Euthyphro
Setting the scene:
- Socrates is going to see his accuser on the charge of impiety, corrupting the youth with his
teachings – with which he is accused of creating a sort of idolatry and ‘creating false
gods’. On the way he meets Euthyphro who claims to boast a set of prophetic powers,
with which Socrates treats with heavy irony throughout their interactions.
- Euthyphro speaks of the prosecution of his father, who is on trial for murdering a young
slave. Euthyphro himself is the accuser which has caused controversy as it is considered
morally controversial for a son to be bringing a criminal charge against his own father.
- It is this controversy which segues the conversation into the crux of the philosophical
debate between himself and Socrates.
Definition 1
- Socrates presses Euthyphro on the matter of piety and his personal definition of it.
- Euthyphro first claims that piety is simply about justice, bringing justice against those
who do wrong – as in the case of his father.
‘The pious is to do what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer, be it about murder or
temple robbery or anything else, whether the wrongdoer is your father or your mother or
anyone else; not to prosecute is impious,’
- Euthyphro makes a comparison between himself and Zeus who castrated his father.
Plainly though, this is not a definition. It confuses the extension of the concept ‘piety’ with its
intension. It gives an example of something that Euthyphro believes is an example of piety
but an example is not a definition. A definition must be explanatory.
In Socrates’ terms, they must provide the one ‘form’ or ‘model ’which makes all pious actions
– pious. A characterisation which may be universally applied.
Definition 2
‘What is dear to [loved by] the gods is pious, what is not is impious,’
- Socrates reminds Euthyphro of the differences in what each god loves and hates, at least
in moral and aesthetic matters.
- The elenchus (logical refutation) then is that on Euthyphro’s definition, action x would be
both pious and impious.
- So this definition generates a clear contradiction, meaning that it must then be false.
- Socrates is concessive in this regard and for the sake of argument, imagines that the gods
agree on what they love. He believes he can refute Euthyphro anyway.
Setting the scene:
- Socrates is going to see his accuser on the charge of impiety, corrupting the youth with his
teachings – with which he is accused of creating a sort of idolatry and ‘creating false
gods’. On the way he meets Euthyphro who claims to boast a set of prophetic powers,
with which Socrates treats with heavy irony throughout their interactions.
- Euthyphro speaks of the prosecution of his father, who is on trial for murdering a young
slave. Euthyphro himself is the accuser which has caused controversy as it is considered
morally controversial for a son to be bringing a criminal charge against his own father.
- It is this controversy which segues the conversation into the crux of the philosophical
debate between himself and Socrates.
Definition 1
- Socrates presses Euthyphro on the matter of piety and his personal definition of it.
- Euthyphro first claims that piety is simply about justice, bringing justice against those
who do wrong – as in the case of his father.
‘The pious is to do what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer, be it about murder or
temple robbery or anything else, whether the wrongdoer is your father or your mother or
anyone else; not to prosecute is impious,’
- Euthyphro makes a comparison between himself and Zeus who castrated his father.
Plainly though, this is not a definition. It confuses the extension of the concept ‘piety’ with its
intension. It gives an example of something that Euthyphro believes is an example of piety
but an example is not a definition. A definition must be explanatory.
In Socrates’ terms, they must provide the one ‘form’ or ‘model ’which makes all pious actions
– pious. A characterisation which may be universally applied.
Definition 2
‘What is dear to [loved by] the gods is pious, what is not is impious,’
- Socrates reminds Euthyphro of the differences in what each god loves and hates, at least
in moral and aesthetic matters.
- The elenchus (logical refutation) then is that on Euthyphro’s definition, action x would be
both pious and impious.
- So this definition generates a clear contradiction, meaning that it must then be false.
- Socrates is concessive in this regard and for the sake of argument, imagines that the gods
agree on what they love. He believes he can refute Euthyphro anyway.
