Euthyphro Dialogue Analysis

Socrates uses a cause and effect method throughout the argument. As Socrate is asking Euthyphro to approve along the way down his points he gets certainly confused. Ending their argument with a point that, piety and what is pleasing to the gods are simply not the same. By the end of the argument Euthyphro is contradicted and can no longer identify what he thinks. Socrates makes a point of the difference of a fact and an opinion. The definition of a moral quality is not a matter of what people think. You cannot determine what goodness, or piety is by asking people around you. Consequently, whether something or someone has a given moral quality is also not a matter of their opinion. Whether an act or a person is good, or pious, for example, is not to be settled by a

Euthyphro’s argument is hurt extensively by the information he neglects to mention. Euthyphro does not say whether he witnessed the crime in person, or if he heard about it at a later date. He does not outline how he knows the information he puts forth, and fails to mention his own role in the scenario, which is crucial to the credibility of his accusatory words. If, by Euthyphro’s logic, his father is a murderer due to intentional neglect of the slave who died, then Euthyphro himself can be considered an accomplice, or a murderer as well for being present for or aware of the killing as it occurred and doing nothing to prevent it. His sloppy thinking results in self-incrimination through his own potential unjust behaviors, thus ruining the cogency of his view. There is no mention of Euthyphro’s relationship with his father, either. It is entirely possible that the father and son have a history of intense strife, and if Euthyphro has a grudge with his father over a prior conflict, his entire argument is flawed at its foundation. His motive for prosecuting his father could be revenge rather than the pursuit of justice and truth in the events that may or may not have happened in the way Euthyphro describes them. Any detail given by Euthyphro could be fabricated for the sake of retribution, aside from the death itself. The perishing of the slave is the only part of Euthyphro’s narrative which has physical evidence (that being the corpse of the slave). Everything else has to be believed as truth in order for Euthyphro’s claims to achieve the goal of cogency, but the speculative nature of his thinking makes trusting his words a difficult task. Before even stepping into the courtroom, it is obvious that Euthyphro’s defense is faulty due to what it lacks.

Because Zeus and Kronos both dealt with their fathers in this way, Euthyphro justifies his prosecution of his own father as “just” (Plato Five Dialogues, Grube & Cooper 2002,). As for Socrates, he questions Euthyphro about his reasoning and the reason why piety is defined by the approval of gods so that it could possibly help him with his impiety issue also. Euthyphro does not help with Socrates’s case at all due to the fact that Euthyphro does not have correct reasoning behind any of his arguments. He continuously tries to explain an example, but since he lacks proper critical thinking, he is not able to fully think about his argument. Euthyphro lacks any type of proper reasoning as to why he believes piety is based on the approval of gods and instead concentrates more on their thoughts rather than his own.

On trial is a man accused of murder and the defendant is Euthyphro’s own father. When Socrates learns this, he is rightfully shocked and astonished that Euthyphro would attempt to ensure the conviction of his father, as any person would. Socrates then asks how and why Euthyphro would do such a thing, to which Euthyphro he says piety is the demands his father’s conviction and punishment because “What is dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious,”. Dissatisfied with this response, Socrates questions if something is pious because the gods command it or if the gods command it because it is pious. Euthyphro’s response to this question explains that the gods command an action because it is pious.

The main question of this dialogue is the definition of the word holy or piety. Euthyphro brags that he is more knowledgeable than his father on matters relating to religion. In this case, Socrates suggests to Euthyphro to define that term. The first definition fails to satisfy Socrates because of its limitation in application. Apparently, Socrates perceives this definition as an example rather than a definition. Subsequent arguments and line of questioning lead to five sets of definitions that are refined to find the general definition. Socrates expects that the acceptable general definition of the question will act as a reference point in his defense.

Socrates helps Euthyphro to give meaning to the word ‘piety ', and this serves to bring a new meaning to the respect to the divine beings and help in the explanation of the whole context of the divinity in the society. In this manner, there is the need to create a clear definition and help Euthyphro in getting ideas that he can use to teach Socrates to answer the resulting question about the piety. This is to enable Socrates to have a string defense against the charge of impiety and help in tackling the challenges that he faces in the society. The story and the relationship between Socrates and Euthyphro arise when Socrates is called to court to answer to the charges of impiety by Meletus, (Plato et al, 1927). In the courts, Socrates meets Euthyphro, who comes to the courts to prosecute his father who is a murderer.

Throughout the dialogue between Euthyphro and Socrates, they both try to come up with an understanding of the relationship between piety and justice. Within the discussion, Socrates questions Euthyphro to see if he can define the difference and similarities between justice and piety, and if they interact with each other. Eventually, Euthyphro and Socrates came up with the conclusion that justice is a part of piety. This is the relationship that I agree most with because in my own opinion, I believe that all of the gods and people agree that human beings who commit unjust actions need to be punished for their actions.

Every single person has their own unique identity and culture.At first when I moved to Lafayette from my hometown it was like being a White Tiger around all regular tigers.I didn't really fit in and I kinda stood out because I wasn't from Lafayette.I moved to Lafayette from my hometown in the summer of 2015.My cultural identity fits me because of my accent.

Euthyphro intends his definition of piety. If right actions are pious only because the gods love them, then moral rightness is completely

Euthyphro’s second definition is linked to the gods. He explains that “Pious is what all the gods love, and the opposite, what all the gods hate, is impious” (9, e), meaning that piety is determined by the gods. Socrates finds this to be false, due to the fact that in order for the gods to decide what is pious, they would all have to agree. However, each god has his/her own opinion about what is honorable or just and what is not. Therefore, a decision is difficult to reach and Socrates concludes that this definition cannot be true. This definition however is the most important one because Socrates creates a strong

& Jowett, 2013). Socrates refutes this definition since he views that the gods do not need to be assisted by mortals. In his final attempt, Euthyphro defines holiness as an exchange between the gods and human beings. The gods receive sacrifices from us, while we they grant our prayers in exchange. In response, Socrates posits that this perspective implies correlates to the prior argument on the gods’ approval. He states that if holiness is gratifying to the gods, it is ambiguous as seen in the argument concerning what the gods approve, and the influences behind them (Plato. & Gallop, 1997).

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

Euthyphro responds by asserting that piety is that which is approved [loved] or sanctioned by the gods; whence impiety is whatever is disapproved of by the gods. However, as Socrates points out, the question poses a dilemma for those who believe as Euthyphro does that Truth is revealed by divine authority alone.

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

Euthyphro tells Socrates that he is prosecuting his father for murdering a servant. Euthyphro thinks prosecuting his own father is a right thing because it’s a pious action. Socrates then asks Euthyphro about the definition of a pious action or piety. Euthyphro answers “What is dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious”. (Euthyphro 7a) After hearing this, Socrates discusses that there are enmities and disputes among gods as well.