Anda di halaman 1dari 2

1) As Socrates and Euthyphro are on the porch, and Socrates ask Euthyphro about why he is there, and learns

that he wants to prosecute his own father Socrates suggest to him that he must be an expert in religious matters if he was willing to prosecute his own father on such a questionable charge, Euthyphro agrees that he does know all there is to know about what is holy. This is where Socrates engage him on the topic of what is holy, Socrates places himself as a ignorant student who is willing to learn, but he really is teaching Euthypro in his on manner concerning holy. 2) Euthyphro gives 3 different definitions of holy to Socrates, the first he suggest that holiness is persecuting religious offenders, and doing as he was doing in charging his father with murder. Socrates refutes this answer by saying he needed a more precise answer, by which Euthyphro had not given, and he told him that he had to admit that there were many other pious acts, which Euthyphro agree were. Second definition that was giving by Euthyphro was, Holiness was that which was dear to the gods, and un holiness was that which was not dear to them. Socrates on the second definition lets him know that he was close to giving him the answer that he wanted but rather it was truth or not, and wanted him to prove it. He then gave him an example by stated that a thing or person which is dear to the Gods is holy, and that is not dear to them is un holy, and said that those two things were extreme opposites of one another. 3) And third Euthyphro definition is that holiness is learning how to please the gods in word and deed, by prayers and sacrifices. Socrates then again challenge him on this definition as well by asking him was holiness a science of asking and giving? I feel that Socrates goal was to teach Euthyphro without him seeing himself as being taught, the method by which Socrates was teaching was to place himself as the student who was looking for answer from someone who was wiser and an expert in his own mind, in asking questions in the manner in which he did, he caused Euthyphro to have to rethink his answers and look into them from a different stand point and you can see where he had to agree with Socrates on every point. I felt that this was Socrates goal due to the way that he would form his questions and yet teach him within the formation of his question, so he would always ask Euthyphro if he agree or disagree. My Definition of Holiness is living in accord with the will of God, knowing what God wants from us and living it the best that we can. My Socrates response to my definition would be, how does one know the will of God? I would state: by his scriptures in the bible, Socrates: Are there not many versions of the bible, and they were all created or made known at different points in time? Did not they translate the bible that you speak on, out of its original language? And if so what was the original language and how does one know that the translator did not make a mistake, or intentionally added in or took away according to their lack of understanding of the original language?

I would state: One would have to have faith that God guided the translators when they were doing the translation. Socrates: and is there any proof or source by which your faith is based on, does not many men walk by blind faith and also take things on face value without proper research and investigation, would you not agree. I would state: I do agree. Socrates: then again if your definition of holiness is living according to Gods will than how does one know what Gods will is and if you are going to use one book, to back your faith, how does one verify that this book is accepted by the God by which they are submitting their will in order to be holy or to define what you called holy?

Anda mungkin juga menyukai