Plato's Euthyphro - Which comes first: God or Morality?
Summary
TLDRThe script is a discussion on Plato's dialogue 'Euthyphro,' where Socrates questions Euthyphro about the nature of morality. Euthyphro initially defines piety as what is dear to the gods, but Socrates challenges this by asking if actions are virtuous because the gods love them or if the gods love them because they are virtuous. This leads to a deeper philosophical inquiry into whether morality is derived from divine command or if it exists independently.
Takeaways
- đŻ The dialogue 'Euthyphro' by Plato explores the nature of morality and virtue through a conversation between Socrates and Euthyphro.
- đŁïž Euthyphro is prosecuting his father for murder, believing he has a moral duty to do so, which prompts Socrates to question him about the nature of morality.
- đ€ Socrates challenges Euthyphro's initial claim that piety is whatever the gods love, questioning whether something is pious because the gods love it, or do the gods love it because it is pious.
- đšâđ« Socrates seeks a definition of piety that is not just a list of examples but an understanding of the essence of piety itself.
- đ Euthyphro struggles to provide a satisfactory answer to Socrates' question, highlighting the difficulty in defining moral concepts.
- đ The dialogue illustrates the problem of explaining moral concepts by reference to divine will, as it leads to questions about why the gods love certain actions.
- đ§ Socrates suggests that if actions are virtuous because the gods love them, then the gods' love is a result of their virtue, not the cause.
- đ€š The dialogue raises the question of whether morality is arbitrary if it is based solely on divine command, as opposed to being based on inherent qualities of actions.
- đ The discussion in 'Euthyphro' is relevant to both polytheistic and monotheistic traditions, as it questions the source of moral values.
- đ€ The dialogue ends without a clear answer to the question of what makes an action virtuous, leaving it as an open philosophical question.
Q & A
What is the main topic of the dialogue 'Euthyphro'?
-The main topic of the dialogue 'Euthyphro' is to explore the nature of piety, virtue, and moral goodness, specifically what makes certain actions virtuous or morally right.
Why is Socrates at the courthouse in the dialogue?
-Socrates is at the courthouse because he has been accused of corrupting the youth, a crime for which he is awaiting trial.
Why is Euthyphro at the courthouse?
-Euthyphro is at the courthouse because he is prosecuting his own father for the murder of a laborer.
What is the initial misunderstanding between Socrates and Euthyphro regarding the question of piety?
-Euthyphro initially misunderstands Socrates' question about piety, thinking it is about specific acts rather than the underlying nature or definition of piety itself.
What does Euthyphro's first definition of piety entail?
-Euthyphro's first definition of piety is that it is what he is doing, prosecuting his father for murder, suggesting that piety is acting in a way that is morally right, regardless of familial relationships.
How does Socrates challenge Euthyphro's initial definition of piety?
-Socrates challenges Euthyphro's definition by asking for the essence of piety rather than examples, comparing it to asking a child what a building is and receiving a list of buildings instead of a definition.
What is the final answer Euthyphro gives to Socrates' question about piety?
-Euthyphro's final answer is that piety is that which is dear to the gods, and impiety is that which is not dear to them.
What problem arises with Euthyphro's final answer regarding the gods' love?
-The problem is that the gods, being numerous and often in disagreement in Greek mythology, do not all love the same things, which complicates the idea that virtue is defined by what the gods love.
What is the 'explanatory priority' question that Socrates asks Euthyphro?
-The 'explanatory priority' question is whether acts are pious because the gods love them, or do the gods love them because they are pious, addressing the direction of explanation between piety and divine love.
What is the dilemma Socrates points out with Euthyphro's final answer?
-The dilemma is that if the gods love virtuous acts because they are virtuous, then there must be something prior to the gods' love that makes the acts virtuous, which is what Socrates is seeking to understand.
How does the dialogue 'Euthyphro' relate to the concepts discussed by philosophers like Bentham and Kant?
-The dialogue 'Euthyphro' relates to the concepts of Bentham and Kant by asking what makes virtuous actions virtuous, similar to how they sought to define moral goodness or the moral rightness of actions.
