The Euthyphro by Plato Part II with Dr. Joey Spencer and Friends

In this episode of the Ascend the Great Books podcast, Deacon Harrison Garlick and guests delve into the complexities of Plato's Euthyphro, exploring themes of piety, morality, and the divine - including the famous "Euthyphro Dilemma."

The podcast welcomes back Dr. Joey Spencer, who serves as a tutor of theology, an archivist, and an expert in angels and demons.

Check out thegreatbookspodcast.com for our reading schedule and more!

Check out our collection of written guides on the great books!

Check our Part I of the Plato's Euthyphro if you missed it!

From the guide:

What is the Euthyphro Dilemma?

The Euthyphro Dilemma, introduced at 9(d), is the dialogue’s most famous section, where Socrates asks: “Is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious? Or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods?” It is a question of causality. The first part or “horn” of the dilemma asks whether the pious is something objective loved by the gods, i.e., “is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious?” The second horn of the dilemma asks whether the pious whatever the gods will, i.e., “or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods?” The two horns are mutually exclusive and present contrary philosophical views: objective versus subjective; or realism versus voluntarism. The Euthyphro dilemma is not reducible to issue of piety but represents a rhetoric template Socrates will have recourse to time and time again to determine whether the definition of a thing is something objective that is discovered or something subjective that is made. For example, the Euthyphro dilemma is often rewritten concerning the good: “Is the good being loved by the gods because it is good? Or is it good because it is being loved by the gods?” It is often written in a monotheistic manner as well: “Is the good being loved by God because it is good? Or is it good because it is being loved by God?”. The Euthyphro dilemma used here ferrets out the nature of piety and the divine, but it represents a greater dilemma that is foundational to human thought: realism versus voluntarism. To wit, is truth discovered or is it made?

What observations may be made about the first horn of the dilemma?

The first horn posits that piety is an objective reality, an independent Idea or Form, and is loved by the gods because of its intrinsic nature. As Deacon explains, piety is good and just in se, and thus the gods love it. The first horn presents a metaphysical reality in which concepts, like piety, have a true, objective universal definition. It represents Plato’s Ideas. Moreover, as Deacon notes, the first horn makes a comment about the divine as well—as the gods do not create piety but rather adhere to it. Like in Antigone, the gods are adhering to law or standard of goodness. Piety’s essence is not contingent on divine approval but is a standard to which the gods conform, as Thomas suggests, pointing to “a universal that stands outside them.” This is significant because it challenges the traditional Homeric view where the divine wills define morality, instead positing that the gods recognize piety’s goodness, as seen in Euthyphro’s earlier intuition that Zeus is “the most just” god, implying a standard of justice above the gods, as Dr. Grabowski notes.

Dr. Spencer comments that the Homeric tradition shows that the gods do not agree or otherwise adhere to an objective standard of piety or justice. In other words, it is hard for a human in the Iliad to be pious toward all the gods, as the gods themselves interpret piety differently; however, if the gods were held to the same standard of piety, an objective, realist metaphysic, then even the gods could be judged—as Euthyphro did earlier saying “Zeus is the most just.”

Thus, the first horn establishes piety as an eternal, discoverable Idea, enabling an intelligible cosmos where human reason can discern truth, a foundational shift in Western philosophy that sets the stage for later Christian thought where the Ideas reside in the Divine Mind, the Logos. Euthyphro’s unhesitating choice of this horn, despite his inability to fully articulate it, reflects his intuition of an objective moral order, making him a fitting interlocutor for Socrates, as Dr. Grabowski suggests.

Go check out our written guide on the Euthyphro for more!

ALSO do not forget about our new sister publication, THE ASCENT, which focuses on Christian spirituality, theosis, and sanctification within the context of Western culture.

You can read the great books with Ascend!