What does it mean to be pious?
This question has been debated for centuries, and one of the most famous discussions on the topic comes from the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates.
In his dialogue with an unnamed interlocutor, Socrates explores various definitions of piety, ultimately concluding that none of them fully capture the essence of the concept.
In this blog post, we’ll delve into Socrates’ arguments and examine the different definitions of piety he considers.
By the end, we’ll have a better understanding of what piety means according to one of history’s greatest thinkers.
So, let’s dive in and explore the world of ancient Greek philosophy!
What Is Piety According To Socrates
Socrates begins his exploration of piety by examining the definition provided by his interlocutor, which states that piety is what is pleasing to the gods. While Socrates initially applauds this definition for its general form, he criticizes it by pointing out that the gods themselves disagree on what is pleasing. This means that an action could be both pious and impious at the same time, which is a logical impossibility.
The interlocutor responds by arguing that even the gods would agree that someone who kills without justification should be punished. However, Socrates counters by noting that disputes would still arise over just how much justification existed. Therefore, this definition cannot be a true definition of piety.
The interlocutor then offers two more definitions of piety: that which is dear to the gods and that which all the gods love. However, Socrates finds flaws in both of these definitions as well. The former leads to contradictions since an action could be both pious and impious, while the latter only identifies an attribute of piety rather than its essence.
Finally, Socrates considers two more definitions: piety as a part of justice that attends to the gods and piety as the art or science by which gods and men do business with one another. However, both of these definitions are vague and fail to capture the true nature of piety.
Introduction: The Question Of Piety
The question of what piety truly is lies at the heart of Socrates’ dialogue with his interlocutor. As they explore various definitions of piety, Socrates challenges each one, seeking a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of the concept. The debate ultimately leads to a deeper exploration of the nature of morality and the relationship between the gods and humans. Through this dialogue, we can gain insight into the philosophical approach of Socrates and his emphasis on seeking truth through questioning and critical thinking.
Socrates’ Dialogue On Piety
Socrates engages in a dialogue with his interlocutor to explore the nature of piety. He challenges the initial definition provided, which states that piety is what is pleasing to the gods, by pointing out that the gods themselves disagree on what is pleasing. This leads to a logical contradiction where an action could be both pious and impious at the same time.
The interlocutor offers two more definitions of piety: that which is dear to the gods and that which all the gods love. However, Socrates finds flaws in both of these definitions as well. The former leads to contradictions since an action could be both pious and impious, while the latter only identifies an attribute of piety rather than its essence.
Socrates then considers two more definitions: piety as a part of justice that attends to the gods and piety as the art or science by which gods and men do business with one another. However, both of these definitions are vague and fail to capture the true nature of piety.
Throughout this dialogue, Socrates emphasizes the need for a true definition of piety that captures its essence rather than simply identifying its attributes. He challenges his interlocutor to provide a more comprehensive definition that can serve as a standard for determining whether an action is pious or not.
Definition Of Piety: Euthyphro’s Proposal
One of the definitions of piety offered by Euthyphro is that piety is what is pleasing to the gods. This definition seems to suggest that an action is pious if it is approved by the gods. However, Socrates points out that this definition is flawed because the gods themselves disagree on what is pleasing. This means that an action could be both pious and impious at the same time, which is a logical contradiction.
Euthyphro responds by noting that even the gods would agree that someone who kills without justification should be punished, which suggests that there are some actions that are universally considered pious. However, Socrates argues that disputes would still arise over just how much justification existed, and therefore this definition cannot be a true definition of piety.
Euthyphro then offers two more definitions of piety: that which is dear to the gods and that which all the gods love. However, Socrates finds flaws in both of these definitions as well. The former leads to contradictions since an action could be both pious and impious, while the latter only identifies an attribute of piety rather than its essence.
Socrates’ Critique Of Euthyphro’s Definition
Socrates critiques Euthyphro’s definition of piety as what is pleasing to the gods by pointing out that the gods themselves disagree on what is pleasing. This means that an action could be both pious and impious at the same time, which is a logical impossibility. Socrates argues that a true definition of piety must provide a standard that can be consulted to determine whether an act is pious or not. Euthyphro’s definition fails to do so since it relies on the subjective opinions of the gods rather than an objective standard.
Socrates also critiques Euthyphro’s other definitions of piety, which are that which is dear to the gods and that which all the gods love. The former leads to contradictions since an action could be both pious and impious, while the latter only identifies an attribute of piety rather than its essence. Socrates argues that a true definition of piety must capture its essence, rather than simply identifying its effects or attributes.
Finally, Socrates considers two more definitions of piety: piety as a part of justice that attends to the gods and piety as the art or science by which gods and men do business with one another. However, both of these definitions are vague and fail to capture the true nature of piety. Socrates argues that if we want to truly understand piety, we must leave the gods out of the equation and focus on defining it in terms of its own essence and characteristics.
The Problem Of Divine Command Theory
One of the major issues with defining piety according to the gods is that it raises questions about the relationship between morality and religion. This is where Divine Command Theory comes into play. Divine Command Theory is the view that morality is dependent upon God, and that moral obligation consists in obedience to God’s commands. The theory claims that morality is ultimately based on the commands or character of God, and that the morally right action is the one that God commands or requires. However, this theory has faced significant criticism from philosophers, including Plato himself.
The problem with Divine Command Theory is that it raises the question of whether an action is moral because God commands it, or whether God commands it because it is moral. This dilemma is known as the Euthyphro dilemma and has been a subject of debate for centuries. If an action is moral only because God commands it, then morality becomes arbitrary and subjective since God could command anything. On the other hand, if an action is moral because it is inherently good, then God becomes irrelevant to morality.
Another issue with Divine Command Theory is that it assumes a particular religion’s view of God and morality. Different religions have different beliefs about what God commands, and therefore, what is moral or immoral. This raises questions about whether morality is relative to a particular religion or whether there are universal moral principles.
Socrates’ Alternative Definition Of Piety
After examining and rejecting various definitions of piety, Socrates offers his own alternative definition. He suggests that piety is a form of knowledge that involves understanding what actions are pleasing to the gods and why they are pleasing. This knowledge is not just a matter of knowing what the gods like, but also understanding the reasons behind their preferences.
Socrates argues that this definition avoids the problems of the previous definitions because it is not based solely on what the gods like or dislike. Instead, it is based on a deeper understanding of why the gods hold certain actions to be pious. This knowledge allows individuals to act in accordance with the gods’ wishes, not just because it is what they like, but because it is what is truly good and just.
Socrates’ alternative definition of piety emphasizes the importance of knowledge and understanding in acting piously. It suggests that piety is not simply a matter of blindly following what the gods like, but rather requires a deeper understanding of their values and motivations. This definition also opens up new avenues for exploring the nature of piety and its relationship to other forms of knowledge and virtue.
