The moral code of a society is established by many different factors. A large amount of different social guidelines are derived from religious doctrines. Due to the evolution of religion, social guidelines lack an absolute. The absolute of piety is what Socrates seemed to be searching for. His questioning of Euthyphro may have been due to his innocent curiosity. It is also probable to assume that Socrates knew that there was no true definition of Piety, and that his overall quest to find the universal of piety was used more as an example. He may have been expressing critical thought and encouraging society to understand the variation of individual perception, and the distinction of human existence. In my opinion, piety cannot have a universal meaning, due to the variation of the human race. The understanding of human fallibility and differentiation of human existence, in my opinion is what Plato meant to express with his construction of the theory of forms. I also believe that representing the lack of human similarity in terms of a pious action, was the reason for Socrates’ severe questioning of Euthyphro.
Euthyphro uses religion as one of his attempts to explain what the true definition of piety is, “Piety, then, is that which is dear to the gods, and impiety is that which is not dear to them” (Jowett, 1903), this is a very common interpretation of the definition piety. Webster’s dictionary defines piety as,” the quality or state of being pious: or: fidelity to natural obligations (as to parents) or: dutifulness in religion: devoutness” (Merriam-Webster, 2012). Webster’s dictionary provides a definition of piety that is very similar to the definition provided by Euthyphro. The dictionary first states piety as an act of being p...
... middle of paper ...
...s of morale led him to understand that there is no definite. In situations and in life there is only relative, and nothing is constant. As humans we try to find the closest thing to constant, so we can measure our lives and daily struggles and compare them to something or someone that is not subject to the fallibility of man. I believe that Socrates was encouraging the search for knowledge by questioning the original understanding of certain definitions, like piety.
Bibliography
(n.d.).
Jowett, B. (1903). Euthyphro. The four socratic dialogue of plato, 10-36.
Merriam-Webster. (2012). About Us: An Encyclopedia Britannica Company. Retrieved January 24, 2012, from Merriam Webster Web Site: http://www.merriam-webster.com/info/index.htm?&t=1327443609
Wolfsdorf, D. (2003). Socrates' pursuit of definitions . BRILL.
Socrates put one’s quest for wisdom and the instruction of others above everything else in life. A simple man both in the way he talked and the wealth he owned, he believed that simplicity in whatever one did was the best way of acquiring knowledge and passing it unto others. He is famous for saying that “the unexplained life is not worth living.” He endeavored therefore to break down the arguments of those who talked with a flowery language and boasted of being experts in given subjects (Rhees 30). His aim was to show that the person making a claim on wisdom and knowledge was in fact a confused one whose clarity about a given subject was far from what they claimed. Socrates, in all his simplicity never advanced any theories of his own but rather aimed at bringing out the worst in his interlocutors.
In the Euthyphro, Plato describes the proceedings of a largely circular argument between Socrates and Euthyphro, a self-declared prophet and pious man, over the nature of piety and even of the gods themselves. The issues raised in this dialogue have been reinterpreted and extended to remain relevant even with a modern theological framework, so much so that the central issue is now known simply as ?the Euthyphro dilemma.? This is based on Socrates? two-way choice which he offers in the dialogue:
Socrates was wise men, who question everything, he was found to be the wise man in Athens by the oracle. Although he was consider of being the wises man alive in those days, Socrates never consider himself wise, therefore he question everything in order to learned more. Socrates lived a poor life, he used to go to the markets and preach in Athens he never harm anyone, or disobey any of the laws in Athens, yet he was found guilty of all charges and sentence to die.
In the article “God’s Heart for the Poor,” Dr. Jay W. Richards, a famous author, claims that Christians should have both heart and mind in order to help the poor and become a true, good neighbor. He uses some Bible verses to teach the readers about the importance of being a good neighbor and uses The Piety Myth to explain how Christians should “exercise prudence” and connects this concept to the economics.
Euthyphro’s second definition of piety is “the pious is what the gods love”. Socrates takes this idea and
I totally agree that Socrates found it important to research about life’s morality and not just think the same way others do. That is a way of proving the knowledge of men. Ones sitting quiet in the corner usually have more knowledge than others that talk so much about what they know. Many men with a high position in life do not always have the most knowledge.
He went about doing that by questioning people. Socrates realized that he truly knew nothing, of importance. So he tried to seek the truth. To be able to do this he had an open mind, and told his followers they should also have open minds. This is why Socrates was falsely accused of a culture that was both strict and hypocritical.
