Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Euthyphro’s Dilemma is Euthyphro’s take on the Devine Command Theory which states “the only reason something is wrong and right is because God says it.” The dilemma consists of two conflicting horns about wrong, right, and God. The first horn states “that which is right is commanded by God because it is right.” The second horn states “that which is right, is right because it is commanded by God.” “That which is right is commanded by God because it is right.” One problem with the first horn is that if you accept the first horn, you are inferring that god is sovereign. God could be sovereign but maybe he could be a God among gods. I could ask: Who made God? Is something is only right because God commanded it? If it turns out that someone made
In the context of the dialogue, this simply segues to a logical argument about the definition of piety, and the question is more or less rhetorical as Socrates asks it. When Euthyphro chooses the first option, the discussion moves on to his next point without further ado, and the implication that this limits the omnipotence of the gods is ignored, probably because the omnipotence of the pantheon of gods wasn?t an assumption of Greek theology (after all, as we read in the dialogue, the father and grandfather of Zeus were castrated; what kind of omnipotent being would allow that to happen to himself?). However, when read with a Judeo-Christian concept of God in mind, the dilemma becomes this:
“Anabasis” is the Xenophon’s account of the expedition for Cyrus against Persian and the marching home of Greeks. The Greek title of Xenophon’s work, “Anabasis”, referred to a march up country, away from the coast. The title applies only to the first of its seven books. It all ends with the death of Cyrus at the Battle of Cuxana. The Greek mercenary soldiers were left stranded in the “barbarian” world. The rest of the books involves with tales of the Greeks’ discipline, leadership and courage during their journey home. Xenophon’s narrative offers an insight of the character and their political life of a Greek army. Although Xenophon seems to write about the account between the Greek and the barbarian, he presents himself as an important role in the Greek army throughout the rest of the books. He uses a third-person form when describing his own actions as a character. It might suggest that Xenophon is writing an apologia to defend himself and to show his vital role in the expedition.
Euthyphro’s second definition of piety is “the pious is what the gods love”. Socrates takes this idea and
The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.
Throughout Greek mythology and tragedy, there is a strong overall theme of honor and hubris. This appears both to be a virtue and a type of human weakness. Hubris is defined as excessive pride toward or defiance of the gods, leading to nemesis. It is widespread among the gods and high-ranking mortals in Greek society. Characters are presented with the option to follow their own will, keep their honor intact and face the consequences, or listen to the gods and higher powers, give up their dignity and honor in hopes of a greater outcome for their life. In the text, we can observe both approaches and how the outcomes varied. Specifically in the text of Hippolytus, characters attempt to overcome obstacles and dilemmas with solutions of hubris and morals or taking heed of advice given by higher powers; however, these solutions do not always resolve the problem and the mortals fate is often unavoidable due to the strong influence of the gods.
Thrasymachus also argues that it is advantageous to live an immoral life rather than a moral one. He says, "morality and right are actually good for someone else… and bad for the underling at the receiving end of the orders… the opposite is true for immorality: the wrongdoer lords it over those ...
Broadly, the divine command theory is a religious moral code in which God’s commands determine what human beings should or should not do. As such, it is expected for theists to subscribe to the divine command theory of morality. The deontological interpretation of the divine command theory separates actions into one of the following categories: mandatory for human beings to perform, prohibited for human beings to perform, or optional for human beings to perform. Those actions that are mandatory to perform are ones which have been expressly commanded by God. Failing to commit a mandatory action would be defying God’s commands, and thus, according to the divine command theory of morality, immoral. Actions that are prohibited are ones that God expressly commands human beings do not perform. Consequently, to perform a prohibited action would be immoral. Finally, those actions that God does not expressly command that human beings should perform or should avoid performing are optional; there are no moral implications to performing or not performing such acts. The rightness or wrongness of an action is inherently and wholly dependent upon th...
