At the end of class today we talked about the strange way in which Euthyphro responded to Socrates' question about what he means by piety (9d, pg. 11).
SOCRATES: Let us assume, if you wish, that all the gods consider this unjust and that they all hate it. However, is this the correction we are making in our discussion, that what all the gods hate is impious, and what they all love is pious, and that what some gods love and others hate is neither or both? Is that how you now wish us to define piety and impiety?
EUTHYPHRO: What prevents us from doing so, Socrates?
Consider the following:
- What is bizarre about the way in which Euthyphro responds?
- For what purpose is Euthyphro using logical reason? Is this different from how Socrates is using reasoning?
- Euthyphro has chosen to be at the court (he is bringing charges against his father) whereas Sacrates has been summoned there (and is not known to like the courts.) Is this difference in character between Euthyphro and Socrates reflected in the passage above? If so, in what way?
6 comments:
i think that the reason he answers in this bizzare way is becuase i get the feeling that he is unsure of himself and he wonders why Socrates is asking him these questions when he clearly felt like he already did. i also think that maybe he is also answering in this way b/c is wanted to make somewhat of a general statement that relates to others who follow what Socrates stated about pious and impious. i also think that Euthyphro feels that since others follow this then he must agree being a fame priest who fortells about the gods, he should know what the gods want.
i think that eurythpro is used to being right. however, he is not sure whether he is right or not in this case, and the fact that socrates keeps on pressing him for his opinion makes him feel that he must answer in such a way where there is no way he can be wrong. thus, he responds neither yes or no to the question.
I think that Socrates is disagreeing with Euthyphro, because of the fact that Socrates is stating something Euthyphro said and says, is that what you would think and want me to try and understand? From what Euthyphro replies back to Socrates, it sounds as if he's thinking that he might be wrong, since he says there's nothing to stop us from saying so.
Manuel Gomez Jr.
Philosophy
9\10\07
Socrates and the Discussion of Piety
Piety, the heart of the discussion held between Euthyphro and Socrates, in “The Trial and Death of Socrates”, has an unknown definition. What piety truly is we don’t know and probably never will due to the number of possible answers. I will explain why piety cannot be defined, nor is there any definition that will suffice Socrates questioning and why that is.
“What is dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious.” pg7, 7:A. Basically what is loved by the gods is pious while what is not loved by the god is impious. But what is the “dictionary definition” that’s forward and sets a better standard? The problem with Euthyphro’s definition is the flaws it poses when it is used. He defines piety as what is loved by the gods, but what is loved by one god could possibly be hated by another for he states that piety is what the gods love not what god loves. Therefore “the same things would be both pious and impious according to this argument.”Pg9, 8:A. It is also said within the text that “different gods consider different things to be just, beautiful, ugly, good, and bad.” pg9, 8:E. This then shows that what is considered pious is in a constant state of being loved and hated by the gods.
To define pious is impossible because it is an open-ended definition. The definition of what is pious is different every time depending on the individuals out look on what is “just”, as Euthyphro first defined piety on pg6, 5:E. The question of what is or isn’t pious is a question of self-morals and boundaries. Where is the line between what is good and bad, innocence and guilt, or justice and injustice? What is the standard, code, or law that helps us to differ one from the other in a general sense? The answer for both questions is that there is no way to determine this with out there being another view, input, or possibility.
We will probably never have a “dictionary definition” of what piety is in a general sense because of the individual input into what it truly is. And never will we probably know what answer Socrates is looking for, because what is pious to Socrates may not be to you, only Socrates knows his own definition of piety from his own perspective and view.
The above is my essay. Enjoy and correct if you want or must. Thank You
Anthony Montero
Euthyphro finds Socrates at the courthouse and talks to him about why he is there. Socrates then asks Euthyphro if he thinks that what he is doing is pious. Euthyphro responds in way where he wasn’t giving the definition, he was only giving examples of piety, so they weren’t good enough. Once he gave an actual answer that can be used as a definition Socrates wasn’t impressed.
Piety all depends on the person’s opinion of what is the right thing and what isn’t. Every one has different ideas, meaning that anything could be pious. There is no set rule as to what is not allowed into the piety group. For example if you were to compare which was longer between a table or a tissue paper then obviously the table would be longer. But if you were asked how do you know and you had to explain yourself then you would measure. The one with the greater number would have the greater measurement. The person tells you that it does have a bigger number, but that it doesn’t mean it’s longer. Then you would have to explain to them what longer means. There is a process to figuring out what is longer and to show that is true without using opinion. Piety is the right thing to do. But different people at different situations would have different ideas about the right thing to do. There is no set definition as to what is the right thing to do at situations. You can’t really give a definition of piety that will impress Socrates.
Piety is the kind of word that would be different from situation to situation. There can’t be criteria for the word piety if it isn’t something that will be the same every time. If you kill somebody without a legitimate reason then you just did something totally different than killing someone who killed somebody and was going to kill you. For example police to day are allowed to shoot to kill if the enemy has fired a shot. So according to society then that would be piety as to killing someone where they haven’t don anything. So the criteria would change from situation to situation.
Post a Comment