Socrates and Euthyphro - Essay Example

Philosophy 10th Jan., Socrates and Euthyphro The main philosophical issue that Socrates and Euthyphro are in disagreement on in the dialogue Euthyphro is the meaning and the definition or holiness or piety. In this dialogue, Socrates takes the side of student and he poses as an ignorant student and asks Euthyphro to give him the definition of piety. Euthyphro, on the other hand, takes the side of teacher and explains to Socrates the meaning of piety. In his attempts to define piety as requested by Socrates, Euthyphro committed the following 3 mistakes or logical fallacies.

To begin with, in his first definition of piety, Euthyphro views piety as persecuting those who commit religious offence. When asked by Socrates what holiness is, Euthyphro answers, “… the holy is what I am doing now, persecuting murder and temple theft and everything of the sort, whether father or mother or anyone else is guilty of it” (pg.4, 8). The main mistake in this definition of holiness is that it the definition is shallow and does not include all what is referred to as holiness; this is because there are many holy deeds that do not involve persecuting religious offenders.

Socrates recognized this mistake and challenged Euthyphro to give a better and a broader definition of holiness. Secondly, having realized the logical inconsistency of his first definition of holiness, Euthyphro attempted his second definition of holiness and he defined holiness as what is approved by the gods; Euthyphro says “Then what is dear to the gods is holy, and what is not dear to them is unholy” (pg.6, 5). The main weakness in this argument is that it assumes that gods agree on all things and that they do not disagree on anything.

Socrates noticed this logical mistake and asked Euthyphro on whether or not gods do not disagree at all. Euthphro agreed that gods disagree and actually even quarrel amongst themselves. Socrates, therefore, challenged Euthyphro to come up with a better definition of holiness.In an attempt to give a better definition of holiness, Euthyphro defined holiness as what is loved by all the gods, Euthphro defines holiness thus, “…the holy is what all the gods love, and that the opposite, what all the gods hate is unholy” (pg.10. 3).

The main logical mistake in this argument is that it does not explain the true nature of holiness, i.e. the definition does not explain what makes something holy. Socrates noticed this inconsistency and challenged Euthyphro to explain to him whether something is holy because it is approved by the gods, or it is because something is holy that the gods approve of it. Euthyphro realized his mistake and agreed that something is approved by the gods because it is holy and not the other way round.In Conclusion, Euthyphro left in huff because he could not offer a broad and holistic definition of holiness.

The argument, therefore, concluded without a good definition of holiness.In this argument, I do agree with Socrates. This is because, although Socrates himself did not offer a sufficient definition of holiness, Socrates, however, exposed the logical inconsistencies in the Euthyphro’s shallow definitions of holiness. All the logical flaws that Socrates pointed out in Euthyphro’s definitions of holiness are true inconsistencies, and for that reason I do agree with Socrates in this argument.

Work CitedIndiana Universty. Plato’s “ Euthyphro”. Web.