phil 20 2nd paper

phil 20 2nd paper - Gable Parigian Phil 20a Paper #2 Quest....

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Gable Parigian Phil 20a Paper #2 Quest. #2 11-19-07 [Type text] The Euthyphro Dilemma The Euthyphro dilemma stems from the problem of getting the eidos (essence), an Ancient Greek word, of what he’s so desperately trying to define, namely the essence of pious acts. First, Euthyphro tries to define pious actions as the ones that please the gods and the ones that aren’t pious as the ones that the gods are displeased by. But, as Plato interprets through Socrates in the Euthyphro this definition doesn’t solve the issue of what Socrates is specifically looking for. He disagrees with Euthyphro and poses another question for him to answer. He asks Euthyphro whether the gods sometimes can disagree or not and Euthyphro tells him they sometimes do disagree. Socrates then shows Euthyphro how this is contradictory due to the fact that an action can’t have both the qualities of pious and impious. That is, if an action is moral for one god and immoral for another, it simply doesn’t make sense because the gods wouldn’t be able to decide on right and wrong, just and unjust, and so on. Yet, Euthyphro still persists and tells Socrates that the gods agree on some things but, he doesn’t explain how we can find out if this is in fact true. This doesn’t bother Socrates who states, through Plato, what is the Euthyphro dilemma: “Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved?”- Socrates (Kolak and Thomson, p.81). The dilemma more refined can be seen that if the gods follow what’s morally right because it actually is, then the gods have no say in what is to be followed. And if what’s morally right is indeed right because the gods say so then there’s really no reason why something rather than another is to be followed. Nevertheless, what will be discussed here will be the latter because Socrates objects the former idea that what the gods say is morally right is right because it actually is morally right. This is because the gods would be going along with whatever is supposedly right and we still wouldn’t have a definition to moral
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This essay was uploaded on 04/07/2008 for the course PHIL 20a taught by Professor Hannen during the Fall '07 term at UCSB.

Page1 / 4

phil 20 2nd paper - Gable Parigian Phil 20a Paper #2 Quest....

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online