1. Morality and Authority

The Socratic Method of Philosophical Inquiry

1.  Read Plato’s dialogue “Euthyphro” at http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/euthyfro.html.

2.  Define the term “morality” by answering Euthyphro’s dilemma.

If you were Euthyphro, how would you have responded when Socrates inquired:

“Is an action morally good because God commands it,
or does God command it because it is morally good?”

3. Read Euthyphro’s Dilemma at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro_Dilemma

4. Read Divine Command Theory at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_command_theory.

“EUTHYPHRO”

by Plato

Written 380 B.C.E

Translated by Benjamin Jowett

Persons of the Dialogue
Socrates
Euthyphro

Scene
The Porch of the King Archon.

Euthyphro. Why have you left the Lyceum, Socrates? and what are you doing in the Porch of the King Archon? Surely you cannot be concerned in a suit before the King, like myself?

Socrates. Not in a suit, Euthyphro; impeachment is the word which the Athenians use.

Euth. What! I suppose that some one has been prosecuting you, for I cannot believe that you are the prosecutor of another.

Soc. Certainly not.

Euth. Then some one else has been prosecuting you?

Soc. Yes.

Euth. And who is he?

Soc. A young man who is little known, Euthyphro; and I hardly know him: his name is Meletus, and he is of the deme of Pitthis. Perhaps you may remember his appearance; he has a beak, and long straight hair, and a beard which is ill grown.

Euth. No, I do not remember him, Socrates. But what is the charge which he brings against you?

Soc. What is the charge? Well, a very serious charge, which shows a good deal of character in the young man, and for which he is certainly not to be despised. He says he knows how the youth are corrupted and who are their corruptors. I fancy that he must be a wise man, and seeing that I am the reverse of a wise man, he has found me out, and is going to accuse me of corrupting his young friends. And of this our mother the state is to be the judge. Of all our political men he is the only one who seems to me to begin in the right way, with the cultivation of virtue in youth; like a good husbandman, he makes the young shoots his first care, and clears away us who are the destroyers of them. This is only the first step; he will afterwards attend to the elder branches; and if he goes on as he has begun, he will be a very great public benefactor.

Euth. I hope that he may; but I rather fear, Socrates, that the opposite will turn out to be the truth. My opinion is that in attacking you he is simply aiming a blow at the foundation of the state. But in what way does he say that you corrupt the young?

Soc. He brings a wonderful accusation against me, which at first hearing excites surprise: he says that I am a poet or maker of gods, and that I invent new gods and deny the existence of old ones; this is the ground of his indictment.

Euth. I understand, Socrates; he means to attack you about the familiar sign which occasionally, as you say, comes to you. He thinks that you are a neologian, and he is going to have you up before the court for this. He knows that such a charge is readily received by the world, as I myself know too well; for when I speak in the assembly about divine things, and foretell the future to them, they laugh at me and think me a madman. Yet every word that I say is true. But they are jealous of us all; and we must be brave and go at them.

Soc. Their laughter, friend Euthyphro, is not a matter of much consequence. For a man may be thought wise; but the Athenians, I suspect, do not much trouble themselves about him until he begins to impart his wisdom to others, and then for some reason or other, perhaps, as you say, from jealousy, they are angry.

Euth. I am never likely to try their temper in this way.

Soc. I dare say not, for you are reserved in your behaviour, and seldom impart your wisdom. But I have a benevolent habit of pouring out myself to everybody, and would even pay for a listener, and I am afraid that the Athenians may think me too talkative. Now if, as I was saying, they would only laugh at me, as you say that they laugh at you, the time might pass gaily enough in the court; but perhaps they may be in earnest, and then what the end will be you soothsayers only can predict.

Euth. I dare say that the affair will end in nothing, Socrates, and that you will win your cause; and I think that I shall win my own.

Soc. And what is your suit, Euthyphro? are you the pursuer or the defendant?

Euth. I am the pursuer.

Soc. Of whom?

Euth. You will think me mad when I tell you.

Soc. Why, has the fugitive wings?

Euth. Nay, he is not very volatile at his time of life.

Soc. Who is he?

Euth. My father.

Soc. Your father! my good man?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. And of what is he accused?

Euth. Of murder, Socrates.

Soc. By the powers, Euthyphro! how little does the common herd know of the nature of right and truth. A man must be an extraordinary man, and have made great strides in wisdom, before he could have seen his way to bring such an action.

Euth. Indeed, Socrates, he must.

Soc. I suppose that the man whom your father murdered was one of your relatives-clearly he was; for if he had been a stranger you would never have thought of prosecuting him.

Euth. I am amused, Socrates, at your making a distinction between one who is a relation and one who is not a relation; for surely the pollution is the same in either case, if you knowingly associate with the murderer when you ought to clear yourself and him by proceeding against him. The real question is whether the murdered man has been justly slain. If justly, then your duty is to let the matter alone; but if unjustly, then even if the murderer lives under the same roof with you and eats at the same table, proceed against him. Now the man who is dead was a poor dependent of mine who worked for us as a field labourer on our farm in Naxos, and one day in a fit of drunken passion he got into a quarrel with one of our domestic servants and slew him. My father bound him hand and foot and threw him into a ditch, and then sent to Athens to ask of a diviner what he should do with him. Meanwhile he never attended to him and took no care about him, for he regarded him as a murderer; and thought that no great harm would be done even if he did die. Now this was just what happened. For such was the effect of cold and hunger and chains upon him, that before the messenger returned from the diviner, he was dead. And my father and family are angry with me for taking the part of the murderer and prosecuting my father. They say that he did not kill him, and that if he did, dead man was but a murderer, and I ought not to take any notice, for that a son is impious who prosecutes a father. Which shows, Socrates, how little they know what the gods think about piety and impiety.

Soc. Good heavens, Euthyphro! and is your knowledge of religion and of things pious and impious so very exact, that, supposing the circumstances to be as you state them, you are not afraid lest you too may be doing an impious thing in bringing an action against your father?

Euth. The best of Euthyphro, and that which distinguishes him, Socrates, from other men, is his exact knowledge of all such matters. What should I be good for without it?

Soc. Rare friend! I think that I cannot do better than be your disciple. Then before the trial with Meletus comes on I shall challenge him, and say that I have always had a great interest in religious questions, and now, as he charges me with rash imaginations and innovations in religion, I have become your disciple. You, Meletus, as I shall say to him, acknowledge Euthyphro to be a great theologian, and sound in his opinions; and if you approve of him you ought to approve of me, and not have me into court; but if you disapprove, you should begin by indicting him who is my teacher, and who will be the ruin, not of the young, but of the old; that is to say, of myself whom he instructs, and of his old father whom he admonishes and chastises. And if Meletus refuses to listen to me, but will go on, and will not shift the indictment from me to you, I cannot do better than repeat this challenge in the court.

Euth. Yes, indeed, Socrates; and if he attempts to indict me I am mistaken if I do not find a flaw in him; the court shall have a great deal more to say to him than to me.

Soc. And I, my dear friend, knowing this, am desirous of becoming your disciple. For I observe that no one appears to notice you- not even this Meletus; but his sharp eyes have found me out at once, and he has indicted me for impiety. And therefore, I adjure you to tell me the nature of piety and impiety, which you said that you knew so well, and of murder, and of other offences against the gods. What are they? Is not piety in every action always the same? and impiety, again- is it not always the opposite of piety, and also the same with itself, having, as impiety, one notion which includes whatever is impious?

Euth. To be sure, Socrates.

Soc. And what is piety, and what is impiety?

Euth. Piety is doing as I am doing; that is to say, prosecuting any one who is guilty of murder, sacrilege, or of any similar crime-whether he be your father or mother, or whoever he may be-that makes no difference; and not to prosecute them is impiety. And please to consider, Socrates, what a notable proof I will give you of the truth of my words, a proof which I have already given to others:-of the principle, I mean, that the impious, whoever he may be, ought not to go unpunished. For do not men regard Zeus as the best and most righteous of the gods?-and yet they admit that he bound his father (Cronos) because he wickedly devoured his sons, and that he too had punished his own father (Uranus) for a similar reason, in a nameless manner. And yet when I proceed against my father, they are angry with me. So inconsistent are they in their way of talking when the gods are concerned, and when I am concerned.

