Euthyphro's Dilemma Analysis

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.

Therefore, appealing to action does not clarify what constitutes piety. Moreover one god may perceive Euthyphro’s action as just, while another deplores is as unjust. Another proposition is that piety is what is universally loved by the gods, and impiety is what is universally hated by the gods. However, is the particular action pious because it is loved by the gods or loved by the gods because it is pious? Is piety intrinsically virtuous or virtuous because external praise by the gods? Socrates poses a remarkably timeless question. For example, is it unjust to kill Syrians because human life has intrinsic value, or is it unjust to kill by consensus? Is there an objective moral duty to preserve human life, or is the value of life merely dependent on social

Greek philosopher Plato’s account of the end of fellow philosopher Socrates’ life in The Trial and Death of Socrates includes a plethora of philosophical theories and ideas, but the one that stands out the most is none other than what is known as the Euthyphro Paradox. Found in the “Euthyphro” section of the book, Socrates brings up the idea of what is actually considered pious, or moral, by asking what exactly makes those things pious in the first place. More specifically, Socrates asks Euthyphro: “Is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods?” (Plato 11).

Through the dialogue present in Plato’s Euthyphro, the reader is presented with different definitions of piety. In the beginning, we learn that Socrates is being charged with atheism. Before his public indictment, he meets Euthyphro and seeks knowledge from him to set himself free of the charges brought against him by his prosecutor. Through their dialogue, Euthyphro tries to explain piety and holiness to him, however all the definitions given turned out to be unsatisfactory for Socrates. Amongst the definitions given by Euthyphro, one states that all that is beloved by the gods is pious and all that is not beloved by the gods is impious (7a). However, from this definition, a dilemma arises which is mentioned by Socrates.

In “Euthyphro”, a dialogue written by Plato, Euthyphro is faced with a series of questions from Socrates regarding what piety is. Euthyphro’s answers continuously contradict one another, and he cannot create a definition. Euthyphro makes reference to the Gods when stating a definition, which leads to the questions, is Euthyphro a theological voluntarist? After examining the claims of Euthyphro and the definition of theological voluntarism, it will become apparent that Euthyphro is not a theological voluntarist. This paper will first explain the definition of theological voluntarism, and what it means to be a voluntarist; next it will describe Euthyphro’s definitions of piety and the flaws of them. Finally, I will consider an objection and follow with my answer and conclusion.

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.

In the third definition, Euthyphro has claimed that piety is what all gods love and Socrates has found that the definition is a mere quality of piety (11a). He comes to this conclusion after he interrogates Euthyphro. This brings the reader to the passage in question, 10e-11b, where Socrates disproves Euthyphro

he has written this indictment against you as one who makes innovations in religious matters, he has come to slander you, knowing that such thing is easily misrepresented” (Plato 3). In light of the fact that both these men are public figures in Athens, Socrates refers to something called the ‘divine matters’ which Socrates believes in voice keeping him from doing anything. Being that this is his reason for his run-in with the law. However, as Socrates continues to ask questions he realized from Euthyphro’s self-importance and moral reasoning gives him the ability to persuade Euthyphro into rethinking some commencing ideas.

In Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates and Euthyphro have a battle concerning the meaning of piety. Socrates interrogates Euthyphro on whether or not is possible to have an objective – definite – definition of a concept/object. This came to be known as Euthyphro’s Dilemma. This argument can be clarified as follows; “what is dear to the gods is pious, and what is not is impious”: if an object is God-love, than the object must be loved by all Gods; therefore, pious objects are those that are necessarily loved by all Gods. (10a). The dilemma emanates when one realizes it is God-loved if it is pious, and pious due to being God-loved; in this case, “piety” in itself would be considered irrational in

The Euthyphro, like other Platonic dialogues, seeks to uncover the definition of a virtue. In its case, the virtue is piety. In the end, the dialogue fails to uncover this definition, rendering an impression of incompleteness. On account of the dialogue's dual effect -- the presentation of Socrates' spirit as well as the Greeks' inability to define piety -- explanations for its incompleteness often place too much emphasis on Socrates and, as a result, fail to unearth its true genesis. Some students argue, for example, that the failure to define piety is induced by the non-existence of the Gods, which they declare Socrates implied through out his life. Hence arises the purpose of this

The dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphro written by Plato itself touches on the obvious, the Euthyphro Dilemma. The notion I’d like to analyze deeper is the conception that is reading between the lines and looking at how Plato wrote this dialogue and most importantly what he may have been saying within. The whole text is a way of Plato saying that there really is no definition of holiness and there is no ONE key to unlocking something that all holy deeds have in common. For as long as time will stand the battle on things that are holy in the eyes of the gods will not have one significant similarity. As when Euthyphro prosecutes his own father for murder in which his whole family disagrees in the process. Many may agree that turning in your

Socrates argues that Euthyphro’s lack of the true meaning of the term piety pushes forth a contradictory cycle within itself. In fact the definition that Euthyphro gave was only showing us an example of a pious act. Euthyphro failed to give a distinguishing meaning as to, what is piety? This gives inside to Euthyphro’s first contradiction from the lack of evidence. Euthyphro mentions that in his opinion on pious saying that it is irrelevant in its nature.

When Euthyphro attempts to define ‘piety’ as “the part of justice that attends to the gods,” Socrates responds by asking Euthyphro what does he mean by attending and that there are several meanings to that word. When attending/attention is applied and are used in the same context to the gods, it is completely different from what it means to others things and contexts.

One of the most common refutes for the Divine Command Theory is the Euthyphro Dilemma, constructed by Plato. The Euthyphro is a discussion between Socrates and Euthyphro set outside a courthouse in Athens. Socrates is on trial as he is being convicted of corrupting youth with impiety, and Euthyphro is there to accuse his father for the murder of a slave (Plato. and Walker, 1984). Socrates reasons that Euthyphro must know about piety and impiety, as someone willing to commit their father to the court house must be sure that is the moral thing to do. Socrates asks Euthyphro to explain to him what piety means, in hope that he may learn, and therefore present no further