Outlines
đ Introduction to the Euthyphro Dialogue
The paragraph introduces a Platonic dialogue named 'Euthyphro', where Socrates engages in a conversation about morality with Euthyphro. Socrates is noted to be a philosopher who is a character in many of Plato's works, and it's mentioned that his existence is more certain than Plato's teacher. The setting is in front of a courthouse, where Socrates is accused of corrupting the youth, and Euthyphro is prosecuting his father for murder. The dialogue is centered around the question of what constitutes piety and impiety, with Socrates seeking to understand the nature of these virtues rather than just examples of them.
đ€ The Nature of Virtue
This section delves into the philosophical discussion between Socrates and Euthyphro about the nature of virtue. Euthyphro initially misunderstands the question, equating his own actions of prosecuting his father with virtue. Socrates clarifies that he is seeking the essence of piety, not just examples of it. Euthyphro then suggests that piety is what is dear to the gods, and impiety is what is not, which Socrates finds problematic due to the inconsistent nature of the Greek gods' affections.
đ Explanatory Priority in Morality
The paragraph discusses the question of whether actions are virtuous because they are loved by the gods, or are they loved by the gods because they are virtuous. This is framed as a question of explanatory priority. An analogy is made with the color green and the English sentence 'grass is green' to illustrate the concept. The paragraph explores the idea that the nature of an act (its virtuousness) should explain why the gods love it, rather than the gods' love explaining the act's virtuousness.
đ The Euthyphro Dilemma
Socrates and Euthyphro continue their dialogue, focusing on the dilemma of whether the gods love virtuous acts because they are virtuous, or if they are virtuous because the gods love them. Euthyphro agrees with Socrates that the gods love virtuous acts because they are virtuous. However, Socrates points out a problem with this reasoning: if the acts are virtuous independently of the gods' love, then the gods' love does not explain their virtuousness.
đ§ The Problem with Divine Command Theory
The paragraph explores the implications of suggesting that the gods' love for certain actions makes them virtuous. It raises the question of whether God's love for an action is the reason for its virtuousness, or if the action is virtuous regardless of God's love. The paragraph discusses the potential arbitrariness of moral values if they are solely based on divine preference, and whether such a view aligns with our understanding of morality.
đ The Divine Command and Moral Arbitrariness
This section contemplates the idea that if God's command is the sole determinant of moral values, it could lead to an arbitrary moral system. It uses a hypothetical scenario where God commands an individual to perform an immoral act, like sacrificing their child, to illustrate the point. The paragraph suggests that morality might not be subject to divine whim and that there may be a deeper, inherent quality to virtuous acts that is not dependent on divine command.
Mindmap
Keywords
đĄEuthyphro
đĄSocrates
đĄPiety
đĄMorality
đĄVirtue
đĄAristotle
đĄExplanatory Priority
đĄDivine Command Theory
đĄMonotheism
đĄCronos
Highlights
Socrates and Euthyphro discuss morality in the Platonic dialogue 'Euthyphro'.
Euthyphro claims to have exact knowledge of moral matters, distinguishing him from others.
Socrates is at the courthouse accused of corrupting the youth.
Euthyphro is prosecuting his father for murder in the dialogue.
The story involves a laborer who killed a domestic servant and was later chained in a ditch by Euthyphro's father, where he died.
Socrates asks Euthyphro to define piety and impiety, which are used interchangeably with moral goodness.
Euthyphro initially misunderstands the question, thinking Socrates is asking for examples of virtuous acts.
Socrates clarifies that he is asking for the nature of virtue itself, not just examples.
Euthyphro's answer is that piety is what is dear to the gods, and impiety is what is not.
Socrates points out a problem with the answer, as the gods do not all agree on what is dear to them.
Socrates suggests that what all gods love is virtuous, what they all hate is vicious, and what they disagree about is morally neutral.
Socrates asks whether actions are pious because the gods love them, or do the gods love them because they are pious.
Euthyphro agrees that the gods love pious actions because they are pious, not the other way around.
Socrates highlights a problem with this answer, as it implies that the gods' love is a result of the actions' piety, not the cause.
The dialogue suggests that virtue cannot be explained solely by divine love or command.
The problem with deriving morality from divine will is that it seems arbitrary and unconnected to our notion of morality.
