Socrates and Euthyphro's discussion on Piety

     I am currently reading a book on Greek philosophy and there had been a specific event which had truly struck me: where Socrates and Euthyphro debate and analyze the importance or ill-importance of piety. 

Euthyphro and Socrates gather as many of the civilians of Athens begin to ponder about Socrates' wisdom, as he is to not be viewed as an immoral, prophecy of Greece, but of an insane man shouting to the streets. Euthyphro begins to sympathize to him and try to re-stabilize Socrates' confidence and pride. Whilst this attempt had been made, Socrates began to elaborate on the issues of Euthyphro; where he is shunned among his family and people due to the prosecution of his own father, a very looked-down upon action towards the grace of a family. He wondered (Euthyphro): was this impious of me?

Piety, in so many cultures, is a significant part of tradition and history. Members of society, whether wealthy or poor, must abide by the commandments or regulations of a religion and/or belief instilled within a civilization. In this case, the Greeks were highly known for their belief in the many gods and goddesses of the Earth and Planet. While Greece had their beliefs to polytheism and others had monotheism (such as Christianity), the same concept of pleasing one's superior is a redundant part of history. In this event, Euthyphro believes he has been such a failure and villain to not only the people of the city, but of the Gods above. Socrates questions his belief: how can prosecuting a man of murder, whether relative nor acquaintance, be an impious action that the Gods shall so dishonor on his name? Socrates, as clever and intelligent as he was, constantly challenged Euthyphro, another scholar whose beliefs seemed illiterate at the time. Socrates argued, "how and why are actions impious or pious?" As the argument led on, Euthyphro seemed to look more redundant each time he spoke or shed light upon Socrates' questions. 

"But if the god-beloved and the pious were the same, my dear Euthyphro, and the pious were loved because it was pious, then the god-beloved would be loved because it was god-beloved, and if the god-beloved was god-beloved because it was loved by the gods, then the pious would also be pious because it was loved by the gods; but now you see that they are in opposite cases as being altogether different from each other: the one is of a nature to be loved because it is loved, the other is loved because it is of a nature to be loved."

Socrates was quite the man with words, eh? While this took me hours to fully understand, Socrates' strategy to simply flip words around create new definitions and meanings to phrases and sentences that had been one thing, and easily altered to the next. The pious in which Euthyphro believed in was of a system; a system of ethics that were created by a seedling that was planted generations before his. This is why Euthyphro could not decipher the difference between the piety of a god's interest and the piety of natural human ethics. Socrates wanted the young Euthyphro to understand his twist of words; how important it was to understand the meaning of whatever came through his mouth. This was not only the significant part of their argument, but of the nature in which "right" and "wrong" are completely abolished due to the leaders which have say in what is "right" or "wrong".

I feel as if I can correlate this argument to the works of society. Euthyphros, just as we as humans today are, was a victim of an issue much bigger than him and that had been planted centures before him: the alteration of right and wrong. Euthyphro suffered from understanding that what he did was truly right; to prosecute a murderer which, too, was his father. But because mythology and religion which he believed in thought otherwise, it was difficult for him to understand his own choices and thoroughly understand why they were either right or wrong. To basic human knowledge, what Euthyphro had done was completely sane and appropriate, but to the eyes of Gods, or whom ever created them and their beliefs, his actions were wrong due to the interruption between a man and his son's loyalty. 

If you think about, we as civilians are similar to Euthyphro. The Gods that had so judged Euthyphro in his head can be the leaders of our world right now: policeman, the government, politics, entertainment, etc. The court room is no more angelic than of the streets due to its power to manipulate regulations and laws to run throughout society. An event relating to Euthyphro's debate can be Edward Snowden. Immediately as news broke out to his actions, he had been so questioned to whether he was a criminal or a hero. Must we question the amount of evil or righteousness a man has due to the core of idealism that had been so corrupted: right or wrong? The government, a high and mighty stature of American society, had been exposed to its involvement in invading the priacy of billions via internet usages, but Edward Snowden is still the villain? Using ideology from Greek philosophy to this event, it seems as though the government instilled laws which THEY believed worked for society, so it was planted centuries ago to be able to perform illicit, repulsive actions in order to benefit themselves (the wealthy). It is not the fault of our current government (wholesomely) because their ancestors, men like Andrew Jackson or President Polk, created a country that had manipulated what was right or wrong to be able to please themselves, but does that make everything they want right, to be right? 

This is the exact argument Socrates had up against Euthyphro. Was it impious for a man to report the killing of another man? No, it certainly was not, but because Gods and Goddesses relied on the loyalty of man and son rather than the entire life of a human being, the perception which Euthyphros held varied between people who believed in Gods' piety or natural ethics. 

The world is surely filled with corruption: from our television screens, to our everyday policeman, to even the clothes we wear; it all involves some sort of manipulation or disillusionment to be able to continuously influence our generation. Its a system that cannot be stopped because it had been so carefully planted generations before us. It is a matter of time where the leaders of our world will e=be portrayed as Gods; of immoral beings sought to supposedly "create" a better world...for themselves.