Soc. May not this be the reason, Euthyphro, why I am charged with impiety-that I cannot away with these stories about the gods? and therefore I suppose that people think me wrong. But, as you who are well informed about them approve of them, I cannot do better than assent to your superior wisdom. What else can I say, confessing as I do, that I know nothing about them? Tell me, for the love of Zeus, whether you really believe that they are true.

Euth. Yes, Socrates; and things more wonderful still, of which the world is in ignorance.

Soc. And do you really believe that the gods, fought with one another, and had dire quarrels, battles, and the like, as the poets say, and as you may see represented in the works of great artists? The temples are full of them; and notably the robe of Athene, which is carried up to the Acropolis at the great Panathenaea, is embroidered with them. Are all these tales of the gods true, Euthyphro?

Euth. Yes, Socrates; and, as I was saying, I can tell you, if you would like to hear them, many other things about the gods which would quite amaze you.

Soc. I dare say; and you shall tell me them at some other time when I have leisure. But just at present I would rather hear from you a more precise answer, which you have not as yet given, my friend, to the question, What is “piety”? When asked, you only replied, Doing as you do, charging your father with murder.

Euth. And what I said was true, Socrates.

Soc. No doubt, Euthyphro; but you would admit that there are many other pious acts?

Euth. There are.

Soc. Remember that I did not ask you to give me two or three examples of piety, but to explain the general idea which makes all pious things to be pious. Do you not recollect that there was one idea which made the impious impious, and the pious pious?

Euth. I remember.

Soc. Tell me what is the nature of this idea, and then I shall have a standard to which I may look, and by which I may measure actions, whether yours or those of any one else, and then I shall be able to say that such and such an action is pious, such another impious.

Euth. I will tell you, if you like.

Soc. I should very much like.

Euth. Piety, then, is that which is dear to the gods, and impiety is that which is not dear to them.

Soc. Very good, Euthyphro; you have now given me the sort of answer which I wanted. But whether what you say is true or not I cannot as yet tell, although I make no doubt that you will prove the truth of your words.

Euth. Of course.

Soc. Come, then, and let us examine what we are saying. That thing or person which is dear to the gods is pious, and that thing or person which is hateful to the gods is impious, these two being the extreme opposites of one another. Was not that said?

Euth. It was.

Soc. And well said?

Euth. Yes, Socrates, I thought so; it was certainly said.

Soc. And further, Euthyphro, the gods were admitted to have enmities and hatreds and differences?

Euth. Yes, that was also said.

Soc. And what sort of difference creates enmity and anger? Suppose for example that you and I, my good friend, differ about a number; do differences of this sort make us enemies and set us at variance with one another? Do we not go at once to arithmetic, and put an end to them by a sum?

Euth. True.

Soc. Or suppose that we differ about magnitudes, do we not quickly end the differences by measuring?

Euth. Very true.

Soc. And we end a controversy about heavy and light by resorting to a weighing machine?

Euth. To be sure.

Soc. But what differences are there which cannot be thus decided, and which therefore make us angry and set us at enmity with one another? I dare say the answer does not occur to you at the moment, and therefore I will suggest that these enmities arise when the matters of difference are the just and unjust, good and evil, honourable and dishonourable. Are not these the points about which men differ, and about which when we are unable satisfactorily to decide our differences, you and I and all of us quarrel, when we do quarrel?

Euth. Yes, Socrates, the nature of the differences about which we quarrel is such as you describe.

Soc. And the quarrels of the gods, noble Euthyphro, when they occur, are of a like nature?

Euth. Certainly they are.

Soc. They have differences of opinion, as you say, about good and evil, just and unjust, honourable and dishonourable: there would have been no quarrels among them, if there had been no such differences-would there now?

Euth. You are quite right.

Soc. Does not every man love that which he deems noble and just and good, and hate the opposite of them?

Euth. Very true.

Soc. But, as you say, people regard the same things, some as just and others as unjust,-about these they dispute; and so there arise wars and fightings among them.

Euth. Very true.

Soc. Then the same things are hated by the gods and loved by the gods, and are both hateful and dear to them?

Euth. True.

Soc. And upon this view the same things, Euthyphro, will be pious and also impious?

Euth. So I should suppose.

Soc. Then, my friend, I remark with surprise that you have not answered the question which I asked. For I certainly did not ask you to tell me what action is both pious and impious: but now it would seem that what is loved by the gods is also hated by them. And therefore, Euthyphro, in thus chastising your father you may very likely be doing what is agreeable to Zeus but disagreeable to Cronos or Uranus, and what is acceptable to Hephaestus but unacceptable to Here, and there may be other gods who have similar differences of opinion.

Euth. But I believe, Socrates, that all the gods would be agreed as to the propriety of punishing a murderer: there would be no difference of opinion about that.

Soc. Well, but speaking of men, Euthyphro, did you ever hear any one arguing that a murderer or any sort of evil-doer ought to be let off?

Euth. I should rather say that these are the questions which they are always arguing, especially in courts of law: they commit all sorts of crimes, and there is nothing which they will not do or say in their own defence.

Soc. But do they admit their guilt, Euthyphro, and yet say that they ought not to be punished?

Euth. No; they do not.

Soc. Then there are some things which they do not venture to say and do: for they do not venture to argue that the guilty are to be unpunished, but they deny their guilt, do they not?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. Then they do not argue that the evil-doer should not be punished, but they argue about the fact of who the evil-doer is, and what he did and when?

Euth. True.

Soc. And the gods are in the same case, if as you assert they quarrel about just and unjust, and some of them say while others deny that injustice is done among them. For surely neither God nor man will ever venture to say that the doer of injustice is not to be punished?

Euth. That is true, Socrates, in the main.

Soc. But they join issue about the particulars-gods and men alike; and, if they dispute at all, they dispute about some act which is called in question, and which by some is affirmed to be just, by others to be unjust. Is not that true?

Euth. Quite true.

Soc. Well then, my dear friend Euthyphro, do tell me, for my better instruction and information, what proof have you that in the opinion of all the gods a servant who is guilty of murder, and is put in chains by the master of the dead man, and dies because he is put in chains before he who bound him can learn from the interpreters of the gods what he ought to do with him, dies unjustly; and that on behalf of such an one a son ought to proceed against his father and accuse him of murder. How would you show that all the gods absolutely agree in approving of his act? Prove to me that they do, and I will applaud your wisdom as long as I live.

Euth. It will be a difficult task; but I could make the matter very dear indeed to you.

Soc. I understand; you mean to say that I am not so quick of apprehension as the judges: for to them you will be sure to prove that the act is unjust, and hateful to the gods.

Euth. Yes indeed, Socrates; at least if they will listen to me.

Soc. But they will be sure to listen if they find that you are a good speaker. There was a notion that came into my mind while you were speaking; I said to myself: “Well, and what if Euthyphro does prove to me that all the gods regarded the death of the serf as unjust, how do I know anything more of the nature of piety and impiety? for granting that this action may be hateful to the gods, still piety and impiety are not adequately defined by these distinctions, for that which is hateful to the gods has been shown to be also pleasing and dear to them.” And therefore, Euthyphro, I do not ask you to prove this; I will suppose, if you like, that all the gods condemn and abominate such an action. But I will amend the definition so far as to say that what all the gods hate is impious, and what they love pious or holy; and what some of them love and others hate is both or neither. Shall this be our definition of piety and impiety?

Euth. Why not, Socrates?

Soc. Why not! certainly, as far as I am concerned, Euthyphro, there is no reason why not. But whether this admission will greatly assist you in the task of instructing me as you promised, is a matter for you to consider.

