|
|
(25 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) |
Line 3: |
Line 3: |
| Return to [[Human Nature]] | | Return to [[Human Nature]] |
| | | |
− | ==Section 1: Reconstructions== | + | ==Section 1: Participation Journals== |
| | | |
− | ==Euthyphro1== | + | ===Euthyphro 10=== |
| | | |
− | When Socrates asks Euthyphro, “is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods?” he is questioning the basis of things. He wonders about the relationship between two things, especially those which are in effect of one another. The question brings to mind a circle with one idea spawning another and no clear beginning or end. However, Socrates seems to believe definitively that piety is loved by the gods or that the gods create piety through their love; one is an affect of the other. If piety is pleasing to the gods, then people would be more in control for if they swayed their actions to be pious they would attain the favor of the gods. However, if the gods create piety then they would hold more power for people would respond in respect and humbleness to the gods will.
| + | ====Student 1==== |
− | Socrates would answer this question with a serious of questions regarding a similar topic, but one less complex. He would then relate the responses to these questions back to the original idea. For example, in Euthyphro, Socrates states that there is a difference between something carried and something carrying. He then goes on to ask if “the thing carried is a carried thing because it is carried, or for some other reason?” By addressing the idea from a simpler perspective, Socrates is able to achieve solid conclusions about issues that can be applied to a more complex situation.
| |
− | Though his dialogue, Socrates decides that something changes or is created because it is affected by something else and did not change or come about of its own accord to produce a response. He deems that “it is not being loved by those who love it because it is something loved, but it is something loved because it is being loved.” However he also comes to the conclusion that something is being loved because it is pious (which would be an act to produce a response) and that something is god-loved because it is loved by the gods (a state of being that causes an action). For Socrates, these two ideas clash and he comes to the conclusion that piety and god-loved are not synonymous.
| |
| | | |
− | ==Euthyphro2==
| + | Throughout the entire dialogue, Socrates asks Euthyphro repeatedly what the definition of piety is. After each explanation given to him, Socrates finds the flaw and proves the definition to be false. Presumably, Socrates wants to know the answer to this question, because he is entering court on this day. He wants to be able to argue against the true definition of piety and, therefore, win the case against him. In Euthyphro’s third definition of piety, he basically says, “All that is loved by the gods is pious, and all that is hated by the gods is impious”. When Socrates says, “Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious or is it pious because it is loved by the gods”, he questions the definition. Ultimately, he completely eliminates Euthyphro’s previous definitions for piety. His first reason for not accepting this definitions is because, he proves that the piety came first, before the liking, through his “see/seeing and carry/carrying” analogies. Basically, Socrates means that “being liked” is a state of an object/idea already in existence. Therefore, that which is righteous is liked by the gods, because it is righteous, it isn’t righteous solely because the gods like it. Socrates offers a definition as well; "piety is a species of the genus 'justice'”. Soon enough, Socrates points out that his definition is also false. All that is pious is not necessarily just, as well as, not all that is just is necessarily pious. However, most human beings generally associate that which is pious, is also just, or considered “morally correct”. Finally, Socrates points out that there are many actions that cannot be sorted into both or either category. If you save your brother’s life by shooting a killer, it is not considered morally correct. But is it considered pious? |
| | | |
− | Socrates is charged with impiety, but he does not even understand the real definition of piety. He goes and questions what the universally true meaning of piety is: whether it is loved by the gods because it is pious or if it is pious because it is loved by the gods. The stakes are determined by whether the gods are dependent on the issue or not. Plato’s presentation of morality is still a debate.
| + | ===Are we radically wrong about our knowledge of reality?=== |
− | Plato uses Socrates’ circular reasoning in his argument to demonstrate the importance of addressing piety. In Socrates’ third definition, piety is loved by the gods because it is pious, piety is independent of gods. The gods, like all living creatures, are bound by the greater force of morality. Euthyphro only lists attributes and examples of piety instead of actually defining it, such as the universal approval of the gods or prosecuting his father. Although there pious actions such as bravery or caring for the gods or others are good, it still does not present a clear definition for piety.
| |
− | In Socrates’ second premise of his definition, it is pious because it is loved by the gods, piety is dependent of the gods’ actions. What actions are “evil” such as murder and rape and what actions are “good” are decided by the gods. The problem with the definition depends on whether a person is religious or an atheist. Euthyphro is stumped by Socrates when asked what the outcome of piety is (17e).
| |
− | In the end, Socrates still has no clear definition of piety. Euthyphro explains giving the gods gifts in order to be liked by them is pious, which brings him back to his previously failed definition of what gods like. Socrates would have no answer, but would clearly present both sides of the dilemma. The first premise may prove to be true if one believes all God’s commands are good, but may be proven false because He hypocritically incorporated unethical actions into the world. The answer is in the matter of personal values. Piety is what one believes to be just and is considered moral to his or her own conscience.
| |
| | | |
− | ==Euthyphro3== | + | ====Student 1 ==== |
− | The dilemma in Euthyphro is asked by Socrates when stated, “Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?” Socrates is trying to justify what piety is to help him in his court case where he is being charged for impiety. Through the dialogue, it seems as though circular reasoning keeps going on. Socrates will ask Euthyphro a question, Euthyphro will answer it, but right away Socrates questions his answer. Either way you answer this question, there is always a way to rebut it: that is what is at stake. Not all the gods agree on the same things to be pious or impious.
| + | ====Student 2 ==== |
− | Euthyphro answers the question by saying the pious is what is loved by gods, but Socrates uses the reasoning that the gods could possibly disagree among themselves as to what is pious and just. With that, Euthyphro changes his answer to that pious is what is loved by all gods unanimously. Socrates answer to this question is that gods love what is pious because it is pious, not because it is loved by the gods.
