Gods Essay

On the Murder of Eratosthenes is a speech by Lysias. Euphiletus, whom is a citizen of Athenia, is the one performing the speech in his trial. He is to provide the jurymen with a testimony where he has to prove that him murdering Eratothenes, his wife’s lover, was justified under Athenian law. This such law dictates that if a man caught his wife in the middle of adultery with another man he then is allowed to murder the man. In his speech, Euphiletus evidentially states why he is in the right for the murder of Eratothenes and how the incident occurred.

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.

In Plato’s Euthyphro, a dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphro, the nature of piety is discussed. Euthyphro proposes several “definitions” of piety and focuses on the relation of piety to the gods. For one of these definitions, he proposes that piety is that which is loved by all the gods. In reply to this, a dilemma arises; and Socrates asks whether the pious, or holy, is loved by the gods because it is pious, or pious because it is loved by the gods. A similar form of this question asks whether the Good, or good action, is commanded by God because it is good, or good because it is commanded by God. If Euthyphro accepts the

* But since different Gods think different things are good how do we decide what is holy

Socrates accurately contests that this definition does not provide the true nature of piety or why pious acts are in fact considered pious. By challenging Euthyphro’s perception of piety, Socrates attempts to obtain an objectivist definition of what it truly means to be pious. Socrates’ queries provide powerful support for the notion that one’s judgements regarding value is a response to objectively existing values. That is, the pious leads the gods to love it or the morally just leads one to approve it. However, perhaps the reason the dialogue draws to an aporetic conclusion, is the fact that piety may not be defined objectively. Pious acts may be considered immeasurable as they are based upon subjective individual values. Thus, the meaning of piety can differ as a result of one’s individual views and values. As one’s definition of piety may contradict another’s, acts may be regarded as both pious and impious simultaneously. Additionally, one’s own definition of what is considered pious may shift overtime, due to experience or greater understanding of a situation resulting in further discord between piety and impiety. However, whilst this Socratic dialogue does not result in a concise definition of what it means to be pious, it does indirectly enhance one’s understanding of piety by encouraging one to evaluate what the pious is

This can be seen as a vital part of Euphiletus’s defense for multiple reasons. First and foremost it establishes Eratosthenes character as a cunning criminal in a league of his own. Not only has he behaved criminally by seducing Euphilitus’s wife, but makes known he seduced other men’s wives prior to his. This paints a picture of Eratosthenes as a debaucher of women, and a disgrace to the community. Not only by his claims, but importantly claims shared by others- exemplified by the old hag when she refers to Eratosthenes unlawful actions as ‘his profession’. Euphiletus not only makes himself appear more morally just, but argues that by choosing the maximum penalty of death he saved future husband’s from becoming victim to Eratosthenes’s criminal advances.

Eisenhower, John S. D. So Far From God: The U. S. War with Mexico 1846 – 1848. New York: Random House, 1989, xxvi, 436.

Interpretive essay for Euthyphro Euthyphro, a priest in Plato’s dialogue, strives throughout the reading to teach his religion to Socrates. Since Euthyphro portrays himself to be the most intelligent human to mankind, Socrates believes that he must know every words meaning and that guides Socrates to ask him about a word he is curious about; piety. Piety is something he is very curious about and asks Euthyphro many questions about it. Euthyphro gives five intricate versions of piety, but one of them is peculiar and brings to my attention.

Piety is nearly impossible to explain and clarify but Socrates and Euthyphro discuss three major possible definitions; while breaking them down,

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

Thus, Socrates asks Euthyphro "…what sort of thing…the pious and impious are…" (Plato, Euthyphro, 5d) and "…is not the holy, just by itself, the same in every action…" (Plato, Euthyphro, 5d). Euthyphro, responding to the second question first, affirms that piety and impiety have discernible characteristics. Subsequently, he states that piety is "…prosecuting murder and temple theft and everything of the sort…"(Plato, Euthyphro, 5e). Socrates points out that this answer is not a definition, since, instead of stating what constitutes piety, it merely provides examples of it. Consequently, Euthyphro states that piety is what is dear to the gods. Socrates responds that, if the gods disagree as Euthyphro previously states in the dialogue, different gods would believe that different things are "…just and beautiful and ugly, good and evil…" (Plato, Euthyphro, 7e). Thus,

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.

because, how can all the gods find everything to be pious when what is just to

If this were the case, the gods would not be the ultimate source of what is holy, and thus not the source of moral authority. Since this is entirely in opposition to the divine command theory of meta-ethics, this cannot be the case, which leaves Socrates and Euthyphro with the idea that objects are holy because the gods love them.

God’s Bits of Wood is his third book and one of the most famous novels ever to be written. The author and also an award winning filmmakers Ousmane Sembene was born on 1923 in Ziguinchor, Senegal then a French Colony. Ousmane Sembene literature crosses the geographical and national borders of his home country of Senegal, Mr. Sembene's literary and inspiring output places him today as the father of African films and as the most creative French-speaking African writers in this first century of creative writing in Africa. He published his first writing in 1993 from Marseilles. Sembene has produced five novels, five collections of short stories, and a whole lot of numerous films, four shorts, nine features, and four documentaries “He has given