Euth. Yes, I should say that what all the gods love is pious and holy, and the opposite which they all hate, impious.

Soc. Ought we to enquire into the truth of this, Euthyphro, or simply to accept the mere statement on our own authority and that of others? What do you say?

Euth. We should enquire; and I believe that the statement will stand the test of enquiry.

Soc. We shall know better, my good friend, in a little while. The point which I should first wish to understand is whether the pious or holy is beloved by the gods because it is holy, or holy because it is beloved of the gods.

Euth. I do not understand your meaning, Socrates.

Soc. I will endeavour to explain: we, speak of carrying and we speak of being carried, of leading and being led, seeing and being seen. You know that in all such cases there is a difference, and you know also in what the difference lies?

Euth. I think that I understand.

Soc. And is not that which is beloved distinct from that which loves?

Euth. Certainly.

Soc. Well; and now tell me, is that which is carried in this state of carrying because it is carried, or for some other reason?

Euth. No; that is the reason.

Soc. And the same is true of what is led and of what is seen?

Euth. True.

Soc. And a thing is not seen because it is visible, but conversely, visible because it is seen; nor is a thing led because it is in the state of being led, or carried because it is in the state of being carried, but the converse of this. And now I think, Euthyphro, that my meaning will be intelligible; and my meaning is, that any state of action or passion implies previous action or passion. It does not become because it is becoming, but it is in a state of becoming because it becomes; neither does it suffer because it is in a state of suffering, but it is in a state of suffering because it suffers. Do you not agree?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. Is not that which is loved in some state either of becoming or suffering?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. And the same holds as in the previous instances; the state of being loved follows the act of being loved, and not the act the state.

Euth. Certainly.

Soc. And what do you say of piety, Euthyphro: is not piety, according to your definition, loved by all the gods?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. Because it is pious or holy, or for some other reason?

Euth. No, that is the reason.

Soc. It is loved because it is holy, not holy because it is loved?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. And that which is dear to the gods is loved by them, and is in a state to be loved of them because it is loved of them?

Euth. Certainly.

Soc. Then that which is dear to the gods, Euthyphro, is not holy, nor is that which is holy loved of God, as you affirm; but they are two different things.

Euth. How do you mean, Socrates?

Soc. I mean to say that the holy has been acknowledge by us to be loved of God because it is holy, not to be holy because it is loved.

Euth. Yes.

Soc. But that which is dear to the gods is dear to them because it is loved by them, not loved by them because it is dear to them.

Euth. True.

Soc. But, friend Euthyphro, if that which is holy is the same with that which is dear to God, and is loved because it is holy, then that which is dear to God would have been loved as being dear to God; but if that which dear to God is dear to him because loved by him, then that which is holy would have been holy because loved by him. But now you see that the reverse is the case, and that they are quite different from one another. For one (theophiles) is of a kind to be loved cause it is loved, and the other (osion) is loved because it is of a kind to be loved. Thus you appear to me, Euthyphro, when I ask you what is the essence of holiness, to offer an attribute only, and not the essence-the attribute of being loved by all the gods. But you still refuse to explain to me the nature of holiness. And therefore, if you please, I will ask you not to hide your treasure, but to tell me once more what holiness or piety really is, whether dear to the gods or not (for that is a matter about which we will not quarrel) and what is impiety?

Euth. I really do not know, Socrates, how to express what I mean. For somehow or other our arguments, on whatever ground we rest them, seem to turn round and walk away from us.

Soc. Your words, Euthyphro, are like the handiwork of my ancestor Daedalus; and if I were the sayer or propounder of them, you might say that my arguments walk away and will not remain fixed where they are placed because I am a descendant of his. But now, since these notions are your own, you must find some other gibe, for they certainly, as you yourself allow, show an inclination to be on the move.

Euth. Nay, Socrates, I shall still say that you are the Daedalus who sets arguments in motion; not I, certainly, but you make them move or go round, for they would never have stirred, as far as I am concerned.

Soc. Then I must be a greater than Daedalus: for whereas he only made his own inventions to move, I move those of other people as well. And the beauty of it is, that I would rather not. For I would give the wisdom of Daedalus, and the wealth of Tantalus, to be able to detain them and keep them fixed. But enough of this. As I perceive that you are lazy, I will myself endeavor to show you how you might instruct me in the nature of piety; and I hope that you will not grudge your labour. Tell me, then-Is not that which is pious necessarily just?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. And is, then, all which is just pious? or, is that which is pious all just, but that which is just, only in part and not all, pious?

Euth. I do not understand you, Socrates.

Soc. And yet I know that you are as much wiser than I am, as you are younger. But, as I was saying, revered friend, the abundance of your wisdom makes you lazy. Please to exert yourself, for there is no real difficulty in understanding me. What I mean I may explain by an illustration of what I do not mean. The poet (Stasinus) sings-

Of Zeus, the author and creator of all these things,
You will not tell: for where there is fear there is also
reverence. Now I disagree with this poet. Shall I tell you in what respect?

Euth. By all means.

Soc. I should not say that where there is fear there is also reverence; for I am sure that many persons fear poverty and disease, and the like evils, but I do not perceive that they reverence the objects of their fear.

Euth. Very true.

Soc. But where reverence is, there is fear; for he who has a feeling of reverence and shame about the commission of any action, fears and is afraid of an ill reputation.

Euth. No doubt.

Soc. Then we are wrong in saying that where there is fear there is also reverence; and we should say, where there is reverence there is also fear. But there is not always reverence where there is fear; for fear is a more extended notion, and reverence is a part of fear, just as the odd is a part of number, and number is a more extended notion than the odd. I suppose that you follow me now?

Euth. Quite well.

Soc. That was the sort of question which I meant to raise when I asked whether the just is always the pious, or the pious always the just; and whether there may not be justice where there is not piety; for justice is the more extended notion of which piety is only a part. Do you dissent?

Euth. No, I think that you are quite right.

Soc. Then, if piety is a part of justice, I suppose that we should enquire what part? If you had pursued the enquiry in the previous cases; for instance, if you had asked me what is an even number, and what part of number the even is, I should have had no difficulty in replying, a number which represents a figure having two equal sides. Do you not agree?

Euth. Yes, I quite agree.

Soc. In like manner, I want you to tell me what part of justice is piety or holiness, that I may be able to tell Meletus not to do me injustice, or indict me for impiety, as I am now adequately instructed by you in the nature of piety or holiness, and their opposites.

Euth. Piety or holiness, Socrates, appears to me to be that part of justice which attends to the gods, as there is the other part of justice which attends to men.

Soc. That is good, Euthyphro; yet still there is a little point about which I should like to have further information, What is the meaning of “attention”? For attention can hardly be used in the same sense when applied to the gods as when applied to other things. For instance, horses are said to require attention, and not every person is able to attend to them, but only a person skilled in horsemanship. Is it not so?

Euth. Certainly.

Soc. I should suppose that the art of horsemanship is the art of attending to horses?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. Nor is every one qualified to attend to dogs, but only the huntsman?

Euth. True.

Soc. And I should also conceive that the art of the huntsman is the art of attending to dogs?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. As the art of the ox herd is the art of attending to oxen?

Euth. Very true.

Soc. In like manner holiness or piety is the art of attending to the gods?-that would be your meaning, Euthyphro?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. And is not attention always designed for the good or benefit of that to which the attention is given? As in the case of horses, you may observe that when attended to by the horseman’s art they are benefited and improved, are they not?

Euth. True.

Soc. As the dogs are benefited by the huntsman’s art, and the oxen by the art of the ox herd, and all other things are tended or attended for their good and not for their hurt?

Euth. Certainly, not for their hurt.

Soc. But for their good?

Euth. Of course.

Soc. And does piety or holiness, which has been defined to be the art of attending to the gods, benefit or improve them? Would you say that when you do a holy act you make any of the gods better?

Euth. No, no; that was certainly not what I meant.