In life much of our future rest upon our decisions. These decisions come in all different shapes and sizes, and some have the potential to thrive our futures into greatness, while others can destroy our lives to the point of no return. In the play Medea, by Euripides he provides his audience with a dramatic story of a woman who will stop at nothing, to reach her goals of revenge. In Medea there are many significant decisions made throughout the story. The decision by Medea to let her desire for revenge rule her life, I believe is the most important. Medea is a tragedy, which shows the true destruction and horror that came from one decision.
Plato’s Theaetetus is one of the most read and interpreted texts under the subject of philosophy. Within the dialect, many topics and questions are analyzed and brought to light. Leon Pearl is the author of Is Theaetetus Dreaming?, which discusses the positions taken on the topic of ‘dreaming’ and ‘being awake’, which is conferred about within the Theaetetus. Pearl critiques the question: “How can you determine whether at this moment we are sleeping and all our thoughts are a dream; or whether we are awake and talking to one another in the waking state” asked by Socrates within Plato’s Theaetetus (Pearl, p.108). Pearl first analyzes the question from the skeptic’s point of view and then proceeds to falsify the skeptic’s argument by his own interpretation, stating that “if a man is awake and believe that he is awake, then this constitutes a sufficient condition for his knowing the he is awake” (Pearl, p.108). Within Pearl’s argument, the conclusion at the end of section II becomes questionable when considering that knowledge and true belief have no distinction in the ‘awake state’ of mind.
Euthyphro was arguing that by doing what the gods believe is holy and pious you are making them better, in other words you are taking care of them and it is like a kind of service that you are doing towards the gods. Euthyphro said, “The kind of care, Socrates, that slaves take of their masters” which meant that you are taking care of them in the sense that you are making them better and not actually caring for them (17, 13d). In other words, you are helping improve them and this is a service that the gods appreciate and want you to do. He believed that this service is improving the gods and that they like this service. The gods believe that being holy is a service towards them, therefore there should be a reason on why the gods use us and want to reward our holiness. He believes that the gods choose what is holy for a reason and should be approved by
At times in a person’s life, they might come across a few situations that leave them with a major decision between two or more options that challenge what they believe or what they might think is wrong or right. These are known as ethical dilemmas. Be it seeing a friend steal something and choosing between being honest and speaking up or letting it go. It can also be getting paid more than you earned and deciding if you’re going to be greedy and keep the money or return it. We run into these situations in our lives, some bigger and more influential on our destiny’s while others are small with no real consequences.
In Plato’s Euthyphro, the main characters are the titular Euthyphro and Socrates. When Plato bumps in Euthyphro, Euthyphro is on the way to court. He is trying his father for murder. This leads to Socrates calling Euthyphro impious, meaning he is unfaithful to the gods. However, Euthyphro argues that what he is doing is pious, as he is prosecuting a murder. After Socrates refuses to take that answer, Euthyphro changes his definition of piety as doing what is dear to the gods. Again, Euthyphro has to change his definition of piety because of Socrates and he says it is what is loved by the gods. His fourth definition of piety is attending to the gods. Finally, Euthyphro makes his last definition of piety, which is doing what makes the gods happy, such as praying and making offerings. When
Throughout the second half of the Euthyphro section of Plato’s Five Dialogues, Socrates is trying to search for a true meaning of the word pious. He converses with Euthyphro to try and detect a definition, in which they both discuss their own court cases. This is when Euthyphro brings up the discussion between piety and impiety, and in doing so creates curiosity within Socrates. Socrates asks Euthyphro to please provide a definition of what is pious or not. Euthyphro first mentions that the definition of piety is what he is doing at that moment, which is prosecuting his father for murder. Socrates disregards this so called definition because he claims it is only an example, not a true definition. After giving possible definitions both in the
The Euthyphro Argument explains that Either God has reasons that support His commands, or God lacks reasons for His commands and if God
Throughout the history of natural law, all scholars have agreed that its primary principle is that everything in this world has a purpose, often agreeing that this purpose was divinely designed. The natural law that we think of today is predominantly the version presented by Aquinas, who “considered that natural law was the moral code which human beings are naturally inclined towards. God reveals specific commands but these do not go against natural law but rather further and develop it”.2 For Aqunias' theory of natural law, one of his key princip...