The dialogue raises questions about the nature of moral truths and their relationship to divine will.
Transcripts
so Socrates says Wow Euthyphro you must
really know what you're talking about
when it comes to morality and Euthyphro
says referring to himself in the third
person the best of Euthyphro and that
which distinguishes him Socrates from
other men is his exact knowledge of all
such matters what a douche so today we
are reading a platonic dialogue called
Euthyphro Plato wrote this dialogue
Plato was an ancient Greek philosopher
he wrote most of what he wrote about his
teacher Socrates Socrates is the
character in all of these dialogues
Socrates almost certainly existed but
there is some question as to whether
Socrates existed in the first place
Plato definitely existed Aristotle who
was Plato's student who we read earlier
in the course
Aristotle definitely existed but this
dialogue is a discussion a philosophical
discussion between Socrates and this guy
Euthyphro and the name of the dialogue
is Euthyphro so there in front of the
courthouse there in front of the
courthouse which I assume works like
this because every building in ancient
Greece looked like that there in front
of the courthouse and Socrates is there
because he has been accused of a crime
corrupting the youth and Euthyphro is
there because Euthyphro is prosecuting a
crime he has accused someone else of a
crime he accused his father of murder
the story is this the father had a
laborer who worked on their farm at
knack cos or something and the laborer
got into a fight with a domestic servant
so you've got these two folks laborer
and domestic servant or whatever and
they're drunk or one of them is drunk
and they're in a fight and this one
kills the other one so this one is dead
and then the father takes this one the
one who killed the other one and chains
him up and puts him in a ditch here's
the ditch and he leaves him in the ditch
for a few days while they're waiting for
a diviner from Athens that's supposed to
figure out what happens to the laborer
who murdered the other person and then
while he's in the ditch he dies
and so Euthyphro claims that his father
by leaving this person in the ditch has
himself committed murder and so
Euthyphro is prosecuting his own father
for murder and socrates takes this
opportunity to ask well Euthyphro if you
know so much about morality and you know
so much about virtue then i have the
following philosophical question for you
and the question is this what is piety
and what is impiety okay so in this
dialogue the terms piety and impiety and
also brought you and also holiness all
of these terms are gonna be thrown
around interchangeably we might also add
a term more familiar that we've been
using in this course something like
moral goodness or the the moral
rightness of actions that's what we're
after that's what this dialogue is about
it's about what makes the good things
good the right things right the virtuous
things virtuous what do they all have in
common you will remember this question
by the way from the beginning of the
course when we talked about Bentham and
Kant these philosophers were answering
the same kind of question what makes the
virtuous things virtuous Bentham's
answer you may remember is that the
virtuous actions are virtuous because
they produce an outcome that has the
greatest total of pleasure - pain that
was his answer so Socrates in this
dialogue is asking Euthyphro the same
question okay so at first Euthyphro
misunderstands the question Socrates
asks what is piety and impiety or what
is virtue and viciousness or vice and
Euthyphro says piety is just what I'm
doing virtue is just what I'm doing
prosecuting your father even though he
is your father when he's done something
wrong that that's what virtue is and
then actually a Euthyphro gives a whole
bunch of other examples and he says that
Zeus also killed his own father Cronos
when Kronos ate some babies or something
I don't really know what the story is
but the Greek gods they were all you
know killing each other and sleeping
with each other and they would have baby
humans and all sorts of crazy stuff
right and so he gives all of these
examples of virtuous acts Euthyphro and
Socrates says no that's not what I meant
that's not what I was asking I wasn't
asking for a list of examples I was
asking for the nature of piety itself
it's like if my young child asked me
what's a building and I said oh the
Chrysler Building the Sears Tower the
Eiffel Tower
the Pentagon that's not a helpful answer
that's just a list of some buildings
what what the child is asking in that
case is what makes all of those things
buildings and all of the non buildings
non buildings we want to know about the
nature of building hood itself or in
this case we want to know about the
nature of virtue itself what makes the
virtuous acts virtuous so don't just
give me a list of virtuous acts give me
the nature of virtue so now we've got
the question
so Socrates asks that question what is
virtue and after they go back and forth
and finally clarify exactly what the
question is
Euthyphro finally gives an answer here
is the answer that Euthyphro gives
okay that's youth the fros answer piety
then is that which is dear to the gods
and impiety is that which is not dear to
them so this answer is that virtue if
