not is certainly demonstrated. Euthyphro gives three definitions of piety that fail to mean much to Socrates, who refutes each one. In this paper, I will present Euthyphro's definitions along with Socrates' rebuttals. I will also show that Socrates goal in the dialogue is two-fold: 1) to arrive at a true definition, and 2) to exercise his method of teaching/inquiry. At the conclusion of this paper, I will give my own definition of piety and imagine what Socrates might say in response.

In this interaction, Socrates considers Euthyphro to help in explaining all there is to be known about piety and the related impiety. Euthyphro confirms that he is indeed an expert in the matter relating to religious issues and can thus assist Socrates in the charges that face him. In their argument in the efforts to define the true meaning of piety, Socrates and Euthyphro engage in the analysis of issues that threaten to confuse human understanding about the whole issue of holiness and impiety in the society, (Plato & Gallop, 2008). To understand the true meaning of piety, it is of great importance to take a holistic analysis of the beliefs of the people about

However in Plato’s Euthyphro, it can be argued that Socrates plays a similar role. In the Euthyphro, Socrates discusses piety in general and what makes things and people pious. Socrates claims he wants to learn more on the subject so that he may better defend himself against the treasonous charges against him. In a way, Euthyphro represents the traditional Athenian way of thinking. He believes in and supports all of the gods and does not submit to Socrates’ prodding of the subject, although he does walk away from him in frustration at the end of the dialogue. However it can safely be said that most Athenians would agree with Euthyphro’s opinion of the gods and to disagree could most certainly be punishable by law, as Socrates was. Socrates’ search for the definition of piety is a difficult one that tests Euthyphro’s patience and ultimately leaves the characters and the reader without an answer. Every time Euthyphro proposes an answer, Socrates is quick to counter it with some thought. Interpreting Socrates’ tone and meaning here is important. Some may see Socrates to be quite demeaning in these instances, almost teasing Euthyphro because he claims to be so pious yet he cannot even define the word. In this way, similar to Aristophanes’ Clouds, Socrates plays a subversive role in the Euthyphro.

pious, but every answer he offers is subjected to the full force of Socrates' critical thinking. Socrates systematically refutes Euthyphro's

Throughout his life, Socrates engaged in critical thinking as a means to uncover the standards of holiness, all the while teaching his apprentices the importance of continual inquiry in accordance with obeying the laws. Socrates primarily focuses on defining that which is holy in The Euthyphro – a critical discussion that acts as a springboard for his philosophical defense of the importance of lifelong curiosity that leads to public inquiry in The Apology. Socrates continues his quest for enlightenment in The Crito, wherein he attempts to explain that while inquiry is necessary, public curiosity has its lawful price, thus those who inquire must both continue to do so and accept the lawful consequences

Socrates says "you did not teach me adequately when I asked you what the pious was, but you told me that what you are doing now, prosecuting your father for murder is pious (Plato, 10) Socrates wants to know what piety is "through one form" (Plato, 10). He does not want to know which things or actions are pious, but rather what piety itself is. One cannot simply define something by giving examples so this definition does not satisfy Socrates.

Socrates was a moral philosopher who was accused of impiety and was about to be tried for a crime, the nature of which no one seemed to understand. The trial and death of Socrates has four dialogs known as the Euthyphro, the Apology, the Crito, and the Phaedo which describes the process of Socrates’ controversial and insightful trial that raises the questions about human morality. Within the story we learned that the relationship between morality and religion might not be as clear-cut as some might think, Socrates forces the witnesses of his trial as well as ourselves to come to conclusions which result in a paradox that conflicts with the individual beliefs of his audience. In the event in which, Socrates poses a question to himself and Euthyphro, an attempt to answer the question "What is piety?" It has a specific tie to the events in “The Trial and Death of Socrates”, for Socrates had been accused of impiety and was about to be tried for the crime of heresy. The Euthyphro dialogue was written twenty-four centuries ago, and its conclusion is devastating for the whole idea that holiness and morality are very well connected. The idea that, “if God does not make something good by commanding it, but rather instead identifies that which is good, what measurement of morality does he use to make this judgment?” If something is right because god commands it, then it follows that something would be just as right if God instructed differently. If god declares that it is right to

While the latter statement is true, the second statement is clearly not; I am the author of this paper, however my birth certificate proves that I am not Eric Arthur Blair. The third definition of holiness which Euthyphro accepts is that “what all the gods love is pious and holy, and the opposite which they all hate, [is] unholy”. This definition provides that holiness is synonymous with what all the gods love and what all the gods love is synonymous with holiness. Moving forward from this point, Euthyphro accepts the claim that someone is in the state of being loved by the gods because the gods love them, and not vice-versa. Plato does not simply leave this claim as unfounded though; he provides a logical justification for it through various examples which explain states in terms of their being and their causality.

In Plato's dialogue, 'Euthyphro', Socrates presents Euthyphro with a choice: `Is what is pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved [by the gods]?'

Euthyphro tells Socrates that he is prosecuting his father for murdering a servant. Euthyphro thinks prosecuting his own father is a right thing because it’s a pious action. Socrates then asks Euthyphro about the definition of a pious action or piety. Euthyphro answers “What is dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious”. (Euthyphro 7a) After hearing this, Socrates discusses that there are enmities and disputes among gods as well.

If it were the exact definition, only Euthyphro would be pious. He said that Euthyphro did not understand the difference between a definition and an example. Next, Euthyphro says that piety is found in things that are dear to the gods (7a). Socrates again rejected Euthyphro’s definition of piety. The Greek gods were anthropomorphic; therefore, another may despise what would be dear to one god. This definition offered was not distinct. Finally, Euthyphro said that what is pious is what loved by the gods (9e). However, Euthyphro can’t answer whether something is pious because it is loved or it is loved because it is pious. He can’t conceive the difference between cause and effect. It is in the Euthyphro that Socrates begins his defense of his actions and principles to the reader. A priest can’t give him a concise answer as to what is religious; therefore, how can anyone else, especially one less religiously guided than a priest, accuse him of blasphemous actions?