The Euthyphro
by Plato
Euthyphro, is one of the many dialogues that was written by the Greek philosopher Plato dicussion the quest for wisdom by his mentor, Socrates. The time that The Euthyphro takes place is doing the time of a trial that Socrates is in regarding some here say that he was corrupting the youth of Athens, and ultimately leads to his demise. It is very important issue due to the system Socrates used to try to understand wisdom, and gives some input on his and Plato's view on holiness altogether. In all, the Euthyphro is a view of how the Socratic way of getting wisdom works and it enters into what Socrates and Plato define holiness as.
The dialogue begins with Socrates and Euthyphro coming across eachother in front of the court house in Athens. Euthyphro and Socrates are amazed to see each other at such a place and Euthyphro is the first to inquire why the other is there. Socrates answer by saying he is being charged for corrupting the youth for giving false information on the new gods by Meletus, which was a young politician who thinks of Socrates in this way. Socrates sometimes tell jokes about what happen by sometimes making a fool of how Meletus's looked, and says that he thinks the greatness of the youth should be a main concern. Euthyphro states that he too has come across some unapproved details due to some of his godly thoughts that where often not believed as well and Socrates will just have to get through the storm. Socrates then question why Euthyphro has come before the court, with Euthyphro answering that he is prosecuting his own father for murder. Socrates is amazed that Euthyphro would actually prosecute his own father, and says that Euthyphro must be an expert in these matters to be able to do ...
... middle of paper ...
...ristic of Socrates and how he did things; he never criticized people's thoughts just wanted to make them think. By the end of the dialogue, Socrates has achieved one conclusion through the conversation; that holiness is in fact not just simply good will whether it is toward god(s) or man. It is something more, something that cannot be grasped himself or Euthyphro, sometimes good will is simply good will it is not necessarily holy. But the fact that Socrates did conclude that holiness is not simply good will he did provide a platform for beginning to think about the full meaning of holiness. I believe that another main message of this dialogue left by Socrates is that no one, including himself, can know everything about anything, and that there will always be more to learn. People should strive to come upon their own conclusions about things and think for themselves.
Before getting into the principles of Socrates, it is important to have some context on these two stories to understand how each of these exemplify philosophical understanding. “Euthyphro” is a dialogue between Socrates and
Plato's The Apology is an account of the speech. Socrates makes at the trial in which he is charged with not recognizing the gods recognized by the state, inventing new gods, and corrupting the youth of Athens. For the most part, Socrates speaks in a very plain, conversational manner. He explains that he has no experience with the law courts and that he will instead speak in the manner to which he is accustomed with honesty and directness. Socrates then proceeds to interrogate Meletus, the man primarily responsible for bringing Socrates before the jury. He strongly attacks Meletus for wasting the court¡¦s time on such absurd charges. He then argues that if he corrupted the young he did so unknowingly since Socrates believes that one never deliberately acts wrongly. If Socrates neither did not corrupt the young nor did so unknowingly, then in both cases he should not be brought to trial. The other charge is the charge of impiety. This is when Socrates finds an inconsistency in Meletus¡¦ belief that Socrates is impious. If he didn¡¦t believe in any gods then it would be inconsistent to say that he believed in spiritual things, as gods are a form of a spiritual thing. He continues to argue against the charges, often asking and answering his own questions as if he were speaking in a conversation with one of his friends. He says that once a man has found his passion in life it would be wrong of him to take into account the risk of life or death that such a passion might involve.
Plato’s "Apology" gives the substance of the defense made by Socrates to the Athenians at his trial. Meletus, Anytus and Lyncon brought Socrates to court on charges of corrupting the morals of the youth, leading the youth away from the principals of democracy, neglecting the Gods of the State and introducing new divinities.
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:
Consequently, In Plato's Euthyphro, our acquaintance with Socrates is immensely beneficial to society, as we obtain awareness on such an innovative method of achieving intuition. The Socratic approach is now a fundamental approach implemented in daily conversation in society Furthermore, not only is Socrates is able to verify that the true seekers are the wise; he also validates the notion that the answers to many questions are merely questions. Simply because, life is so debate that certain subjects begin to intertwine. To sum up, Plato's Euthyphro is extremely indicative of this Socratic irony, for the reason being that: Socrates's portrays a sense of intellectual humility.
When discussing specific knowledge, it is often hard to pin down an exact definition of what it is you are discussing. Often a concept or word will get thrown around so often that it will begin to be taken for granted and when pressed, a person may struggle to pin down specifically what it is they mean. Realizing this, Socrates often went out and attempted to fix these kinds of problems and find out what people actually knew, compared to what they just thought they knew. In the dialogues Euthyphro and Meno, Socrates attempts to pin down definitions for piety and virtue, respectively. In doing so, we are shown that the thinkers in question struggle to define these terms, and attempt to do so in vague terms that may vary heavily under different circumstances. What Socrates is attempting to find is one definitive definition of piety and virtue, what is called his One Form Requirement. Rather than defining something by classifying different parts that make it up, Socrates maintains the belief that piety and virtue both can be simplified into one specific form that describes exactly what makes all F actions F.
