Euthyphro's Argument Analysis

Following traditional Socratic procedure, Socrates, in Plato’s Euthyphro, assumes the unfitting role of the ignorant pupil seeking to obtain knowledge from Euthyphro, the prosecutor and self-proclaimed expert on piety. However, as the dialogue progresses and the irony reveals itself, Euthyphro unveils his true ignorance and Socrates emerges as the wise prosecutor who questions the former on his various definitions and understandings of piety.

The discourse between Socrates and Euthyphro clearly depicts a dilemma when it comes to the question on holiness, moral goodness and the will of God. While Euthyphro is of the opinion that what is dear to the gods is holy, and what is not dear to them is unholy, (Indiana University 6) Socrates seems to be of a different opinion. This discourse occurs at a time when there is a belief in many gods in Greece, each god having different duties. The gods are also known to disagree on a number of issues. Socrates, in trying to counter Euthyphro’s idea he opines that since the gods disagree, they must have different concepts of what is ethical and what is not. Socrates clearly states, in support of this opinion that that according to Euthyphro’s account,

Here he runs into Euthyphro and they stop to talk about their cases. Socrates is particularly interested in Euthyphro’s case as Euthyphro contends that he must hold his father accountable for his impiety. Socrates starts questioning Euthyphro on the definition of piety, which he will never be able to answer.

Euthyphro’s father and relatives were angry on him for prosecuting his own father, the family members think that it is impious for a son to prosecute father for murder. Explaining piousness to Socrates, Euthyphro argued “The pious is to do what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer, be it about murder or a temple robbery or anything else, whether the wrongdoer is your father or your mother or anyone else.” He further argued that Zeus is the best and most just of gods and that he bonds his father because he unjustly swallowed his sons and he castrated his father for similar reasons. After these statements, Socrates objection for piousness started, Socrates questioned Euthyphro that there are other pious actions also apart from this one he further added that to his question that any action of ours or another’s is pious and if it is not that it is not. In these chunks of questions Socrates was trying to identify meaning of piousness in the eyes of Euthyphro.

He is certain that prosecuting his father is the just and moral course of action because he believed it was commanded as such by the divine who are supposedly innately good. Unable to see the soundness in Euthyphro’s claim, Socrates proposes a question that has become known as possibly one of the oldest ethical questions in the history of philosophy. Socrates proposes the following question to Euthyphro, “Is what is holy (or moral) approved by the gods because it is holy, or is it holy because it is approved by the

Euthyphro tries to explain him that he was doing the same as Zeus did to his father and therefore being pious. But Socrates argues that it is just an example and not an explanation. He tries again and says what gods like is pious and what they dislike is not. But Socrates points out the fallacy in that argument that one god might not agree with another to which he replies in his third attempt what all gods like is pious and what they all hate is impious. Here, in this example we can see that how he searches for a concrete and complete definition for being pious.

In Apology, Socrates faces possible execution as he stands trial in front of his fellow Athenian men. This jury of men must decide whether Socrates has acted impiously against the gods and if he has corrupted the youth of Athens. Socrates claims in his defense that he wants to live a private life, away from public affairs and teachings in Athens. He instead wants to focus on self-examination and learning truths from those in Athens through inquiry. Socrates argues that "a [man] who really fights for justice must lead a private, not a public, life if [he] is to survive for even a short time" (32a).

Socrates’ position towards the authorities was inconsistent in The Euthyphro and The Crito. He questioned the authority in The Euthyphro but defended and obeyed it in The Crito. In The Euthyphro, Socrates had a dialog with Euthyphro who claimed to be an expert on the subjects such as holiness, Gods, piety, justice, etc. Socrates began his philosophical debate by asking Euthyphro to define piety and impiety.

For the individuals who are searching for a tasteful meaning of devotion, the discourse is a failure, for no conclusion has been come to concerning the exact idea of that goodness. It has now and again been kept up that the genuine motivation behind logic isn't to answer addresses yet rather scrutinize the appropriate responses that have been given. Anyways, this is precisely what Socrates has been doing in this back and forth. Euthyphro has displayed a few speedy and prepared responses to the inquiry "What is devotion?" however upon magnification, each of these questions has appeared to be unsuitable.

In this paper I will examine why Socrates did not attempt to appease the jury in his Apology. Socrates is put on trial for corrupting the youth and believing in gods other than the gods of the city. I believe he chose not to appease the jury for three reasons: he is a man of pride, he does not fear death and additionally finds it shameful to fear death. Socrates is a man of pride.

Agathon describes Eros as young, delicate, beautiful, courageous (brave), and most skillful of all the activities known to mankind. Before giving a speech, Agathon first criticized other speakers, as he claimed that other speakers prior to him does not know how to properly praise the “god,” Eros. (195, a) Agathon states that Eros prevented violence, and instead brought peace among the gods, due to “love of beauty”. (197, b) In addition, Eros is a freely-moving spirit that cannot force anyone or be forced into doing anything by anyone and instead only acts upon ‘mutual concent and agreement,” hence

HUM2225 Dr. Hotchkiss September 30, 2016 Moral Insight Plato’s Euthyphro is based on a lesson between Socrates and Euthyphro outside of the Athenian court about the definition of pious or impious. Euthyphro was surprised to see Socrates there and even more curious to find out why he was there. Socrates explained that the court was persecuting him for impiety because Meletus was spreading rumors about him corrupting the Athenian youth. Euthyphro explains to Socrates that he was there to prosecute his father for murdering a farm worker named Dionysus.

Sydney Leopard Philosophy 105 3-5-2018 What is pious and impious and who, on the off chance that anybody, is to decide equity? In The Trial and Death of Socrates, Plato relates the dialog amongst Crito and Socrates in his correctional facility cell. Crito is doing what he supposes is just and intends to convince Socrates to escape execution. Socrates, however, doesn 't rush to take Crito 's offer.

The trial and death of Socrates is a book with four dialogues all about the trail that leads to the eventual death of Socrates. The four dialogues are Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, and Phaedo. It will explain the reasoning that brought Socrates to trial in the first place and give us a glimpse into the physiological thought of this time, and in this paper will describe some of the differences today. The first of the four dialogues are Euthyphro.

In Aristophanes’ Clouds it wasn’t just for Strepsiades to beat his father because although Strepsiades was a bad citizen, that doesn’t give it a right to beat his own father. In Plato’s Euthyphro, I think Socrates felt the same way that it isn’t really ‘just’ that Euthyphro should prosecute his own father because he was in great shocked that Euthyphro is doing such bold move and this is a big crime in Greek society. This is why Socrates kept questioning Euthyphro reason for prosecution with holy and unholy and impious and pious.