we're translating this from piety talk
into virtue talk or moral goodness talk
virtue is that which the gods approve of
or like or love later in the dialogue as
you noticed it sort of switches from
what is dear to the gods to what the
gods love okay so that's the answer
that's youth the pros answer what is
virtue virtue is what the gods love
all right so this answer runs into a
problem it's a problem that may have
already occurred to you when we're
talking about the ancient Greek gods
there's a whole bunch of them and
they're like reality TV stars or their
characters on a soap opera and they're
all sleeping with each other and
murdering each other and lying to each
other and they're getting in fights all
the time and they have alliances with
each other they don't agree about stuff
if the gods don't all love the same
stuff then how can what the gods love be
an account of virtue or of anything else
that's the problem
Socrates points this out and you throw
kind of gets that this is the problem
can't think of a solution and then
Socrates just gives him a solution it's
not actually that good of a solution but
the solution is something like okay
we're gonna settle on this the things
that all of the gods love those are good
those are virtuous and the things that
all of the gods hate those are bad those
are vicious and the stuff that the gods
disagree about that's going to be
morally neutral it's gonna be they say
neither or both okay there's some
problems with this answer maybe like it
seems like the gods are gonna disagree
about a lot of stuff so this answer is
gonna make most actions morally neutral
they're gonna be very few virtuous acts
and very few vicious acts that might be
a problem don't worry about that put
that aside we're gonna settle on this as
the answer most of the reason by the way
that it's helpful to settle on this as
the answer is that actually we're gonna
run this entire set of questioning this
entire line of thinking we're gonna run
it with just one God we can think of
this as being an argument that's
relevant to monotheism just as much as
it's relevant to ancient Greek
polytheism anyway the answer is virtue
is what the gods love then Socrates asks
a question about this answer this is a
big deal question here's what the
question is
the point which I should first wish to
understand is whether the pious or holy
is beloved by the gods because it is
holy or holy because it is beloved by
the gods okay let's get a few things
straight first of all we're talking
Socrates is talking about what's pious
or holy and we're sort of translating
that into virtue talk or what's morally
good
although Socrates also talks in these
terms in the dialogue as well okay so
the question is a question about what
explains what does the fact that these
acts are good or virtuous does that fact
explain why the gods love them or does
the fact that the gods love them explain
why they are good or virtuous that's the
question what explains what
our virtuous acts virtuous because the
gods love them or did the gods love them
because they are virtuous this is a
question about what philosophers would
call explanatory priority it needs to be
perfectly 100 percent clear what this
question is before we go on here's an
analogy say that you've got two
different things one is you've got some
grass here's the grass it's on the
ground it looks like that okay then
you've got this other thing you've got a
sentence in the English language the
sentence is grass is this is a true
sentence don't come back at me telling
me that sometimes the grass is brown if
you don't water it or whatever forget
about that this is a generalization
about grass grass is green this is true
grasses and purple grasses and orange
grass is green we're going to assume
that for the purposes of this example
this is a bunch of ink on a piece of
glass this sentence it's a bunch of ink
or when I say it it's a bunch of sound
waves moving through the air or through
the water if I set it under water or
something right
so it's a bunch of ink or it's a bunch
of air right it's a sentence of the
English language this well this is a
bunch of marker also because it's a
drawing but the grass itself is a plant
on the ground okay so we've got a
sentence and a plant and we might ask
the following question
is the English sentence grass is green
true because grass is green or is grass
green because the English sentence grass
is green is true right so we're talking
about two different things we're talking
about the sentence and it has a certain
feature or quality it has trueness and
then we're talking about the grass a
plant and that plant has a certain
quality or feature it has greenness how
do you spell greenness are there two
ends probably not it doesn't matter okay
the grass has the greenness
well what explains what what comes first
not in time exactly
but what comes first in explanatory
order what explains what is it that the
greenness of the grass explains the
trueness of the sentence or is it the
trueness of the sentence that explains
the greenness of the grass
what's the answer everybody knows about
grass and sentences right it's
definitely to the greenness of the grass
explains why that sentence is true the
grass doesn't as it were to speak
totally metaphorically check with the
sentence to see whether this sentence is
