Why Euthyphro's Pious And What Is Unholy?

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.

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.

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

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

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

Holiness, or piousness, is the center of the conversation between Socrates and Euthyphro. Both of the men met on the porch of the King to deal with a legal matter; Socrates the defendant and Euthyphro the plaintiff. Socrates was being charged with

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.

But Socrates is not interested in this specific case but more generally what is categorized as holy or unholy. Euthyphro finally gives Socrates an answer by saying “what is agreeable to the god is holy, and what is not agreeable to them is unholy.” This answer leads to an important point that Aristotle makes in his attempt to undermine Euthyphro’s argument.

Euthyphro is at the court to charge his father with manslaughter, because his father did have the right equipment to protect his workers from different elements. Socrates is astonished about Euthyphro that he's putting his dad to death. The words of Euthyphro : "It's ridiculous, Socrates for you to think it makes any difference whether the dead man's a stranger is a relative...You, see it's impious they say, for a son to prosecute his father for murder. Little they know Socrates about the god's position on the pious and the impious!" Euthyphro wants to teach Socrates what's impiety. If Socrates knows what impiety is, he can use it for his own trial. Socrates wants a universal translation of impiety. Euthyphro first definition of piety is what Euthyphro is doing right now, charging his father with manslaughter. Socrates discards

Euthyphro replies by saying that surely the gods agree that the unjust killing of a man is unholy and should be punished. Socrates refutes by saying that that is not what is in question and that yes they do agree on factual things. He says that the question is that they do not always agree with what is just and what is unjust, each has their own opinion, and if this is true that they must not agree. Socrates uses his method to get Euthyphro to question his decision on prosecuting his father. This leads Euthyphro to change his definition up yet again.

Euthyphro prosecuted his own father because he believes that a murderer should be punished regardless of the murderer’s reasoning. Euthyphro had no fear of acting impiously in bringing his father to trial. Socrates asks Euthyphro “…is the pious not the same and alike in every action, and the impious the opposite of all that is pious and like itself, and everything that is to be impious presents us with one form or appearance insofar as it is impious?” When asked, “…what is pious, and what the impious…” Euthyphro answers that he believes the pious is prosecuting the wrongdoer even though it is his own father. Socrates then continues to ask Euthyphro what it is he believes what the gods believe is pious or impious. After moments of discussing this question, Socrates and Euthyphro have come to terms that some things are considered just by some gods and unjust by others, and as they dispute about these things they are at odds and at war with each other. Socrates finally asks Euthyphro for proof that the gods would be in favor of him prosecuting his own father. Euthyphro responds saying, “I will show it to them clearly, Socrates, if only they will listen to me.” In response, Socrates says, “They will listen if they think you show them well.” This implies that the gods will only be in favor of Euthyphro’s decision if they like the idea. At this point, Socrates starts to question if things are right because the gods say they are right, or the gods say they are right because they are right. Socrates came to the conclusion that what Euthyphro was saying is that “…the pious and the god-loved were shown not to be the same but different from each other” and then later said, “…what is dear to the gods is the pious.” Socrates was not satisfied with this answer and wanted to start over from the beginning. However, he concludes that he believes that Euthyphro has a clear

continuing the discussion. More importantly, Socrates instigates a formal problem for Euthyphro from a deceivingly simple question, "Is the

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]?'

In Euthyphro, Socrates is on his way to his trial for impiety when he runs into Euthyphro. Euthyphro is on his way to trial as well, but he is the prosecutor in his trial. He is trying his own father for the murder of a servant. Socrates asks him to teach him about what is holy so that he might be able to defend himself better. Socrates asks Euthyphro to teach him, but as you read you