Plato’s Euthyphro
Socrates and Euthyphro meet by chance outside the King-archon’s court. Socrates is about to be tried on the grounds of not believing in the city gods and corrupting the youth of the city. Euthyphro, on the other hand, is prosecuting his father for murdering a labourer who was also a murder. Socrates is surprised that a son can prosecute his father for the murder of a stranger. Euthyphro then answers that his course of action is pious and all the people condemning his actions do not understand the nature of piety. Socrates then asks Euthyphro to explain what piety means. The rest of their dialogue outside the courthouse is based on the definition of piety as Socrates counters all the interpretations that Euthyphro offers.
Euthyphro first says that piety is prosecuting wrongdoers. According to Euthyphro, his father had caused the death of the servant because he neglected the prisoner. The prisoner died because of hunger, cold and the cords used to tie him. Therefore, by prosecuting his father for the death of the prisoner, Euthyphro was doing what was piety. Furthermore, Euthyphro says that piety is prosecuting wrongdoers without discriminating relatives from strangers. Socrates, however, counters this definition of piety. As per Socrates, prosecuting wrongdoers is an example of piety but not a general description of what the word meant.
Euthyphro then defines piety as what is loved by the gods. What the gods love is pious, and what the gods do not like is impious. As simple as that answer seems, Socrates gives Euthyphro a counter-argument. Socrates refers to an earlier discussion where they had states that the gods are also in a state of discord. In line with a previous statement made by the two, the gods differ with each other, and they also prefer different things. For instance, what is loved by Zeus may be displeasing to Cronus, and therefore, the gods also love different things. Thus, Socrates argues that it is difficult to differentiate between piety and impiety based on what is loved by the gods since the gods are in a state of discord.
Euthyphro offers a third definition where he says that piety is what is loved by all gods. Socrates uses a subtle but powerful argument to counter this definition. Socrates asks Euthyphro whether something is pious because the gods love it or whether the gods love it because it is pious. According to the argument by Socrates, simply because the gods love an action does not mean it is pious. Something is pious if the property of being pious rather than being loved by the gods.
The fourth definition by Euthyphro is that piety is a part of justice concerned with caring for the gods. Socrates asks Euthyphro what care to the gods’ means and the importance of the care. For lack of a better answer, Euthyphro offers a final definition.
Euthyphro final definition is that piety is doing what pleases the gods during prayer and sacrifice. Socrates counters this definition since it is a disguise of the third definition. Socrates insists that an action cannot be pious simply because it is loved; instead, it has to be pious for it to earn the love of the gods. Therefore, according to Socrates, whether an action or a man is loved or not, it has to have certain qualities that make it pious other than being god-loved. Euthyphro feels cornered by Socrates, and he excuses himself based on time.
I agree with Socrates on the view of piety. Something cannot be pious simply because it is loved. One might like insulting other people, but that does not make the actions right. For something to be pious, it must have specific characteristics that make them righteous. The judgment of piety and impiety has to be based on the quality of the actions towards humanity and not whether the gods love them or not.