Soc. And I, Euthyphro, never supposed that you did. I asked you the question about the nature of the attention, because I thought that you did not.

Euth. You do me justice, Socrates; that is not the sort of attention which I mean.

Soc. Good: but I must still ask what is this attention to the gods which is called piety?

Euth. It is such, Socrates, as servants show to their masters.

Soc. I understand-a sort of ministration to the gods.

Euth. Exactly.

Soc. Medicine is also a sort of ministration or service, having in view the attainment of some object-would you not say of health?

Euth. I should.

Soc. Again, there is an art which ministers to the ship-builder with a view to the attainment of some result?

Euth. Yes, Socrates, with a view to the building of a ship.

Soc. As there is an art which ministers to the housebuilder with a view to the building of a house?

Euth. Yes.

Soc. And now tell me, my good friend, about the art which ministers to the gods: what work does that help to accomplish? For you must surely know if, as you say, you are of all men living the one who is best instructed in religion.

Euth. And I speak the truth, Socrates.

Soc. Tell me then, oh tell me-what is that fair work which the gods do by the help of our ministrations?

Euth. Many and fair, Socrates, are the works which they do. Soc. Why, my friend, and so are those of a general. But the chief of them is easily told. Would you not say that victory in war is the chief of them?

Euth. Certainly.

Soc. Many and fair, too, are the works of the husbandman, if I am not mistaken; but his chief work is the production of food from the earth?

Euth. Exactly.

Soc. And of the many and fair things done by the gods, which is the chief or principal one?

Euth. I have told you already, Socrates, that to learn all these things accurately will be very tiresome. Let me simply say that piety or holiness is learning, how to please the gods in word and deed, by prayers and sacrifices. Such piety, is the salvation of families and states, just as the impious, which is unpleasing to the gods, is their ruin and destruction.

Soc. I think that you could have answered in much fewer words the chief question which I asked, Euthyphro, if you had chosen. But I see plainly that you are not disposed to instruct me-dearly not: else why, when we reached the point, did you turn, aside? Had you only answered me I should have truly learned of you by this time the-nature of piety. Now, as the asker of a question is necessarily dependent on the answerer, whither he leads-I must follow; and can only ask again, what is the pious, and what is piety? Do you mean that they are a, sort of science of praying and sacrificing?

Euth. Yes, I do.

Soc. And sacrificing is giving to the gods, and prayer is asking of the gods?

Euth. Yes, Socrates.

Soc. Upon this view, then piety is a science of asking and giving?

Euth. You understand me capitally, Socrates.

Soc. Yes, my friend; the. reason is that I am a votary of your science, and give my mind to it, and therefore nothing which you say will be thrown away upon me. Please then to tell me, what is the nature of this service to the gods? Do you mean that we prefer requests and give gifts to them?

Euth. Yes, I do.

Soc. Is not the right way of asking to ask of them what we want?

Euth. Certainly.

Soc. And the right way of giving is to give to them in return what they want of us. There would be no, in an art which gives to any one that which he does not want.

Euth. Very true, Socrates.

Soc. Then piety, Euthyphro, is an art which gods and men have of doing business with one another?

Euth. That is an expression which you may use, if you like.

Soc. But I have no particular liking for anything but the truth. I wish, however, that you would tell me what benefit accrues to the gods from our gifts. There is no doubt about what they give to us; for there is no good thing which they do not give; but how we can give any good thing to them in return is far from being equally clear. If they give everything and we give nothing, that must be an affair of business in which we have very greatly the advantage of them.

Euth. And do you imagine, Socrates, that any benefit accrues to the gods from our gifts?

Soc. But if not, Euthyphro, what is the meaning of gifts which are conferred by us upon the gods?

Euth. What else, but tributes of honour; and, as I was just now saying, what pleases them?

Soc. Piety, then, is pleasing to the gods, but not beneficial or dear to them?

Euth. I should say that nothing could be dearer.

Soc. Then once more the assertion is repeated that piety is dear to the gods?

Euth. Certainly.

Soc. And when you say this, can you wonder at your words not standing firm, but walking away? Will you accuse me of being the Daedalus who makes them walk away, not perceiving that there is another and far greater artist than Daedalus who makes them go round in a circle, and he is yourself; for the argument, as you will perceive, comes round to the same point. Were we not saying that the holy or pious was not the same with that which is loved of the gods? Have you forgotten?

Euth. I quite remember.

Soc. And are you not saying that what is loved of the gods is holy; and is not this the same as what is dear to them-do you see?

Euth. True.

Soc. Then either we were wrong in former assertion; or, if we were right then, we are wrong now.

Euth. One of the two must be true.

Soc. Then we must begin again and ask, What is piety? That is an enquiry which I shall never be weary of pursuing as far as in me lies; and I entreat you not to scorn me, but to apply your mind to the utmost, and tell me the truth. For, if any man knows, you are he; and therefore I must detain you, like Proteus, until you tell. If you had not certainly known the nature of piety and impiety, I am confident that you would never, on behalf of a serf, have charged your aged father with murder. You would not have run such a risk of doing wrong in the sight of the gods, and you would have had too much respect for the opinions of men. I am sure, therefore, that you know the nature of piety and impiety. Speak out then, my dear Euthyphro, and do not hide your knowledge.

Euth. Another time, Socrates; for I am in a hurry, and must go now.

Soc. Alas! my companion, and will you leave me in despair? I was hoping that you would instruct me in the nature of piety and impiety; and then I might have cleared myself of Meletus and his indictment. I would have told him that I had been enlightened by Euthyphro, and had given up rash innovations and speculations, in which I indulged only through ignorance, and that now I am about to lead a better life.

THE END

Advertisements

49 Responses

  1. Morality is something that God’s love. It is something that we must imbued in our minds and hearts. For example, some countries make immoral things moral like abortion. In the states abortion is legal but isn’t moral to the eyes of God. This is something that I thing is right and should be followed by all. Remember that morality is something that God’s love and not the vice versa. We must always keep this into our minds and hearts so we could be able to please the Gods and they as well show some appreciation on what we are doing.

  2. I think morality is something that Gods love and not the vice versa. Its because we are free and we can be moral in our own ways and morality is something which should be imbued in the eyes and hearts but their are times that morality becomes immoral in the eyes of the Gods. For example, abortion is becoming moral in other countries but we all know that abortion is immoral in the eyes of the Gods. We must remember that morality is planted and should be shown to other people who makes immoral things moral.

  3. “Is it moral because the Gods love it, or the Gods love it because it is moral?”

    Answering this question made me to think long enough in such matter. I don’t desire to answer this question but if I may ask to the given question, if I would first define the concept,
    It would be:

    Morality, for me, is the limitation of one’s individual. It is the manner which limits us against the abused freedom and teaches us to have proper behavior. Thus, morality can be defined as righteousness. In authority, if it is connected with it, it will only circulate to the term “right and wrong” (in the eyes of the liberal morality) there are no exemptions for it. But if you would revise it in Christian morality it might not only circulate to the term “right and wrong” but it will also exempt us in good and evil. One thing is not clear, if the word “God” does prefer to the authorities or to our real God. That’s why maybe it is hard to answer the question. God gave us the wisdom and freedom to everything, in the choice given it might be pleasing to answer the choice “the Gods love it because it is moral” for it is because of morality there is peace in the world and the reason why our Gods love it. But if you would think and analyze that if our God is the source of goodness then in every virtue that is moral is certainly chosen by God thus, “it is moral because the God’s love it.” I read about an essay on how would u choose a given concept and the writer says, “Try to choose the lesser of two evil.” Maybe it is true sometimes you need to choose what u think is much lesser evil, choosing what your faith might tell you to do.
    Besides, what matters is what our dear God, the source of goodness, ask us to do. I maybe not as smart as a Socrates but my faith is with God. Thus, I’m choosing both of it in terms of God Himself alone.

