There were errors for instance gods do not also see eye to eye on some matters such as just and unjust. This definition is impossible because what is loved by the gods are also considered hated by the gods. Therefore, same things both determine are pious and impious. Euthyphro’s answer cannot be applied
On the other hand Plato also realised that by no means all alleged exceptions are justified. In the Euthyphro Socrates upon being informed that Euthyphro intends to prosecute his own father for murder suggests that perhaps it would be right to prosecute his father if he killed a relative but not if he murdered a stranger. Euthyphro rebukes Socrates for suggesting such an exception. Socrates offers no defence except to express amazement at the certainty with which Euthyphro claims to know what is right. There are several ways to resolve the problem of uncertainty which the ex... ... middle of paper ... ...speak both universally and correctly.
Socrates does not respect Euthyphro, he proves this by continuing to defend himself with the truth, calling his accusers “all those who persuaded you by means of envy and slander,” therefore he would not respect Dionysus either (Plato, Apology, 18d). This parallel between Euthyphro and Dionysus is also shown through their inability to recognize their own ignorance. Euthyphro claims he “would be in no way different from other men, if [he] did not have exact knowledge about all such things” in reference to divine law and holiness (Plato, Euthyphro, 4e). Dionysus, through his actions, is claiming to know all and does not acknowledge any ignorance he may have. As a god, he inclines he is entitled to his actions.
In Plato’s: The Apology Socrates was charged and put on trial for impiety, as well as accused of committing many other crimes. I will first explain the most important issues of why Socrates was sent to death. Then I will argue the position that Socrates is innocent, and should not be have been found guilty. To introduce, Socrates was placed on trial and charged with the crime of impiety. Impiety is the lack of reverence for the gods and other sacred things.
He says “what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer “is pious and “not to prosecute is impious” (5d-e). Euthyphro says this because his father is a murderer and regardless of his relation to him it would be impious not to punish a wrongful act. In his example he regards that whether it is “murder or temple robbery” (5d) the “law is so” (5e). Here Euthyphro explains that there is law for a reason and that regardless of who is committing the crime they should be punished for not following the law. In a furtherance of this explanation, Euthyphro compares himself to the Greek god Zeus, “Zeus...bound his father because he unjustly swallowed his sons…and that he in turn castrated his father” (5e-6a).
The Readings of The Apology of Socrates and Crito Throughout the readings of The Apology of Socrates and Crito I have found that Socrates was not a normal philosopher. It is the philosopher's intention to question everything, but Socrates' approach was different then most other philosophers. From one side of the road, Socrates can be seen as an insensitive, arrogant man. He did indeed undermine the laws so they fit his ideals, leave his family, and disregard the people's values. On the other side he can be seen as an ingenious man who questioned what many thought was the unquestionable.
From Meletus’ point of view, Socrates “corrupted the young” by teaching dishonor to one’s elders and disbelief of the Gods. Moreover, Socrates’ refusal to credit the Gods and skepticism toward “heavenly things” provides the bases for the accusation that the philosopher does not believe in the gods in whom the city
No matter which view is taken on what determines a man’s guilt, it can be concluded that Wieland bears the fault in the murder of Catharine Wieland and her children. To any religious person, hearing a command from the voice of their god is reason enough to carry out the proposed action, but in the case of Wieland, a third party must take a deeper look at such a command from a God whose known character does not line up with the order He supposedly gives. This makes Wieland’s motivation questionable, especially to those who believe that a man’s motive determines a man’s guilt. In his testimony to the court, Wieland, a pious man, reveals his motive in the murders as he recounts God as saying, “‘Thy prayers are heard. In proof of thy faith, render me thy wife.
His execution was not justified because the charges that were brought against him were false and unfounded. The fist crime that Socrates was charged with was that of impiety. This charge was invented primarily to discredit him and make him unpopular with the citizens. The charge was that of not acknowledging the same gods that the state believed in. Throughout the book, Socrates refers numerous times to the fact that it is because of the gods that things are as they seem to be.
Socrates implies at the beginning of his speech that his fate is doomed because the people who judge him believe in the persuasive falsehoods and won’t be willing to listen to the truth. The death of Socrates also reveals the internal fallacy in Athenian democracy. The consequence of a recalcitrant philosophy stands against the whole city is written, because the gulf between the belief of the society and the philosophy is impassible. Socrates’s way of living seems to be unreasonable for most people, and as the same time is not suitable for the proper operation of society which doesn’t want civilians to question the essence of life. However, Socrates shifts the focus of philosophy from the heaven to the earth.