| + | ====Student 3 ==== |
− | This question is about where do morals come from. Do they all originate from the gods? How do we know what the true form of pious is unless we interact with the gods and know the true form of it? We do not know the actual form of piety, just the idea of it that has been passed on. Socrates tries to narrow down the definition of piety and what is pious, but there is no absolute answer, just the ones that we create.
| + | ====Student 4 ==== |
− | | |
− | ==Euthyphro4== | |
− | The question of piety and whether it is loved by the gods simply because it is pious or whether pious actions are pious because the gods love them basically comes down to a person’s individual beliefs. This is what is at stake in the question. For every argument made by either party in this argument, there was a completely legitimate counter argument that was made. This caused the argument to go in a large circle and basically come back to what a person believed about the characteristics of the gods back then. Now, with the spread of Western Christianity, the question changes because of a singular God versus a large number of gods since one of the major premises in Socrates’ argument is the gods being in constant conflict with one another, and the one Christian God cannot logically be in conflict with Itself.
| |
− | I do not think that it is an accident that Plato had these two men meet to discuss this issue. Socrates is known for not conforming to the Greek standards when it came to believing in their gods, and Euthyphro is obviously a religious scholar who would never question the gods and their love of piety because it is pious. Socrates knows that the answer to this question concerning piety cannot simply be solved with logic and, I believe, that he just wanted to take this opportunity to make this religious scholar question himself a little bit. Although Socrates never directly gives his opinion in this argument, I believe he would answer the question by saying things are pious because they are loved by the gods. This is because he challenges Euthyphro’s argument in the first place, and is constantly offering counter arguments to his claims throughout the argument. Also, the fact that Socrates is being prosecuted for corrupting the youth by not teaching them about the gods according to the Athenian customs also points to Socrates belief of piety being based on what the gods love. This belief is scary because it would cause major issues in ethics and whether good is actually good and bad is actually bad, and these questions may have caused Socrates to strike up the argument with Euthyphro in the first place in hopes that the religious scholar could show him where his logic was flawed that he could believe such a thing. These are the reasons that I believe that Socrates felt that pious acts are pious because they are loved by the gods.
| |
− | | |
− | ==Euthyphro5== | |
− | In the Euthyphro dilemma, Socrates and Euthyphro try to define the meaning of pious. Euthyphro makes several attempts at the definition but each attempt is subjected to Socrates and shortly there after, refuted.
| |
− | In his first attempt to define piety, Euthyphro states that piety must be that which is loved by all gods. However, Socrates illustrates that the God’s are constantly at odds which each other and they’re always at least two viewpoints on a definition. He asks Euthyphro if the God’s would disagree on what is beautiful and what is ugly. This then forces Euthphyro to state that piety is what all gods love unanimously.
| |
− | This definition leads to many more problems in the definition of piety. Socrates asks “is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?” This generates a dilemma in which there can’t be an absolutely correct answer. “It cannot be said that the reason why the pious is pious is that the gods love it. For, as Socrates presumes and Euthyphro agrees, the gods love the pious because it is pious (both parties agree on this, the first horn of the dilemma). And it cannot be said that the gods love the pious because it is pious, and then add that the pious is pious because the gods love it, for this would be circular reasoning.”
| |
− | This dilemma has been unanswerable ever since it was first proposed. In defining this question, we are searching for a definition of morality and which defines the other.
| |
− | I’m not sure Socrates could answer this question. Because to give a exact answer to a question like this would force Socrates to make too many assumptions that he may not be willing to make. Already in the discussion Socrates agrees that piety is what all gods love unanimously. This was very difficult for Socrates to do however because it would be ignoring a fundamental point that there is always disagreement between what is right and wrong? Socrates would raise some very important questions however such as: “Do we care about the good because it is good, or do we just call good those things that we care about?” “Are truths necessary because we deem them to be so, or do we deem them to be so because they are necessary?”
| |
We'll use this page to post student work. You may take your name off your work if you wish.
Return to Human Nature
Section 1: Participation Journals
Euthyphro 10
Student 1
Throughout the entire dialogue, Socrates asks Euthyphro repeatedly what the definition of piety is. After each explanation given to him, Socrates finds the flaw and proves the definition to be false. Presumably, Socrates wants to know the answer to this question, because he is entering court on this day. He wants to be able to argue against the true definition of piety and, therefore, win the case against him. In Euthyphro’s third definition of piety, he basically says, “All that is loved by the gods is pious, and all that is hated by the gods is impious”. When Socrates says, “Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious or is it pious because it is loved by the gods”, he questions the definition. Ultimately, he completely eliminates Euthyphro’s previous definitions for piety. His first reason for not accepting this definitions is because, he proves that the piety came first, before the liking, through his “see/seeing and carry/carrying” analogies. Basically, Socrates means that “being liked” is a state of an object/idea already in existence. Therefore, that which is righteous is liked by the gods, because it is righteous, it isn’t righteous solely because the gods like it. Socrates offers a definition as well; "piety is a species of the genus 'justice'”. Soon enough, Socrates points out that his definition is also false. All that is pious is not necessarily just, as well as, not all that is just is necessarily pious. However, most human beings generally associate that which is pious, is also just, or considered “morally correct”. Finally, Socrates points out that there are many actions that cannot be sorted into both or either category. If you save your brother’s life by shooting a killer, it is not considered morally correct. But is it considered pious?
Are we radically wrong about our knowledge of reality?
Student 1
Student 2
Student 3
Student 4