  4. “Is an action morally good because God commands it,
    or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    I think it is God command it because it is morally good and not the vice versa.In the last discussion we agreed that morality is something that the Gods love. Morality speaks of a system of behavior in regards to standards of right or wrong behavior. God never commands us to do something evil. We are the one who is doing evil things. In America same sex marriage is legal, but we all know that in the words of God same sex marriage isn’t right. God created a man and a woman for them to be united and not the other way around. So we must always remember that doing God’s command or doing good things is the only way we can make the world an evil free and moral place.

  5. I believe that morality is dependent on God because God in Himself is good and the source of our morality standards. God would not delight in anything evil thus; He wouldn’t make moral what is evil in nature. For example, He didn’t allow Abraham to kill his son even though He commanded him to do it because it was a mere test to Abraham’s obedience.

    God is absolute and so are His commands to us. It is us humans who make things relative to our desires. For example, abortion, contraception, and the like are legalized in other countries but do not mean it is moral for their country. It is good for others but does not make it right at all.
    I also think that if it wasn’t for God, we wouldn’t have known what is moral and what is not. Everything would have been arbitrary. Everything would just be right or wrong depending on how we perceive it to be. It is He who handed to us the morality that we know up to these times.

  6. In my opinion, morality is something good because a person thinks that it is good. We had one similarity with God, and, that is freedom. In my case, I don’t do things that is immoral , because, it is God’s will. I don’t do immoral things, because I think it is the right and moral thing to do. God commands it because he thinks that it is morally good, just like my opinion, I do morally good things ,because, I think it is the right thing to do.

  7. “Is something pious because the gods love it, or the gods love it because it is pious?”

    IN MY OPINION, something is considered to be pious or holy because the gods or an authority love it. Piety is something that is marked by reference for diety and it became that if not for the authorities. Nothing is considered pious unless the authority who sets the norms in our society say that it is. This dilemna also comes across our belief and faith because even if the authorities tell that something is pious or not, if you don’t believe them, nothing they say will change your mind. 🙂

  8. For me I think that morality is cross-cultural. For example, a man abandoning his brothers on the field of battle is considered immoral in all cultures, even without God. And also murder can be very immoral because one does not want to be murdered and can put two and two together. I know that morality deals with the manner, character, and proper behavior. “Morals” came from the root word of morality are defined by society, religion, or and individual conscience. So morality can be pertaining to the acting on the mind of a person and there feelings also there characteristics. Morality is also the rules of conduct so if it is a rule by god, we must follow it and put it into our minds and everyday in our life. like logic, logic is an everyday activity as well as the morality we must do or follow the morality of god as well. And logic can be used to create quite responsible morality to us. So for me even without god there can be morality. Because morality can be defined as the rules of conduct, only the rules of god but not god.

  9. Something is Moral because God loves it.

    God is the source of everything, He is the creator. He is Omniscient (all knowing). The fact that we acknowledge Him as our God means we accept His Omnipotence, whatever He says should be done. We refer to Him as our God, therefore we submit ourselves to His power, will, and supremacy. Whatever he labels as morally good will be morally good and vice versa. The statement “God commands something because it is moral” is somehow also correct, but If that’s the case it means that God is subjected to certain standards. If that’s the case, He’ll cease being a God because he is now following certain standards, but where does that standard came from?

    For example, we all know that killing is wrong, but when God commanded it, it is right. Why? Simply because He is God, if we oppose Him, therefore He’s no longer a God because we had surpassed His goodness and knowledge. The main reason why we can’t accept the fact that killing is right because we are already subjected in the existing morals. Morality here is not arbitrary, as have been claimed by St. Thomas Aquinas. God is the uncaused caused, everything comes from Him including the laws that claim what is moral or not.

  10. Every commandment God gives is morally good. But it’s up to the person whether he will obey. Usually, moral values of a person is based from how he was brought up. If it’s from the Word of God his actions would always be good. Every person has their own moralities and beliefs. One might say that a thing is good while the other might say that it is bad.

  11. From the question “Is what is MORAL commanded by GODS because it is MORAL or is it MORAL because it is commanded by GODS?”, I saw what Socrates is trying to get at. For he does not consider GODS as moral beings but only those Who have the authority/power to change things.

    In my own point of view, what is moral is what the GODS commanded in a good way. For that the GODS can disagree among themselves, they could not make such immoral things moral in an instant. It follows the nature of Morality. For theologists, they always thought of GODS as the center of righteousness which Socrates does not imply with his confront with Euthyphro.

    Hence, morality is upon the GODS righteousness. And GODS are righteous. ^_^,

  12. “Is an action morally good because God commands it,
    or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    If I were in Euthyphro’s place, I would have answered Socrates that an action is morally good because God commands it. Morality is something that is morally right. Morality from the root word moral, which means pertaining to conduct from the point of right and wrong. Therefore, morality is the standard of right and wrong. Morality is based on God’s commands because God’s commands tells us what is right. For example is the commandment “Thou shall not covet thy neighbor’s wife” or what we call as adultery. Violating this commandment is immoral/wrong for the fact that you are already committed to someone and yet you chose to have another affair/relationship.

    God cannot be dependent to what is moral because if God’s commands depend on it then God is not supreme over all. If that’s the case then this would be a big argument for everyone because we will have different terms or perceptions on what is “right” or what is “wrong”. It is in out opinion if something is right or wrong. Therefore, this will bring all people into total chaos.

    Thus, something is morally good because God commands it.

  13. as i see it there is no real thing as moral for if you think that what you do is moral may be moral to others as stated the gods (little g and with an s) themselves argue over each on his matter for what is moral to one god may be immoral to another. its like saying im think its moral therefore it is moral which is wrong or saying what i did is immoral because i think its immoral which is stupid and also wrong. morality cannot be bound by the mere comprehension of the human mind(in my opinion), i mean the gods themselves don’t fully apprehend the idea its like asking why God is benevolent or why is the morning star (Lucifer) evil.

    “Is an action morally good because God commands it?
    Or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    i would say that if God wills it then it must be morally good, there are some things that the mind (due to factors such as emotion, love etc )cannot comprehend it must be morally good in a superior being’s mind but un comprehendible to ours, for we humans cannot comprehend what we do not know or those that our minds cannot process (and i thought humans were perfect (sarcasm)). There are its to what we can process and we may die a thousand deaths before we truly understand a fragment of what truly is the plan of God).

    -END- kc

  14. The gods love it because it is moral.

    Man is different from other creations of god because he was created with intelligence and free will to use it. With thus faculty of thinking and reasoning, man has the power to decide for himself whatever pleases him. Even if the society, religion or his education have provided him with sets of rules and norms to follow, man still has the freedom to choose what to do or how to respond to the various stimuli in his environment.

    Man’s exercise of his free will, in relation to the rules of what is acceptable or not to the society, will define if his deed or act conforms to the morality dictated by the society.

    In the context that moral is good while immoral is the opposite and the universal premise that goodness pleases God, therefore God, loves moral deeds. Since God created man with a free will to do whatever man decides, therefore, the first argument that something is moral because the gods love it becomes untrue since God would have created man to act or think only by God’s rules. In such case, man becomes merely a robot and not a creation of a Supreme Being who loves His people more than anything, even his deeds, moral or not.

  15. The gods love it because it is moral.

    Man is different from other creations of god because he was created with intelligence and free will to use it. With this faculty of thinking and reasoning, man has the power to decide for himself whatever pleases him. Even if the society, religion or his education have provided him with sets of rules and norms to follow, man still has the freedom to choose what to do or how to respond to the various stimuli in his environment.

    Man’s exercise of his free will, in relation to the rules of what is acceptable or not to the society, will define if his deed or act conforms to the morality dictated by the society.

    In the context that moral is good while immoral is the opposite and the universal premise that goodness pleases God, therefore God, loves moral deeds. Since God created man with a free will to do whatever man decides, therefore, the first argument that something is moral because the gods love it becomes untrue since God would have created man to act or think only by God’s rules. In such case, man becomes merely a robot and not a creation of a Supreme Being who loves His people more than anything, even his deeds, moral or not.