true or not and then based on that it's
either green or some other color that's
not the way it works but there's a
certain sense in which the sentence
checks with the grass and then based on
how the grass is that determines whether
the sentence is true or false the
greenness of the grass is explanatorily
prior to the trueness of the sentence
this thing this fact about grass
explains this thing the fact about
language this question is asking the
same sort of thing does the virtuousness
of the axe explain why the gods love
those acts or does the fact that the
gods love those acts explain why they
are virtuous that's the question and so
we're choosing between the same sort of
two options as we were choosing with as
we were choosing between in the grass
example right the options are these one
does the virtuousness explain the love
of the gods right or does the love of
the gods explain the virtuousness those
are the two options those are the two
ways of answering Socrates's question
and now we're going to see what answer
they set along Euthyphro of course just
sort of bumbles through a sort of answer
and then Socrates really ends up filling
it in for him
here I'll just read this bit Socrates
says and what do you say of piety
Euthyphro is not piety according to your
definition loved by all the gods and you
throw says yes and Socrates says because
it is pious or holy or for some other
reason and Euthyphro says no that is the
reason and Socrates says it is beloved
because it is holy not holy because it
is loved and Euthyphro says yes so they
pick one of these answers they pick
number one they pick that one
virtuousness the virtuousness of actions
explains why the gods love those actions
they pick that one right so we can sort
of summarize this by having Euthyphro
answer Socrates this question by saying
that you know the gods love them the
actions that is they love them because
they are virtuous okay that's the answer
except there's a problem with this
answer Socrates points out this problem
a little later in the dialogue here's
what he says
Socrates says you appear to me Euthyphro
when I asked you what is the essence of
holiness to offer an attribute only and
not the essence tell me once more what
holiness or piety really is whether dear
to the gods or not and what is impiety
and then Euthyphro responds and
basically just says I don't know what to
say man it seems like every time we talk
we just go round and round in circles
and I get really confused okay but do
you see what the problem is it's a
problem for this answer the answer that
the gods love the virtuous acts because
they are virtuous the problem is this if
the acts are virtuous independently of
whether or not the gods love them and
the gods choose to love them because
they as it were recognize that virtue
they they look at the acts and they see
huh these are the virtuous ones because
they're virtuous I'm going to love them
then mentioning the fact that the gods
love the virtuous acts doesn't explain
their virtuousness they were virtuous
already and that's what we were
interested in why were they virtuous in
the first place if the virtuousness
explains the gods love then there's got
to be something earlier that explains
the virtuousness and that's what we want
to know about it's the same sort of
thing with the grass is green right if
the fact that the sentence the grass is
green is explained by the greenness of
the grass well then there's some further
thing that explains why grass is green
the answer is like chlorophyll or
something like that it's in the plants
and it allows the plants to absorb
energy from the Sun and then the
mitochondria is the powerhouse of the
cell or something I don't know the point
is there's something else that explains
why the grass is green and that's the
thing we want to know when we ask what
makes grass green there's something else
then that explains why the virtuous acts
are virtuous and that's what we want to
to know about the whole time so Socrates
is response to Euthyphro answer that the
gods love these acts because they are
virtuous is something like that doesn't
explain that's no explanation at
all I wanted to know what makes those
acts virtuous and you just told me some
result of their being virtuous but I
wanted to know the cause or the
explanation so we see that there's a
problem with this option it might be
true of course it might be true that the
gods exist or that one god exists and
that there's a divine love for certain
acts and that it is itself explained by
virtuousness that might be true but if
that's true then saying all of that
doesn't answer the original question
what is virtue that's the problem
we wanted to know what made the virtuous
acts virtuous in the first place so
we've got a problem with this answer but
what about this answer in the dialogue
Plato doesn't even consider this option
that the gods love what they love and
that that explains why those things are
good things to do are virtuous acts
what's wrong with this option and let's
think about it in terms of a
monotheistic God because I suspect most
of the students in this class are well
they're more likely to be monotheists
than they are to be ancient Greek
polytheists why can't we explain the
rightness or wrongness of actions based
on just the fact that God loves those
