Plato's Euthyphro Dilemma

Words: 947
Pages: 4

Abstract

For the purpose of this paper I will be referring to the gods in the polytheistic sense taken in the Euthyphro, in reference to the Greek Gods. This is not to deny monotheism, henotheism, etc. rather just to make this paper less complicated when providing examples. When referencing either Euthyphro or Socrates throughout the paper I am referencing their character and views set through Plato’s dialogue in the Euthyphro.

The Euthyphro Dilemma

Euthyphro, one of Plato’s earliest dialogues (roughly 399-395 BCE1) establishes one of the foremost arguments used to refute the Divine Command Theory – the Euthyphro dilemma, threatening either to leave morality subject to the whims of God, or challenge his omnipotence. Through maieutics Plato
…show more content…
Plato leaves the Euthyphro inconclusive (not uncommon among Plato’s dialogues), rather that be to allow the reader to come to a conclusion on their own or because the Euthyphro dilemma is unsuccessful. Plato later (after the Euthyphro) discusses his Theory of Forms – one may see hints to the form of holiness in the Euthyphro and see this as being the successful conclusion, but that is simply a speculation. To prove the Euthyphro Dilemma as unsuccessful based on the information given (no speculations) I will take each horn and break it down to examine its common arguments; claiming the Euthyphro Dilemma as successful would be negligent as there is no plausible way to reform the Euthyphro Dilemma without still leaving holes within the argument. Suppose we aver that x is holy because the gods love x. This horn is more in line with the Divine Command Theory but is dangerously simple. If we rendered this statement true and maintained the god’s omnipotence, the gods would be able to claim anything as holy – such as murder, rape, adultery, etc. From a polytheist stand point, multiple gods deciding what is holy based on their love for it, one would assume there would be complications, as Socrates clearly states in the Euthyphro “different gods also regard different things as just, or as honorable and dishonorable, good and bad” (Page 9, 7e). This leaves something or someone to be both holy and unholy. Now let us suppose that the gods love x because x is holy. To render this true, goodness would be independent of the gods love, undermining the Divine Command Theory. A common argument among theists to preserve this horns integrity is to look at it in the broadest sense – that is, rather than the gods looking at individual things and loving them because they are holy, the gods must look at specific features, such as happiness. If something maximizes happiness