  16. An action which is morally good pertains to an action towards upright living. As i see it God commands it because an action is morally good because i know that when God commands, it would never do us any harm. Everyone should obey what God says because he is our father and our creator. It is necessary that everything that he says is right.We obey him because we want to please him. I guess everybody wants to go to heaven right? It is said that when one does moral actions there is a big chance that we could go to heaven. With following God’s commands, it would be easier for us to be with the Lord for all eternity. And i guess God would love all of his creations to be with him in eternal life.

    therefore, God commands it because it is morally good…

  17. Morality not only centered to human relationship. It does apply to any thing, animals-treating them in a nice ways is moral in other ways is not at all correct.
    In a society like ours where most people live beyond the poverty line, morality is abused more often than not by the people who have the power like the one at government, top company officials and other people who has the authority or in control of their faith whether employing or their needs for their personal use.
    Morality often disregarded to people of less privilege. Very hard to think off, when people when you know that can help it’s just because its their work or being paid for their job can’t help but add suppression on oneself. Authority been used too much, that morality abused too much by authority. Authorities in their capacity seldom paid themselves in their low profile selves, they always s puts selves in the top level to others especially of the needy comes to their rescue. There, comes that the oppressed ones felt so depressed find themselves on the side of the society. The power always on the top of their minds (the greedy individuals in the comfort of their air-conditioned rooms) they are so confused that they don’t know which should comes first their pocket or the preservation and respect to others but just because of the comfort they were drunk and inferred to have it in hue of the moral values that we must have. I call, (the corrupt and powerful) crocodiles with wide open watery mouth readily crack in so small individuals.
    But I think that they are doing that kind of thing, was they choose to be in a nice living than in doing good but can ruin one’s life.
    We must have the moral obligation in preserving good values. We can have both the power and the authority.

  18. Every commandment God gives is morally good. But it’s up to the person whether he will obey. Usually, moral values of a person is based from how he was brought up. If it’s from the Word of God his actions would always be good. Every person has their own moralities and beliefs. One might say that a thing is good while the other might say that it is bad. For me, as a Born-Again Christian I have my own beliefs as well. I follow the teachings that is based on God’s word. Because I know that God gave us his commandments cause it is right and just. He wouldn’t give us His commandments if they would only give us harm.

    Thus, I say that God commands it because it is morally good.

  19. Morality for me, it has something to do with God, because what God tells us or command us is right, all the commandments of God is morally good. Everyone should obey the commands of God, because God is our creator. we, as man, are different from other creations of God, we have the intelligence and the will to do something, whether it is good or bad. It is up to us if we will obey God’s commandment or not, but for me, as a christian, I will do the right things and obey God’s command, because I know that God wouldn’t give us his commands if it would only give us an opposite result or something that is negative.

    therefore, God commands it because it is morally good.

  20. “Is an action morally good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    If one believes that God is all-good, all-mighty, the beginning and the end, then everything that God commands is good. The Bible which is the theological reference for Christian’s action serves as the guide in defining what is good and bad.
    Morality, however, is an interpretation of man and society of what is good and bad. It is largely a subjective perception, hence, it is said that what is morally right for one person may not be so for another person. Morality is influenced by one’s religion that may not include the idea of God or a higher being.

    Therefore, an action is morally good not because it is commanded by God, but because man thinks it is so.

  21. Morality can be define as things that you are doing right and obeying Gods commandments. We have our choice of doing what is called piety or impiety actions. But as a Christian, we are morally obliged to do things right because it is commanded by God. Some of them says that we are generally immortals because of our ancestral history and God forgave us with our sins. But from there on, a lot from us choose the right way to follow God’s will.

    So I should say Action is morally good because it is God’s command. It is through our faith that we do things in the best way possible.

  22. Foremost, the question poses two distinct issues:

    the former asks for the reason why an action (human act) is morally good; the latter asks for the reason why God commands.

    I agree with the second issue which is God commands it because it is morally good. When God commands, it is but for a sole purpose. All actions that come from God are of love. And because God is love, all his acts are acts of love. When God commands, He is not governed by any law. The laws that he authored are for man and all of creation. It is to establish order in creation, so that all of created beings may be directed towards his love and guided by it. Therefore, when God commands, his point of reference is his love.

    To state it as “God commands it because it is morally good” gives a connotation that he uses the moral law as a reference point. It gives an impression that he is not over and above the law, but is below it. God transcends the law, he is the author of the law, however by saying this, it doesn’t mean that he can disobey the law or is exempted from it. Rather, he executes the law to help man be directed to his will and be guided by it, such that, he who follows the law perfects himself and draws himself closer to God.

    Remember that the law was made for man and all of creation. God has no need of any law because he is the Supreme and Perfect Being. The law was handed on and was given to imperfect beings to help them reach perfection. God is also Supreme Goodness, and as such, all his acts are good. All acts which are the opposite of goodness or devoid of goodness (evil acts) are not of God. Therefore, He is not capable of doing evil acts because as Supreme and Perfect Being, he cannot contradict Himself.

    Therefore, properly stated, God commands it because He is love. Even the sacred scriptures attest to this: the two greatest commandments are of love.

  23. “God command it because it is morally good”

    An action is morally good because it does not violate the common good. Something is good if it is for the sake of mankind and if does not violate the human dignity. But sometimes a person’s right may be violated for the sake of a greater good.

    God command one thing because it is morally good. Which means it is for the good of mankind. And we all know that God don’t want anything from his from his people except to do good things in order for us to be with him in the paradise. Therefore God will command something because it is the right thing to preserve human dignity(the action is good therefore God command it.)

    on the other hand, God is also the source of all Goodness therefore the action is also good because God command it.

  24. (continuation)

    Morality pertains to the right things that GODS tell us to do. Of course, it is for the good that we follow those orders as their people. An upright conduct is not suppose to be bended by power. That is why we have gods to lead us to an upright living. And probably, that’s the reason why “moral” is said to be moral because it is commanded by GOD…,

    ^_^,

  25. I strongly believe that the Gods command it because it is moral.

    What do moral and god mean? Moral is pertaining to something that conforming to standards of what is right or just in behavior. It is about the righteousness of an act. God pertains to a supreme being according to some particular conception. It affirms that the meaning of god is dependent on the concept of the people. It does not directly imply that gods are always good. When we say god, it is connected to authority that entails the responsibility to his/her subordinate to make them a better person or to live in an easeful and satisfactory life.

    I came to reach on a conclusion that the gods command it because it is moral by affirming that gods are due to particular conceptions of people and the meaning of moral is consistent on goodness. Having an authority to the people means claiming the responsibility of being their guide. It makes the gods to establish rules that are good for us. Therefore, the gods command is dependent on the moral issue and not because they are gods that it becomes to be moral.

    For the religious people, it is more agreeable for them that an action is moral because the gods command it, for they believe that the gods is unified or one with goodness. But this becomes limited on a perception where gods are not all good.

  26. I believe that all actions are moral because gods love it.

    Why?

    Because all human actions are moral in a case to case basis. Sometimes, unmoral actions are good for the people and sometimes are not good for the human beings. Specially, when we want some changes to happen for those people, so that they can repent on the actions that they do.

