A

on the

Note

LYNN

Euthyphro,

10-11

E. ROSE

defines the pious as that which all the gods love,

Euthyphro
refutes him with what is perhaps the most interesting
Socrates
and most intricate argument in the dialogue. He does this by
to make certain admissions which, in conjunction
getting Euthyphro
results. This note
with Euthyphro's
lead to inconsistent
definition,
calls attention
to a feature of the argument that none of the commenis involved here in three
taries make explicit:' namely, that Euthyphro
of which would have sufficed to
inconsistencies,
any one
separate
undermine his position. Euthyphro
has committed himself to two pairs
and to a third pair of statements
of contradictory
which,
statements,
his
while not contraries,
when
taken
inconsistent
with
are,
together,
definition.

hen

Euthyphro's

admissions

are the following:

(1) The pious is loved by the gods because it is pious. (lOdl-6, 10e2-3)
(2) It is not the case that the pious is pious because it is loved by the gods.
(lOd6-7, 10e3)
The
beloved
of
the
is
beloved
of
the
because
it
is
loved
by the gods.
gods
(3)
gods
(lOd9-10, 10e5-6)
(4) It is not the case that the beloved of the gods is loved by the gods because
it is beloved of the gods. (10 e 6-7 )
Socrates

then brings

out the difficulties

in Euthyphro's

position:

"But if [by definition] the beloved of the gods and the pious were the
same, my dear Euthyphro,
and if
(1) the pious were loved because it is pious,
then also
(5) the beloved of the gods would be loved because it is beloved of the gods,
and if
(3) the beloved of the gods were beloved of the gods because it is loved by
the gods,

149

then also
(6) the pious would be pious because it is loved by the gods.
But now you see that they are opposite, since they are altogether different from
one another. For the one [the pious], because it is loved, is in a state of being
loved [according to (6)], and the other [the beloved of the gods], because it is in
a state of being loved, is for this reason loved [according to (5)]."a
The bracketed explanations
together with the spacing and numbering
of the propositions
should make the intricacies of this tightly-worded
clearer. (5) follows from (1) by substitution
of "beloved of
argument
the gods" for "pious," and (6) follows from (3) by substitution
of
for
"beloved
of
the
But
and
gods."
(6) say opposite things
"pious"
(5)
about the pious and the beloved of the gods: the one is in a state of
being loved because it is loved, and the other is loved because it is in a
state of being loved. Thus the pious and the beloved of the gods are
to define the one as the
different and distinct, and it is inconsistent
What
other. This seems to be Socrates'
and the
Socrates,
point.
is
do
not
that
commentators,
mention, however,
Euthyphro's
position
is further undermined
He is cominconsistencies.
by two additional
mitted to (2) and (6), which are contradictories,
and also to (4) and
But Socrates has already established the
(5), which are contradictories.
of Euthyphro's
and he need not explicitly
inconsistency
position,
statements.3
The argument is
mention the two pairs of contradictory
so
that
not
have
followed these
presented
concisely
Euthyphro
might
and
extra subtleties,
but
they give Socrates'
anyway;
they are there,
a tightness
and an elegance that we ought not to fail to
argument
appreciate.
State University

150

o f New York at Buffalo.