More handpicked essays just for you.
Concept of democracy as viewed by plato
Plato's opinion on democracy
Concept of democracy as viewed by plato
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
This is a summary of a conversation between Euthyphro and Socrates that happened near Lyceum. The conversation starts with what takes each person to the court today; Meletus was prosecuting Socrates for corrupting the youth and refusing the acknowledgment of the gods of the state and Euthyphro was there to prosecute his father for killing one of the servants of their house. In ancient greek taking your own family specially your own father to the court was a preposterous action, Socrates startled by this fact told Euthyphro that he must have a clear knowledge and understanding of what is pious and what is not or what is piety as a whole picture that he sees himself well qualified and befitting for such action. So Socrates ironically asks Euthyphro to explain this to him so he could use it as his defense in the court.
Euthyphro replies “Piety is doing as I am
…show more content…
Socrates argues that he didn’t want some examples but a general idea that makes all pious things to be pious. Then Euthyphro says “Piety, then, is that which is dear to the gods, and impiety is that which is not dear to them“. Next Socrates asks him what if the gods are having quarrels among them, then there wouldn’t be any single right or wrong because of the gods different perspectives on different matters so somethings could be both dear and hateful to the gods, hence rises the question is the pious, pious as a view of the fact that it is beloved by the gods because it is holy, or it is holy because it is beloved by the gods which is in contradiction with Euthyphro’s claim that what all the gods love is pious and what they hate is impious. Socrates
Socrates a classical Greek philosopher and character of Plato’s book Phaedo, defines a philosopher as one who has the greatest desire of acquiring knowledge and does not fear death or the separation of the body from the soul but should welcome it. Even in his last days Socrates was in pursuit of knowledge, he presents theories to strengthen his argument that the soul is immortal. His attempts to argue his point can’t necessarily be considered as convincing evidence to support the existence of an immortal soul.
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
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...
Socrates: A Gift To The Athenians As Socrates said in Apology by Plato, “...the envy and detraction of the world, which has been the death of many good men, and will probably be the death of many more…”(Philosophical Texts, 34) Throughout history, many leaders have been put to death for their knowledge. In Apology, Socrates- soon to be put to death- says he was placed in Athens by a god to render a service to the city and its citizens. Yet he will not venture out to come forward and advise the state and says this abstention is a condition on his usefulness to the city.
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.
In Plato’s The Republic, we, the readers, are presented with two characters that have opposing views on a simple, yet elusive question: what is justice? In this paper, I will explain Thrasymachus’ definition of justice, as well as Socrates’s rebuttals and differences in opinion. In addition, I will comment on the different arguments made by both Socrates and Thrasymachus, and offer critical commentary and examples to illustrate my agreement or disagreement with the particular argument at hand.
Imagine the time just after the death of Socrates. The people of Athens were filled with questions about the final judgment of this well-known, long-time citizen of Athens. Socrates was accused at the end of his life of impiety and corruption of youth. Rumors, prejudices, and questions flew about the town. Plato experienced this situation when Socrates, his teacher and friend, accepted the ruling of death from an Athenian court. In The Last Days of Socrates, Plato uses Socrates’ own voice to explain the reasons that Socrates, though innocent in Plato’s view, was convicted and why Socrates did not escape his punishment as offered by the court. The writings, “Euthyphro,” “The Apology,” “Crito,” and “Pheado” not only helped the general population of Athens and the friends and followers of Socrates understand his death, but also showed Socrates in the best possible light. They are connected by their common theme of a memoriam to Socrates and the discussion of virtues. By studying these texts, researchers can see into the culture of Athens, but most important are the discussions about relationships in the book. The relationships between the religion and state and individual and society have impacted the past and are still concerns that are with us today.
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’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
A coincidental encounter outside the courts of Athens leads two men who are involved in legal matters to discuss the nature of piety. Socrates has been charged with impiety of corrupting the youth and Euthyphro is supposedly performing an act of piety by prosecuting his own father of murder. Socrates believes that the general public has a poor understanding of the meaning of piety and decides to ask what piety means to Euthyphro. In what follows, I will discuss the exchange of dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphro and analyze the philosophical issues that they come across.
The pious is loved by the god because it is pious, there is something in the nature of being pious which makes the gods love it. However, this is not the case for the god-loved, the thing is said to be god-loved because it is being loved by the god. The difference here is, the nature of the pious is independent of anything, the pious has a quality of being loved by the gods, but even if the god didn’t love the pious, the pious would still be pious. This is the opposite case for the god-loved, whether a thing is god-loved does depend on whether the gods really love it. If the gods decided not to love it, then that thing would no longer be god-loved. The nature of pious never changes, regardless of the circumstances; the affect or quality of the pious, which is being god-loved, does change, it relies upon the gods. Therefore, when Euthyphro says the pious is what all the god loves, he is giving an affection of being pious, not the nature of pious, and Socrates is looking for the answer of the latter one. After all, it is clear to see that why Euthyphro has not given out the definition of pious from the statement “the pious is loved by the gods because it is pious”. The statement explains nothing about what is pious. We can ask the question: why do the gods love it? The answer would be: because it is pious. Then we may ask: why is it pious? This question
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...