Socrates Holiness

Socrates was a Greek philosopher, who is one of the founders of western philosophy. Socrates never wrote down his ideas or thoughts; his student, Plato, wrote down his ideas and thoughts. Socrates was accused of expressing there were different Gods and he was brought to trial in 399.B.C.E. Socrates character, in the different passages I read, Euthyphro, Apology and Citro are a little contradictory. Also if the act of persuading the state is the only alternative to blind obedience, why did Socrates' in both of specifically in his defense and generally in his career make so little effort to persuade the people when they were acting unjustly? In this essay I hope to demonstrate how Socrates character contradicts in these different passages and

The Euthyphro is an example of early dialogue of Plato's: it is brief, deals with a question in ethics, this is a dialogue which took place between Socrates and Euthyphro who claims to be an expert in a certain field of ethics, which ended prematurely. It is also puzzled with Socratic irony, the irony is present because Socrates is reckoning Euthyphro as the teacher when in fact Socrates is teaching Euthyphro. Socrates poses as the ignorant student wishing to learn from a supposed expert, when in fact he shows Euthyphro to be the ignorant one who knows nothing about the subject on which they are discussing, which is piety and impiety. This setup is necessary in order to encourage Euthyphro to bring forth and evaluate the arguments being formed by him, and thus to lead him to see their faults for himself.

Euthyphro accepts these ideas because he offers different definitions that are in line with the clarified ideations. Socrates uses basic philosophical question “What is holy?” , which leads to a myriad of definitions with different characteristics. Euthyphro sums up all these characteristics in the final definition.

In Plato 's Euthyphro, Socrates and Euthyphro discuss the nature of piety. Euthyphro first proposed that piety is that which the gods love. His proposal was quickly objected by Socrates though, since the gods often disputed amongst themselves and therefore what one loves can be what another hates. Euthyphro then revised his hypothesis to say that piety is that which the gods love unanimously and for the moment this was their conclusion. This definition however, that piety is what the gods love unanimously, further proposed the question of whether the gods love the pious because it is pious or whether the pious is pious solely because the gods love it. If it is true that the gods love the pious because it is pious then the definition of

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.

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

Finally i will have to tell you who is this man you are falsely accusing today. Even though we all, men of Athens, hates Socrates’s way of seeing and doing things and the way he embarrassed our greatest men of Athens in public. But the past had proven to us that he is a good wise man that rarely been mistaken in term of what was good for Athens. Moreover, one event that we cant forget is the trail of the 8 Generals where he oppose the exception of the 8 men. Even though he was threaten to take the same fate as theirs. Athenian thought he was crazy back then and ordered to execute the 6 Generals they have at hand and the same fate awaits for those who fled. However, few years later Athens needed as much strong men as they can get so they dropped

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).

Socrates is brought to trail before the citizens of Athens, accused of not recognizing the gods that are recognized by the state. Euthyphro is brought to prosecute his father for murder. Before the trails, they discuss the definition of piety and what the difference is to impiety. Instead of a straight forward answer Euthyphro explains his position on prosecuting his father. Although his father murdered a murderer that fact that Euthyphro knew what his father had done. It would have impious of him to sit back and pretend his father was innocent of such a thing. Euthyphro also discusses the relation to Zeus castrating Cronos for devouring his children. Providing a point that no matter who you are, he who is unjust must get punished. As Socrates finds it difficult to believe such stories his finds himself questioning wether to believe or not. Socrates is in search of a direction definition as to what exactly is piety.

Does morality stem from God? Or does it exist independently of his presence, not subject to arbitrary decisions? The first discussion over these questions appeared in Plato's Euthyphro, in which Plato chronicles the proceedings of a highly repetitive argument between Socrates and Euthyphro, a prophet and holy man, over the nature of piety and holiness. The questions produced in this dialogue have been expanded to remain relevant even in a modern religious context. It has achieved so much fame that the core question presented in this dialogue is now known as the Euthyphro Dilemma. In the dialogue, Socrates presents Euthyphro with a choice, "Is what is holy loved by the gods because it is holy, or is it holy because it is

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

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

One of the most interesting and influential thinkers of all time was Socrates, whose dedication to careful reasoning helped form the basis for

When Socrates asks, "Is the holy approved by the gods because it's holy, or is it holy because it's approved? " his main goal in this dialogue is showing that there is no definite, definition of what holiness is because people define it differently based on their individual beliefs on what it is, and doubtfully that can depend on their own beliefs or that of their culture, background etc., and because of these reasons individuals should not be prosecuted on charges of impiety. Socrates trys to express the truth in that an impious thing to one person may be a highly pious thing to another person and that people are never consistent in their beliefs and hence, are not sure of what holiness truly is. This is very evident throughout this dialogue

In Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates and Euthyphro had a conversation about piety. During the conversation, Socrates raised a question which was a challenge to the Euthyphro’s definition of piety. Also, this question is a challenge to the theists’ view of divine command theory. I agree with the arbitrariness objection which succeeds giving a good reason to theists to reject the divine command theory. This objection indicates that the arbitrariness of God’s commands contradicts to the fundamental attribute of God, and God’s commands are unable to make an act morally good or bad.