    Therefore, sometimes we commit moral actions and the gods do appreciate it, due to the fact that human beings are not perfect as the gods are. And humanely speaking we ought to do moral actions to prevent people criticizing our own intentions or actions to other people but, the mere fact that we want some changes to happen to those people, we unconsciously do unmoral behavior to restore the moral attitude deep within every human being. ^^

  27. I think God command it because it is morally good.. 🙂

    Morality means a code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong. God has a plan for each of us and I think that his plan is not been made to do any harm to us.
    Gods didn’t and will never command such bad things but what he’ll do is to make us suffer for us to learn from our mistakes.
    The reason that i didn’t choose “an action morally good because God commands it” is because in our world there are thousands of commandments but God just gives us 10. So does it mean that 10 out of thousands of commandments are good?
    I also think that it depend how people react to each of goods command because what is good for other people is not that good for others and vice versa.
    But I will stick to my answer that God command it because it is morally good. I also believe that God is Good all the time 😀

  28. Morality is defined as moral commanded by God…not as being moral.
    The reason?
    People do things because they have a principle.They apply their action based on things in which they believe it is good at the sight of God. God is a fictional or realistic being. We believe that doing what he wants us to do will morally defines morality.But isn’t it doing God`s will the best way of saying morality saves us?He believes that doing what he wants us to do benefits us and also benefits himself.Morality is not defined as being moral because moral has many meanings in the eyes of people.We can’t change the fact that people have different states in life and have different principles on which they believe.And so sums up the whole explanation as morality is good because it is commanded by God not as being moral.

  29. “God command it because it is morally good”

    An action is morally good because it is equivalent to what most people regard as the right thing.

    God is the essence of good. What God does must mean that it benefits everyone. Even though other people wont accept that it is good, still it benefits them in some way.

    Looking at it still, everything that God does is good, so an action morally good because God commands it.

  30. It holds that “morally good” means “commanded by God” and that “morally … it could be summarized: “Are certain actions good because God commands them, …
    Christians sometimes feel they have a natural right to the moral high ground. One of the most common arguments heard by an atheist is that if you don’t believe in God, you are a less moral person, and that you cannot have morality without a God.

    The argument is called the Divine Command Theory of Ethics, and asserts that morality cannot be evaluated apart from God, and that “good” is by definition what God says is good, and “evil” is by definition whatever God says is evil. Many Christians will agree with this at first, but I will demonstrate that most Christians, and the Bible itself, have implicitly rejected this argument already.

    Let’s look at the Divine Command theory of ethics. It holds that “morally good” means “commanded by God” and that “morally wrong” means “forbidden by GodIf this theory is true, it follows that God’s moral choices are arbitrary. By that I mean that there is no outside definition or judgment of good or evil that can be used to evaluate God’s decision. So, if God had decided that murder, rape and torture was morally good, then it was good. Theists cannot possibly deny the possibility that God could have so ordained, because then they would have to admit that their moral judgments are really independent of God’s. At this point, practically everyone understands that the Divine Command theory of ethics is absurd.

  31. MORALITYn.[muh-ral-i-tee] means a code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong, morals are created by and define society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience.

    I think the definition of morality according to my sources is right, it is a code of conduct held to be authorative in matters of right and wrong. Morality for me is something doing good that depends first in our God and follows the person itself that he will do the right thing.

    “Is an action morally good because God commands it,
    or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    This Question is a little bit complicated for me but i will try to answer.
    I think God command it because it is moral. For example: The Ten commandments of God,if we follow these commandments, we will avoid sin to God and to others, it is also similar that if we follow the rules, we will avoid violations. God is our creator. He is perfect that he knows all. We are creatures made by God that we possesses Freedom. Then we can do anything we want but it has limitations. Like, if we do something that has a cause for the sake of good, then it is morally good because God knows that we are doing the right thing. If we are doing something that will not bring anything good, it is not moral. That’s all i can say..

  32. “God loves it because it is morally good”

    Morality is the quality of human acts by which they are constituted as good, bad, or indifferent. That which is good is describe as moral, bad is immoral, and that which is indifferent is amoral. Human acts are those actions performed by man knowingly and freely.

    Without morality man as rational being is a failure, because God has seen it fit to gift man with the natural insight of it. What a person is and what becomes of him depend largely on the type of actions he performs during his life time. Man does not act aimlessly. When he acts it is because he enjoys the action or he wants to achieve something by the action. It is good when it is good in inself, in its motive or purpose.

    Therefore God, the infinite good, the greatest good is to be attained as the ultimate end. God wants everything good for us. God cannot take us for granted, God loves us so much that He can take away us from any evil and temptation that can lead us to immorality.

  33. What is morality? It is a principle. It is what is perceived from what is believed to be good as opposed to what is evil.

    In relation to Euthyphro’s Dilemma, to be pious is moral. Piety is salvation, it pleases God in word and in deed, just as Euthyphro himself said:”Piety is doing as I am doing; that is to say, prosecuting any one who is guilty of murder, sacrilege, or of any similar crime-whether he be your father or mother, or whoever he may be-that makes no difference… all the gods would be agreed as to the propriety of punishing a murderer: there would be no difference of opinion about that.”

    According to Euthyphro, “Piety, then, is that which is dear to the gods, and impiety is that which is not dear to them.” Thusly, what is good and just is moral and that is commanded by God for he is omni benevolent, meaning to say, however God is merciful, turpitude shall not be tolerated.

    “Is an action morally good because God commands it,
    or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    Our actions can be defined as morally good because God commands it to be as such. He has the power
    to decide; He holds the final judgment. One may argue that morality is arbitrary. If divine command theory is true, morality is based merely upon God’s whim. This may not necessarily be true because as previously stated, God is perfectly good, perfectly just, all-loving, fully merciful, or any number of other qualities, depending on precisely how “good” is understood.

    In short, God has authority over what can be categorized as morally good, therefore He shall command nothing but.

  34. “Is an action morally good because God commands it,
    or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    This may be a confusion when we say Morality and God. If we will going to define what morality is, it speaks about an ideal code of conduct, where in each would be espoused in preference to alternatives by all rational people, under specified conditions. Morality may also reflect as ethics, the systematic philosophical study of the moral domain. Thus, Morality is being run and being ordered by a high person, that for us, is our God. Our God which we all know and familiar to is the most often conceived of as the creator and overseer of the universe. Theologians have conceived different attributes about Him, and the most common of these are omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, omnibenevolence (perfect goodness), divine simplicity, jealousy, and eternal and necessary existence.

    If I were Euthyphro, I will agree that “God commands it because it is morally good”. As I’ve said, God is our creator, our overseer, a supervisor. Therefore, God is in charge whatever task we will render. He has the responsibility of guiding us to our path. And because he is an omniscient God, he has the capacity to know everything. That definitely implies what he was doing for us, tending us to do, ordering us to pursue is a good moral that will not violate any ethics, rules, regulations and commandments. An order from God will not ever be superseded by evil morality. Because he is an omnibenevolent, a perfect goodness.

    Today, Government and Church had undergone many discussions about laws. One of this is the lethal injection as a punishment to a heavy crime. It is in God’s order that we shall not kill others. And Government people are just the same as us. If they will going to pursue the law that they want to have, they will definitely overpower God and will contradict the perspective of the Religious People. Recently, Lethal Injections or any punishment that will end an individual’s life, are not being encouraged by the Church. What they do is to put those people into jail for the rest of their life. This is a perfect existence of God’s all knowing capacity. Thus, God commands it because it is morally Good.

  35. “Is an action morally good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    I strongly agree with the proposition of “The action is morally good because God commands it.”

    Morality comes from the Roman Word “MORES”. It means that morality is traditional manners, customs, habits or character of a community or group which pertains to group’s standard or norms or system of values which determines what is good, right or proper way.

    Everything that is being done to us by God is morally good. That’s why we must have faith in Him in order for us to follow His commandments. As a Catholic, we are expected to be responsible for our actions. God gave us the intellect and free will, in short, the freedom to live. That’s why we must know how to be responsible for our actions. If God depends if the action is morally good, then He is not the supreme or the absloute being, that’s why for me, the action is morally good because God’s commands it because I strongly believe that God is the absolute being. We must always remember that in our lives, we always have a choice and we must know how to arrive at a certain choice.

  36. “God commands it because it is morally good”

    Morality, first and foremost, came from the Latin word moralitas which means manner, character, proper behavior. Morality has different meanings but in my opinion, morality as the code of conduct in the matters of right and wrong which is prefered by all rational people under specified conditions.