He establishes that “the pious is what all the gods love”. Socrates immediately asks a clarifying question, asking whether the gods love pious acts because they are pious or if it because since the gods love these actions it makes them pious. Euthyphro choses to say that the gods love pious acts because they are pious, which was a mistake in his thought process. Euthyphro committed the begging the question fallacy. Socrates shows that although Euthyphro is deemed an expert in this field, he does know understand piety at all. He has brought the conversation to the beginning by saying that pious acts are pious because they are pious, which is not an explanation. It is redundant in thinking, which is what Socrates wanted to avoid. At the end when Socrates tries to further push Euthyphro’s thinking, Euthyphro merely gives up and avoids Socrates altogether. Plato again illustrates the importance of applying rational thought when one ventures to find the truth. Euthyphro did not ask himself insightful and challenging questions to further push his idea towards the truth. Had he use rational standards, he would developed his idea in a much clearer
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...
One could see the final walk-away as a complete failure to a then seemingly meaningless story. Yet, I do not see it this way. Although Euthyphro walked away without a resolution, there was still much to be learned. The seemingly arrogant man that we were introduced to in the beginning, was not the same man in the final pages of the book. We may not have received a complete answer, but we did find something better; the knowledge that we cannot believe that our insights are always correct. And this is what Socrates strove to do: to evoke thought. When put on trial, we see this questioning is not an isolated occurrence as he states, “I believe the god has placed me in the city. I never cease to rouse each and every one of you, to persuade and reproach you all day long and everywhere I find myself in your company” (Apology, 30e). Socrates believed it was his duty to live a life of service in order to make people open their minds. In order for people to grow in wisdom, they needed to realize their ignorance. We need to be challenged in order to grow and it is through experiences, like Euthyphro’s, in which we become more
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 Apology is Socrates' defense at his trial. As the dialogue begins, Socrates notes that his accusers have cautioned the jury against Socrates' eloquence, according to Socrates, the difference between him and his accusers is that Socrates speaks the truth. Socrates distinguished two groups of accusers: the earlier and the later accusers. The earlier group is the hardest to defend against, since they do not appear in court. He is all so accused of being a Sophist: that he is a teacher and takes money for his teaching. He attempts to explain why he has attracted such a reputation. The oracle was asked if anyone was wiser than Socrates was. The answer was no, there was no man wiser. Socrates cannot believe this oracle, so he sets out to disprove it by finding someone who is wiser. He goes to a politician, who is thought wise by him self and others. Socrates does not think this man to be wise and tells him so. As a consequence, the politician hated Socrates, as did others who heard the questioning. "I am better off, because while he knows nothing but thinks that he knows, I neither know nor think that I know" (Socrates). He questioned politicians, poets, and artisans. He finds that the poets do not write from wisdom, but by genius and inspiration. Meletus charges Socrates with being "a doer of evil, and corrupter of the youth, and he does not believe in the gods of the State, and has other new divinities of his own."
The story that is found in Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro proposes a dilemma that has since been a very controversial subject. When Socrates encounters Euthyphyo, he is on his way to trail to face charges against his own father. His father had been accused o...
Socrates starts his defense by addressing the jury and telling them that his accusers had a prepared speech, while Socrates' speech will be completely improvised. Socrates continued to further disassociate himself from the opponents by telling the jury to forgive him for his conversational tone in his speech, for that's how he best speaks. He also asks the jury to keep an open mind and not concentrate on how his defense is delivered, but the substance of his defense. Socrates tells the jury that he is not a sophist. Sophists were known for charging fees for their work, and Socrates does not charge a fee for his words. His next decides to cross-examine Meletus. Basically Socrates turns the tables on his accuser and accuses Meletus of "dealing frivolously with serious matters." Socrates says that the youth he supposedly corrupts follows him around on their own free will, because the young men enjoy hearing people and things being questioned. In this line of questioning of Meletus, Socrates makes him look very contradictory to his statements in his affidavit. Socrates then moves on to the second part of his defense. Moving on to the second charge that he does not believe in the Gods accepted ...
In the Apology, Socrates examines the charges brought against him by Meletus and tries to prove that they are false. The first charge brought against him is that he was corrupting the youth. Socrates responds to this by asking Meletus, in his opinion, how Socrates was corrupting the youth. Meletus says that Socrates was teaching the youth to go against the government. Socrates asks if there was anyone who was beneficial to the youth.
Socrates says that God determines what is right and wrong. “I owe a greater obedience to God then to you and so long as I draw breath and have my faculties, I shall never stop practicing philosophy and exhorting you and indicating truth to everyone I meet” (Apology, 29d). God’s rules and commandments are what you need to follow in order to assure a good life after death. God and his commandments come first over everything else. Socrates believes in the divine command theory and how you must listen to Gods commandments. God decides what is moral and obedience to God is how you live justly. Socrates also says he will never stop practicing philosophy because in his eyes philosophy is the way to live life. He has said that living without examining life is a life not worth living. Questioning and indicating truth to others by pointing out their ignorance is what he saw as an essential part of being moral. Morality ties in to the question of solution by asking questions and seeking wisdom you are doing what is just and fixing the condition of humanity. Morality also relates to condition because the soul must be more important than material objects in order to be moral. He says you must follow cities laws and obedience to Gods laws as well in order to be just. On top of that you should be self-examining yourself so that you can better the soul as much as