Throughout the dialogue Socrates uses his method of elenchus to show Euthyphro that he actually does not know the absolute definition of piety. The Euthyphro dilemma occurs when, after some debate, Euthyphro comes to the conclusion that piety is what all of the gods love. Socrates then asks Euthyphro if something is pious because the gods love it or do the gods love it because that something is pious? This question forms the basic premise for the Euthyphro dilemma and through his use elenchus; Socrates is able to make the point that in order for piety to have any true value it must be valuable on its own, regardless of the gods and what they view as good. This idea portrays the view that ethical and moral values are independent of religion, which means moral action does not necessarily require religious belief.
Is it really rational to believe that God will reward blind faith and punish those who do believe in moral justice but do not necessarily believe in him? Pascal’s Wager portrays God as an insecure, arrogant being who must be validated by the belief of mere mortals. Since there is a claim that God is indeed “All-Good” wouldn’t that mean that he would reward those who are just like him even if they did not believe in him. A Being that possesses perfect goodness would not reward an immoral person for the sake of mere belief because that would mean he is not perfectly good. This aspect of Pascal’s Wager is therefore nullified because it negates one of the attributes of God, which is that he is “All-Good.” Another controversial problem with Pascal’s argument is one believing in god for the sake of a reward.
Which follows on from which? Do the Gods make piety, or fit in with it? Euthyphro states “Is what is pious loved by the Gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved?” Essentially what Euthyphro is saying is ‘Does God command what is good because it is good, or is the good “good” because commanded it?’ This dilemma leaves us with an argument based upon circular logic, and no matter how we seem to go about answering it we are left with the same predicament. We could side with the latter half of this
Instead of describing a pious or impious act, Euthyphro has given a clear definition of what piety is, just like Socrates asked him to. Piety is what is dear to the gods. However, Socrates refutes this definition of Euthyphro as well. Earlier, Socrates and Euthyphro had stated that Gods were in a state of discord, in odds with each other, and that they were at enmity with each other. Now Socrates asks Euthyphro, “What subject of difference would make us angry and hostile to each other if we were unable to come to a decision?” Socrates claims that subjects such as the just and the unjust, the beautiful and the ugly, the good and the bad are certain subjects that would cause differences between them when they were unable to come to a satisfactory conclusion and would cause Socrates and Euthyphro as well as other men to become hostile towards one another.
To this Euthyphro agrees” (Plato, 2008). The first horn of dilemma suggests that if something is pious then God also supports it. It seems to be quite logical as this theory proves that God is there with them who deserve His affection. That makes the existence of God more
When presented with the idea that there are many gods and each of them might have a different notion of what is pious and what is not, Euthyphro offers one last definition. Finally Euthyphro states that that which is pious is just to the gods, but there can also be things that are just for men but not the gods. They have returned to one of the definitions they began with, that piety is that which the gods love. Throughout their conversation
Socrates applauds Euthyphro, insinuating that he must be a great philosopher in religious matters if he is willing to prosecute his own father. Euthyphro concurs that he does indeed know all there is to know about what is holy. Upon hearing this Socrates immediately assumes that Euthyphro has knowledge of piety and impiety. He believes if Euthyphro can teach him the meaning of piety and impiety this would enable him to better argue his trial against Meletus. So, Socrates assumes the role of student instead of teacher.
He does as such for a few reasons. In any case, he doesn't trust that one's obligation toward a perfect being ought to be viewed as something that is partitioned and particular from his obligation toward his kindred men. In actuality, he holds that the main genuine method for rendering administration to God comprises in doing what one can to advance the good and otherworldly improvement of people. Second, Socrates respects the reason and capacity of religion as something that is unique in relation to the view communicated by Euthyphro. Rather than religion being utilized as a sort of hardware or gadget for getting what one needs, as was valid for Euthyphro's situation, Socrates trusts the basic role of genuine religion is to carry one's own life into amicability with the will of God.
All attempts to explain piety comes with more unanswered questions to Socrates thus leaving him with more questions to the definite definition of piety. Socrates and Euthyphro are in a bit of a conflict over their views of piety. To Euthyphro piety is the act of being pious which is godly. Showing justice whether it is sought by bringing a stranger to justice or someone who is a relative. The concept emerges in the dialogue after Socrates asks Euthyphro to explain what is piety or holy.
The Euthyphro Dilemma In the reading Euthyphro, Socrates asks about piety (“The Euthyphro-Question”) to show the lack of clarity of the Divine Command Theory. By Socrates questioning the meaning of piety, it is intended to show the clarity of the Divine Command Theory. In this paper, I will argue why horn one of the Euthyphro Dilemma shows the Divine Command Theory to be false, but also how horn two supports the theory. The Divine Command Theory states that actions are right or wrong just because God commands or prohibits them. This means that the only thing that makes and act morally wrong is that God either commands or prohibits it.