Socrates and Euthyphro – Discussion on the Concept of Piety/Holiness
Name:
Course:
Instructor:
Date:

Socrates and Euthyphro – Discussion on the Concept of Piety/Holiness
The concept of holiness emerges after Euthyphro meets Socrates at the courthouse. Socrates is interested in understanding Plato’s dialogues, which begin with a principal question, the topic of the dialogue. The question was “What is holiness?” The discussion on holiness takes a prominent position in the conversation because Socrates wants to understand the concept better, as Euthyphro’s principal question is “What is the nature of holiness or piety?” The principal questions vary and this contributes to their in-depth definition since both Socrates and Euthyphro try to find out amicable answers.
Euthyphro provides three definitions in response to Socrates’ question. One of the definitions that Euthyphro gives is that holiness is “doing what one is doing; prosecuting anybody that is guilty of murder, sacrilege or any serious crime committed, and not prosecuting them is viewed as unholy”. However, this definition is refuted by Socrates who claims that it is an example and not universal, and therefore it does not address all cases of holiness and unholiness. This makes Euthyphro come up with another definition; he defines holiness as what God loves, while unholiness as what God hates. Similarly, Socrates refutes this definition on grounds that the definition is a contradiction as he used direct questioning method. According to Socrates, a direct question is answered with either a yes or a no response. By the third definition, he states that “holiness is what all the God’s love and unholiness is what all the God’s hate and what some of the God’s love or hate is either both or neither”. This definition addresses the concerns of Socrates with regard to qualification as manifested by the addition of the phrase “and what some of the God’s love or hate is either both or neither.” Furthermore, Socrates asks for clarification by posing his famous question: “is the holy loved by the Gods because it is holy or is it Holy because it is loved by the Gods?”
The two come to a consensus on the definition of holiness by stating that God loves holiness since it is holy and not because it is holy by the God loving it. However, this does not end here when the two establish that love is not a characteristic of holiness. They bring in the concept of moral righteousness in their quest to find out the initial meaning of holiness, leading to the termination of their conversation without having reached a conclusion that they both agreed.
In this argument, I think that Socrates’ goal was to find out how principal questions lead to problems in definitions and contradictions. He uses the concept or the question of holiness to test these arguments. The various definitions postulated by Euthyphro do not convince him, and that is why he keeps on challenging them. He does not arrive at a tangible definition of the concept to help him understand the definition. He is also committed to reason to avoid such contradictory beliefs. From the beginning of the conversation, it is clear this is his goal. He uses Plato’s philosophy that his dialogues do not usually start with a principal question. This principal question is the topic in the dialogue, and an example of this is a question such as “what is holiness?”
The features of the dialogue that align with the interpretation of his goals include how he questions the responses. He uses direct questioning, which helps him pose questions that elicit the answers of ‘yes’ or ‘no’. The definitions given by Euthyphro are crosschecked by insightful questions that seem to identify the loopholes and gaps that he does not address.
Different people can define ‘holiness’ in different ways. Even though different words may be used, the meanings of the words can be retained. My own definition of holiness is living a sanctified life as the God wishes us to live so that at the end people are rewarded. Socrates’ criticism would be about the question of how possible is it to measure the level at which an individual has lived a holy life. This is a gap that he would have demanded an answer to establish the rationale. Therefore, Socrates would have required the definition to provide a deep understanding of sanctified life to be in a better position to understand this definition. Therefore, living holiness is something that is open to an individual’s choice. God has given human beings this discretion and it is up to them to make their own decisions as everyone will have to be answerable to what he or she did. Socrates’ definition would have required some level of clarification to enhance clear understanding. Therefore, the new definition of holiness would have been “holiness is living a sanctified life as the God wishes us to live to be positively rewarded, while those who live unholiness are punished.”

Reference
Socrates in the Euthyphro. Illustration of the Socratic Method. Retrieved from: http://www2.palomar.edu/users/jfmartin/Adobe/Knowledge/Socrates_in_Euthyphro.pdf