In the Euthyphro, Socrates and Euthyphro have a discussion in which they seek to define the concept of holiness. Socrates ran into Euthyphro at the king’s court and leans that Euthyphro is accusing his father of murder. His father was indirectly responsible for the death of a servant who had killed another person. He took the servant, bound him and threw him in a ditch while they waited for advice on what they should do to him. By the time the messenger returned, the man was already dead. For this, Euthyphro was going to prosecute his own father of the murder of the servant. Socrates was himself accused of impiety and he sought to know what holiness truly is. Socrates believed that, being a religious leader, Euthyphro was best placed to define the term.
The issue of holiness was of importance to both parties in the conversation because one was accused of being impious while the other was accusing his father of acting out of impiety. Socrates needed a definition of holiness that he could use in his defense. Being a religious leader, Euthyphro’s definition of piety was likely to be taken seriously, and it is for this reason that Socrates was so insistent. After a long discussion, Euthyphro did not seem to have a satisfactory definition of holiness, and this led to Socrates questioning whether by prosecuting his father, Euthyphro was not himself acting impiously.
Euthyphro comes up with three different definitions of piety. His first definition of holiness is the persecution of offenders. Socrates is not satisfied by this definition because there are many other holy deeds which have nothing to do with prosecuting offenders. He suggests that Euthyphro should give him a definition of holiness that encompasses all holy deeds. At this, Euthyphro defines the term “holy” as that which is agreeable to the gods. Socrates then points out that even the gods do not agree on all matters, and this shows that everything may not be agreeable to every person.
Euthyphro then defines holiness as that which is approved of by all the gods. Here, Socrates argues that this definition is also wanting. That which is holy becomes accepted of by the gods on the grounds of its being holy, and therefore what is holy is what determines what will be approved by the gods. This in turn determines what becomes approved of by the gods. It logically follows that, what is holy is not the same as that which is approved of by gods, because one determines what becomes approved by the gods while the other one is determined by what is approved by the gods. Euthyphro then suggests that piety is a type of justice, especially one which deals with looking after the gods.
Socrates points out that the gods do not need looking after as they are omnipotent. Euthyphro suggests that holiness is a form of trade with the gods in which we offer sacrifices and they give us the answers to our prayers. They do not gain anything from these sacrifices; they simply please them. Here Socrates points out that this is similar to saying that holiness is doing what is approved of by the gods, which brings them back to the beginning of the argument. This makes a cyclic argument. Euthyphro is frustrated by Socrates arguments and he leaves in a hurry.
Euthyphro’s definition of piety was wanting, and he was not able to come up with a concrete definition. This is seen in how Euthyphro constantly changes the definition of holiness after realizing the flaw in his previous definition. It is also seen in how the definition of holiness becomes a cyclic argument and they end up at the very same place they began. On realizing this, Euthyphro leaves the king’s court frustrated. He clearly does not wish to continue with the argument. Therefore, if a concept cannot be defined, how then can one truly know which behaviors constitute piety and which ones do not? It was therefore impossible for the accuser to prove his case without a proper definition of piety.
Holiness is the state of being completely moral or having moral integrity. It refers to the code of ethics and values that guide a person in doing what is right and in accordance with the law. It is the state of being able to do what is right at all times and applying one’s religious beliefs to rightful living.
This definition of holiness, however, is wanting. In this definition, holiness is equated to moral integrity. Moral integrity is culture based. What is morally acceptable in one region or country may be considered immoral in another. A person from one region may consider himself morally upright because he has not had the opportunity to interact with other people from a different region where his type of behavior is unacceptable. For example, a person living in a polygamous society may see nothing wrong with his behavior until he finds himself in a region where polygamy is considered immoral.
Even if all his other behaviors are morally acceptable, his one act of immoral behavior disqualifies him from being considered holy. This definition does not also consider behaviors which are amoral. There are certain behaviors which are neither good nor bad in one region, but may be considered to be in either extreme in another. For example, in some African cultures, it is wrong for women to eat chicken. This behavior is amoral, but women who eat chicken in these regions are considered to lack morals. This proves that the concept of holiness cannot be defined objectively.
Reference
Plato. (2008, November 23). Euthyphro. (B. Jowett, Trans.) Retrieved January 25, 2013, from Guternberg.org: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1642/1642-h/1642-h.htm
