Socrates Piety Analysis

Philosophy is very complex but it always aims at the revelation of truth. Because of this, philosophic studies became the permanent quest of truth. It is possible to refer to Socrates’ philosophy and his ideas, which make the search of truth as the main reason of purposeful and valuable life.

The philosopher suggests looking for the truth as the determinant element of justice. To make justice means to find the truth. It is possible to refer to his argument with Euthyphro concerning piety. Piety is a concept that shows the obedience to divine norms and respect of gods. Socrates’ dialogue with Euthyphro reveals that this concept is extremely difficult to define. Euthyphro argues that he was inspired by deity to bring his own father to court (Fagan & Russon, 2009).

Socrates challenges the essence of the argument of his opponent.

Socrates continuously refers to examples concerning stories related to gods, which he believes to be inconsistent and incredible. Euthyphro draws more and more examples of stories concerning gods, which he believes prove his position as being inspired by gods. Soon Enough Socrates asks Euthyphro to define piety, which he fails to do because he cannot give the definition, which is universally true (Fagan & Russon, 2009). Socrates uncovers that the concept of piety offered by his opponent is incorrect.

Socrates believed in the importance of happiness, self achievement and fulfilling goals without hurting yourself or others. A person, who cannot find happiness is living a life that is not worth living. A Person should gain the value of life and inner happiness through studying and examining the life, the world around, and the internal world of him/her self. Life became purposeful and fruitful. Otherwise, the life would be pointless and

useless.
Socrates’ apology is the critique of the political life of the Athenian state. The philosopher was really unsure about the vulnerability of political decisions and policies conducted by Athens. Socrates defends himself from accusations of the neglect and offense of religion and religious beliefs of Athenian citizens. At the same time, the standpoint of Socrates is philosophical in its essence. His primary goal is to present his views accurately and to prove that he is not innocent and, thus, to debunk the accusation. In this regard, he attempts to persuade the audience in his righteousness emphasizing the importance of the truth as his only goal. However, the philosopher rejects religion as the truth. Instead, he argues that he does believe in gods but he doubts in his abilities.
To me, his position is reasonable and fair since he may doubt in virtually anything. He should doubt in everything. Such a position is unacceptable because Athenians were religious people and religion played an important part not only in the social but also political life of the Athenian society. Therefore, the position of challenging abilities of gods put under the question the essence of the ideology and religion dominating in the Athenian society.
Socrates questioned abilities of gods but such position was too daring for political leaders and political elite of Athens because if one dares to doubt in abilities of gods, who were always viewed in Athens as superior deities, then one would doubt in abilities of governors and the ruling elite at large. Therefore, if Socrates’ ideas became popular, there was the direct threat to the ruling regime in Athens, while the state was ruled by the aristocratic elite. In fact, people being influenced and inspired by ideas of Socrates could challenge abilities of the ruling people.