actions well it seems like we have two
options either there's some reason that
God loves those acts right so the
virtuousness is explained in terms of
divine love and that love is in turn
by something else right if there's
something else that that is the reason
why God chooses to love those things
well then what is it
and whatever it is it's really gonna be
the explanation of the virtuousness of
those acts right so why does God love
those actions well is it because those
actions produce the greatest total of
pleasure - pain if that's why then
really it's the fact that these acts
produce the greatest total of pleasure -
pain that makes them virtuous that's a
more satisfying or fuller explanation at
least to go through God fine but all the
way back to the real reason why those
acts are the ones that's one route but
the alternative route is to say well the
virtue of actions is explained by the
fact that God loves them and there is no
explanation for why God picked those
acts why God gathered those acts
together and labeled them as the
virtuous ones or chose to love those or
chose to command those if there's no
explanation for why God picked those
well that might seem kind of bizarre and
arbitrary it just might seem at odds
with our notion of morality maybe not I
mean maybe you just say no no that is
our notion of morality our notion of the
moral rightness or wrongness of actions
just is whatever actions God chooses to
love and he could choose to love you
might say anything he could choose to
love murder he could choose to love
vengeance and pettiness and selfishness
and aggressiveness he could choose to
love lying and breaking your promises
and harming other people and harming
yourself and if he did choose those
things than those things would be moral
they would be morally good it would be
virtuous you might say that it does seem
like there's something a little odd
about that right I mean consider if God
woke you up in the middle of the night
and you said oh whoa
who's there and God said it's me God and
you said really
and God said yes it's me God and then
you just knew without a doubt that it
really was God okay so now you know you
are face to face with the creator of the
universe and God says okay I need you to
do something I need you to go wake up
your child and bring this child up on
this mountain and then slit the child's
throat and kill the child the child will
bleed out died on the rocks right there
leave the kid on the rocks no problem go
home and then you might say why
and God says can't explain why you just
got to do it and you say okay but that
doesn't seem right to me and God says no
no I'm telling you that it's what you
should do so it is right and then you
say okay I've got it I've got it I've
got it is it that my kid is gonna grow
up to be Hitler or something like that
and this is the only way to prevent some
terrible tragedy and God says no no it's
fine your kid is fine
your kids not going to be terrible your
kids a good kid doesn't deserve this
will never deserve it is not gonna be
Hitler is not going to do anything
terrible it's just that your child is
innocent and I'm telling you to go
slaughter this child and leave him or
her on the mountain on the rock and you
say I don't know if that's the right
thing to do God and God says of course
you know that it's the right thing to do
this is the rightest thing you've ever
been asked to do in your entire life how
do you know it's the rightest thing the
most morally righteous thing you could
ever do will you know that I want you to
do it and I'm God telling you live face
to face so it obviously is the right
thing to do it's more obviously the
right thing to do than anything else
that you've ever thought was right your
whole life because I'm telling you to do
it
now you might then say oh you know what
wow you're right and then you go do it
you kill the child great where
everything works out great but you might
still think know there's something
bizarre about this story that God can't
just arbitrarily choose what what
actions are good and what actions are
bad there's a sense in which that's not
how morality works and he works in such
a way that it's not up to God if that's
the case then you can't go with option
number two and if you can't go with
option number two and you can't go with
option number one well then this can't
be the answer
virtue can't be what the gods love or
what God loves oh one last thing
while I'm erasing this you may have
noticed that last time we talked about
John Locke and there was this passage
where Locke explains the existence of
certain universal moral truths based on
certain facts about God and there was a
problem with that kind of move and the
problem was that well it seems you can
only use facts about God to explain the
existence of objective moral truths if
they're already existed at least one
objective moral truth and we get a sort
of similar version of that kind of
problem here except for well a little
over two thousand years earlier than
Locke and the problem is that moral
truths resulting from divine will seem
at least in some cases or some ways of
making the argument seem only to work or
make sense if you exhume that moral
truths exist already
you
what is piety and what is impiety that
sucked hold on
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)