The Argument On The Euthyphro Argument

Not all people who are religious have sound morals, just as not all people who are atheistic are immoral. In his article, John Arthur discusses why religion does not depend on morality and morality does not depend on religion. Arthur seeks to alter the perspective of those who believe religion is necessary within a society to have a proper moral code. Many believe religion provides a purpose in life, a motivation to do what is right, and a set list of guidelines to follow in order to be a good person.

Someone who would believe a statement such as this one would most likely be in agreement with the Divine Command Theory---the reason being that the main claim in this theory is, all that is morally right, is right because God commands it so. Therefore in order to believe in the Divine Command Theory, one would need to be a strong believer in God---and would truly believe that if there were no God, morality would be absent. With this in mind, if God is the creator of all that is morally right, and there turns out to be no god at all, then nothing is morally wrong or can be capable of being morally wrong---would be a statement that non-believers of the Divine Command Theory would believe, and believe that morality can exist on its own, with or without a God. In this paper I will focus on the Divine Command Theory in relation to the statement above, and those who would oppose this statement. In doing so, I will attempt to show why I believe that those opposing this statement have a more plausible view.

Socrates is believed to be one of the greatest philosophers of all time and he is credited as being the founder of western philosophy. This paper will explain some of his views to the most fundamental questions of today’s age. These questions will include topics about morality, the human condition, solution, and death. After Socrates’ views on these topics are explained, a critique will be done on his answers. I will start out by explaining exactly who Socrates is, and the time that he lived in. To start out, we will first examine Socrates’ view on morality.

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.

The belief that morality requires God remains a widely held moral maxim. In particular, it serves as the basic assumption of the Christian fundamentalist's social theory. Fundamentalists claim that all of society's troubles - everything from AIDS to out-of-wedlock pregnancies - are the result of a breakdown in morality and that this breakdown is due to a decline in the belief of God. This paper will look at different examples of how a god could be a bad thing and show that humans can create rules and morals all on their own. It will also touch upon the fact that doing good for the wrong reasons can also be a bad thing for the person.

The Divine Command Theory is the assertion in ethics that an action is morally right if, and only if, it conforms to God’s will. This premise ties together morality and religion in a manner that seems expected, since it provides a solution to arguments about moral relativism and the objectivity of ethics. On the other hand, in Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates questions whether something is right because God commands it, or whether God commands it because it is right. The ethical implications of the Euthyphro problem suggest that the relationship between morality and religion might not be as straightforward as suggested by the Divine Command Theory.

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.

What is the Euthyphro Dilemma or Problem? How is it resolved? First, Socrates encounters Euthyphro outside the court of Athens, where he was called upon to be charged with impiety by Meletus, which is the lack of being religious towards god. On the other end, Euthyphro was present at court that day to prosecute his own father for accidentally murdering an innocent slave worker, by throwing him in a ditch. Socrates believes Euthyphro must know what is right from wrong, if he is responsible for the prosecution of his own father.

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.

Although Euthyphro redefines piety to fulfill Socrates requirement of generality, Socrates still refutes this third definition. Specifically, he rejects the definition given by Euthyphro because it gives a quality of piety instead of the nature of piety. As such, piety cannot be defined by a quality of itself because a part cannot define the whole. In this paper I will demonstrate how Socrates refutes Euthyphro’s third definition of piety.

pious actions” (Grube 6d). Socrates wants Euthyphro to give a wide definition of piety, saying “Tell me then what this form itself is” (Grube 6e) that makes all pious actions pious.

morality permits each of us a sphere in which to pursue our own plans and goals.

Plato’s paradigmatic dialogue, Euthyphro, may be considered the epitome of Socrates’ mastery of philosophy. In this dialogue, Socrates and Euthyphro converse on the porch of King Archon, who oversees religious laws. They both state why they are there and try to justify themselves to each other. While doing this, they circumvent about the matter of what piety exactly means. Euthyphro, having the reputation of being divine and pious, told Socrates that he is indeed an expert in these matters relating to piety, but Socrates makes it his mission to prove Euthyphro wrong in the most indirect and clever way possible.

When Socrates challenges the intelligible foundation of piety, one that entails a complex unraveling of gods, love and justice, the instability of institutionalised theodicy comes through. Euthyphro draws parallels between his proposed action (of prosecuting his father for a wrongful act) with similar instances from Hesiod’s account. The potential of mythology as canonical

Lastly, and on the other hand, many people cerebrate that the conventional views of religion hold just the antithesis, since many people believe that religion is the indispensable substructure of morality, and that without the notion in God, there can be no ethics, no right or