During the dialogue, Euthyphro defines, “Piety means prosecuting the unjust individual who has committed murder or sacrilege, or any other such crime, as I am doing now, whether he is your father or mother or whoever he is.” Given this Euthyphro overarching principles can be summarized as divine law requires to prosecute the offender no matter who she or he is. Also, the ideology should be what befits humans as well. Socrates is fine with how Euthyphro accounts the factual evidence of his father’s misguided acts. What Socrates takes problem is how Euthyphro uses greek mythology to highlight that taking action against your parents is the correct direction of action. Due to the fact that mythology isn’t confirmed to be true in any sense, socrates feels as though this is extremely inappropriate. Euthyphro actions should be based on divine law with results in him being impious. Socrates ultimate principles can be summarized as respect for parents should be the ultimate law combined with whatever does not befit the gods shouldn’t befit everyone else. Insert another
In the Euthyphro, Socrates is making his way into the courthouse; however, prior to entering he had a discussion with a young priest of Athens, Euthyphro. This dialogue relates religion and justice to one another and the manner in which they correlate. Euthyphro feels as though justice necessitates religion and Socrates feels the opposite, religion necessitates justice. Euthyphro claims that religion is everything, justice, habits, traditions, customs, cultures, etc. all are derived from religion. Socrates went on to question what exactly would be the definition of pious. Euthyphro offered Socrates three definitions of pious and in all three Socrates was able to successfully find fault...
Keeping true to Socratic/Platonic methodology, questions are raised in the Euthyphro by conversation; specifically “What is holiness?” After some useless deliberation, the discussion between Socrates and Euthyphro ends inconclusively. Euthyphro varying definitions of piety include “What I do is pious to the gods,” and, “What is pleasing to the gods is pious.” Socrates proves these definitions to be insufficient, which leads us to the Apology.
The first objection that Socrates stated was that Euthyphro’s first definition of piety was not a definition because it did not express a general idea of the word piety. Soon after the first try at defining the word piety, Euthyphro said that “what is dear to all the gods.” In disagreement, Socrates let out his second objection, which was that some gods could disagree. Then, Euthyphro said that piety was “what is dear to all the gods.” As his final objection, Socrates states “should something be pious just because it is dear to the gods or is it dear to the gods because it is pious?” In short, is an action considered morally right by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because God orders it? Even though this important point impacts the Divine Command Theory mainly, it also works against the theory of Cultural Relativism. The theory’s problems start arising when you start to think “why do our actions become moral if society or our culture approves of them?” There is also nothing in the theory of Cultural Relativism that explains why normal behavior in a society is considered the moral behavior instead of the other way around. Thus, morality is decided on a random basis there is nothing that says what makes normal behavior moral. The Divine Command Theory and Cultural Relativism both share this weakness that discredits
As it is alluded to in the Euthyphro, the concept of piety is one in which all followers of faith and beyond strive to understand and adhere to the manifestation of. For hundreds of years after this dialogue the question of piety and divine command still alludes the wisest thinkers and holiest of men. Is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods? With only two paths to venture down, both having unpleasant results, this question is still unanswered to most. But the importance of the question remains. To question everything we encounter, to question everything we think we already know, and to “prefer nothing, unless it is true (14e)”. In this essay I will argue that the Gods commanding good actions because they are already good is the
Socrates’s argument that what is holy and what is approved of by the gods are not the same thing is convincing because they both are two different things. Like Socrates stated in 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?” This connects back to Socrates argument because it states that the gods choose what is pious because they love it or is it pious because it being loved be the gods. The gods are determining the definition of pious instead of letting it be defined. In a way they are changing the definition of it because their peers will look up to them and follow what they have to say. Socrates arguments relate to this because if the gods don’t approve of something
The interesting dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphro demonstrates this Socratic method of questioning in order to gain a succinct definition of a particular idea, such as piety. Though the two men do not come to a conclusion about the topic in the conversation seen in Euthyphro, they do discover that piety is a form of justice, which is more of a definition than their previous one. Their conversation also helps the reader to decipher what makes a good definition. Whenever Euthyphro attempts to define piety, Socrates seems to have some argument against the idea. Each definition offered, therefore, becomes more succinct and comes closer to the actual concept of piety, rather than just giving an example or characteristic of it. To be able to distinguish between a good definition and a bad one is the first step to defining what Socrates so desperately wished to define: w...
In Euthyphro, Socrates and Euthyphro are discussing the topic of piety. Namely what is in fact piety, and once one knows that, how he can regard himself to be 'pious'. According to Euthyphro, there are three definitions of piety: doing what Euthyphro is currently doing; but this needs an essence, which is basically a refutation agreement between the gods. On the topic of gods, Euthyphro's second definition is that piety is what the gods love, and thirdly that piety is what all the gods love. Based off of Euthyphro's definitions, one must ask if something is pious because the gods love it? Or do the gods love it because