    Euthyphro said that something is morally good because the gods love it and something is not good because it is not loved by the gods. For me, it he is wrong since what if something is loved by the gods but is actually wrong? Then there would be a conflict there so, I will have a stand on the gods commanding it it because it is morally good since doing something right and not violating anything or anyone will be definetly be approved by God .

    “An action morally good because God commands it,” this is what Euthyphro has a stand on which I oppose. Doing something only because the God commands it is not necessarily right. If He commands one to kill another person, wouldn’t that be wrong and not be morally good? Even if we say that God will never command such thing to be done but it is just an example just to show that not everything that God commands you to do is actually morally good. It has to be morally good in itself to be commanded by God.

  37. Morality describes the principles that govern our behavior. Without these principles in place, societies cannot survive for long. In today’s world, morality is frequently thought of as belonging to a particular religious point of view, but by definition, we see that this is not the case. Everyone adheres to a moral doctrine of some kind

  38. “What is morality?”

    Morality is a set of rules given by a higher authority; if you conform to them, you will be rewarded; if you don’t conform to them, you will be punished. Morality also the way that unhappy old folks enjoy making young folks unhappy too.

  39. there are three principles meanings of morality.

    first, morality means a code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong, morals are created by and define society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience.

    second, normative and universal sense, morality refers to an ideal code of conduct, one which would be espoused in preference to alternatives by all rational people, under specified conditions.

    and the last, morality is synonymous to ethics.

    In short, the rules given by the authorities are based on morality, or in the commandments of God. I believe in the statement ” an action is morally good because the God’s commands it”, because the Gods know whats right and whats not. The commandments were set by God for us people to follow it, so that we can be in the right place. The Gods does not order people to do bad things because they know that it is a sin to do bad things. God also gave us freedom to do the things that we want, but it is up to us if we will do the good things, the commandments are just guides and rules for us to follow so we can be morally good.

  40. Morality means a code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong, morals are created by and define society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience; while authority means power to act on behalf of somebody else, or official permission to do something.

    “Is an action morally good because God commands it?
    or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    I am most certainly expressing an affirmation with the latter statement since God’s eyes are open and aware of what is good and evil; thus, earning the name omni potent. Naturally, a supreme being like Him will never command anything that is pure evil. We were born from his own image and likeness. He gave us our own minds and hearts in order for us to sense what is good and evil, and right and wrong. Since we are situated in this world, we may see the same object but we do not see or think the same picture. Likewise, God commands something that is ethical because He believes that a certain action is virtuous. On the other hand, we are given a privilege to decide on what we think is moral.

    Basically put, God gave us the authority to choose what we believe is morally good since we all have our own definition of terms and viewpoints of the things in the world.

  41. For me,”God commands it because it is morally good.”

    Morality first came from the latin word “moralitas” meaning manner,character and proper behavior.Morality means a code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong,morals are created by and define society,philosophy,religion and individual conscience.

    God gives us freedom,a freedom to make our own decisions.so the decisions we make don’t necessarily always have to be morally good,but that is what he wishes for them to be.God is the source of morality,so whatever he does,see,feel or tell should be ideally good for us,because if not,we might be wrong of what we actually think of a god is.

    God will command it because he will not let us do things that would harm us.everything has a purpose,everything he commands is for our better good.

  42. “Is an action morally good because God commands it,
    or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    Bertrand Russell once quoted, “We have, in fact, two kinds of morality side by side: one which we preach but do not practice, and another which we practice but seldom preach.”

    The reason behind initiating my answer emphasizing this quote is because morality is not just aligned on God’s will. One may preach God’s commandments and words but hardly ever follow and apply into life’s everyday living. It may happen the other way around. I strongly concur on the idea that God commands it because it is morally good. One clear example is the Bible, which contain His words and holy gospels. This book tells us things He has done and scenarios in which the people living on His time witnessed. Of course, He did good moral things in which we learn principles in life from. And I believe, He wants his children to follow what He has done. An action may be good because of God’s commandment, but what if God tells his people to hurt each other? That is precisely immoral.

    Then there will be an action morally ‘bad’ because God says so.

  43. An action is morally good because God commands it, and God commands it because it is morally good.

    “Morality” is the code of conduct, the code of ethics, the capacity of the conscience or/and the godliness in people.

    God created us in His own image and likeness, he gave us the ability to think. He gave us the rights and the ability to think and decide what is right and wrong, good and evil.
    God commands only those things and actions that are morally good bacause it is morally good.

  44. Morality is a social-construct.I say this because has anybody talked to God Himself to say that He defined the limits of what is pious or what is not? Who then defined these limits? Isn’t it the church or the government? Society made the standards, society decides which is wrong and which is right.

    You cannot define morality by giving example because you are not stating the standards of what it really is.Moral laws are subjective,they are not fixed and universal. What may be wrong for us may be right for others.

  45. Morality is connected to Ethics, and Ethics is about the Divine Revelation, the Culture and the Scriptures of God which are written in the bible. Therefore, Morality is based on God’s laws stated in the bible. Man’s laws cannot be established without the foundation of God’s word.

    “Is an action morally good because God commands it,
    or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    For me, God is not actually commanding us, meaning, He is not forcing us to do things, instead, He is giving us choices whether to follow it or not.
    We base our actions from the laws and rules that God has made. When our actions are according to His rules, we are being morally good, otherwise, we are not.

    Therefore, an action is morally good because God commands it.

  46. Morality is a social-construct.I say this because has anybody talked to God Himself to say that He defined the limits of what is pious or what is not? Who then defined these limits? Isn’t it the church or the government? Society made the standards, society decides which is wrong and which is right.

    You cannot define morality by giving example because you are not stating the standards of what it really is.Moral laws are subjective,they are not fixed and universal. What may be wrong for us may be right for others.

    i prefer not to choose between the two because putting God in my argument won’t justify my point.

  47. “Is an action morally good because God commands it,
    or does God command it because it is morally good?”

    If I were Euthyphro, i would strongly concur that the God command it because it is morally good and not the other way around. The term “Morality” comes from the Latin word moralitas, which means manner, character, and proper behavior. Descriptively, it refers to a code of conduct put forward by a society or some other group, such as a religion. It is then based on what the truth about morality is.

    Unlike other creatures, God give humans an ability of being free. Free to do things that they’ve wanted to, free to express themselves but with limitations. He then give a choice or an authority whether we would choose the right path or prefer the opposition of it.

    Morality has it’s own meaning. It has it’s distinctive connotation. If it happens that we are going to base morality on what the God loves, then everything will be ruined. What if God commands us to kill? Then can we conclude that killing is now moral? Is it right to say that it’s just moral because the God likes it? If it is so, then the term “morality” will now become now trash and meaningless.

  48. What is “Morality”? For me, Morality means a code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong, morals are created by and define society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience. Morality is the limitation of one’s individual. It is the manner which limits us against the abused freedom and teaches us to have proper behavior. Thus, morality can be defined as righteousness, and Morality is something that God’s love.

  49. For me “God commands it because it is morally good.”

    if you would define morality it won’t tell you anything about the Christian God. the usual definition would be; a code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong, morals are created by and define society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience. From this, we could already conclude that God commands us to stick to morality simply because it is moral, because it is the right thing to do. God tells us in the Lord’s prayer to follow thy will. yes, it is his will but it is not because he owns it or it originated from him but simply because he would love to see us doing it. God just want us to be free from harm and to follow “thy” will which is the will that would that he would love us to do will lead us to a better way, to the place where we can be with him.

    Another definition of Morality tells us that it refers to an ideal code of conduct, one which would be espoused in preference to alternatives by all rational people, under specified conditions. This tells us that NOT ALL kinds of Morality contemplates to the morality which God tells us. it depends upon the believers or the followers what can be moral to them cannot be moral to us because we have our own distinct variety and it is Christian morality.

    -sir nilipat ko lng. dun pla napapost sa 1-IS-1- hahahah! ty :)-

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: