The Plato Paradigm

Some background this time. Species = {GENUS: specifying difference} (e.g., Man is ANIMAL: rational: mortal). A species entails other species, and all the species together fully complete all instances of the genus. The genus ANIMAL may be divided into the species God = ANIMAL: rational: immortal; Man = ANIMAL: rational: mortal; Beast = ANIMAL:irrational: mortal; Divine Beast (e.g. Cerberus) = ANIMA...

Having just suggested that the just (to dikaion) is part of the holy (to hosion), Socrates purportedly explains what he means by adducing the poet Stasinus who says something which Socrates claims is the opposite (regarding the relationship of the terms), that where there is apprehension there also is reverence/shame. This hardly explains anything, but It does recall the shameful behavior of Euthy...

Following the refutation of the holy as the godloved, and Euthyphro's reluctance to offer an alternative definition, Socrates suggests that the holy is the just (or that holiness is justice), in whole or in part. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Mentioning the legendary sculptor Daedalus eventually allows Socrates to confess that he too is an expert (sophos), albeit an unwilling one. His expertise is in changing not only his own opinions, but those of others as well. This expertise is not rhetoric but dialectic, the art of dialogos, conversation. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go....

Having established that the godloved is merely an affect of the holy, Socrates asks Euthyphro again for something which is common to all instances of holy but is not an affect. Euthyphro complains or observes that every attempt at an answer so far has moved around. Instead of pointing out the obvious, that the (very few) suggestions so far have been wrong, Socrates begins to develop the conceit th...

Socrates continues his examination of the holy as godloved with further observations on the difference between something causing an activity and something described by an activity Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Socrates presents Euthyphro with active and passive participles and verbs in order to impress upon him the nature of cause and effect. An activity is logically prior to a thing described by that activity. A thing described by an activity is not the reason for that activity. This will become relevant to the discussion on the holy defined as the god-loved. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, tra...

The Euthyphro Dilemma - will not be discussed in this series, since it has little to do with this dialogue or with Plato. Instead, we shall be examining the original question at 10a which is effectively the springboard for many and varied discussions about the connection between God and morality. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resu...

Euthyphro finally concludes that what is holy (to hosion) is what all (not some of) the gods love, and that what is unholy (to anosion) is what all (not some of) the gods hate. Euthyphro may seem to have switched from a definition of holy involving the removal of miasma to one involving a divine hatred of injustice, but he is simply describing two aspects of his own god-loved action (prosecuting h...

Socrates continues to run rings around Euthyphro with gods loving just acts, hating unjust acts, all the while disagreeing with each other, and yet Euthyphro remains blithely confident that all the gods love his prosecution of his father, and is happy to have the killing at the centre of his court case appear to be hated by all the gods. The subsequent definition of holiness (hosion) and unholines...

It becomes even more apparent that Euthyphro is concerned with to hosion rather than justice, but will use justice as a rhetorical device. Rhetoric is necessary in a court case. Socrates is not so easily influenced by rhetoric, and he dwells on the legal difficulties of Euthyphro's case. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting ana...

Euthyphro is motivated by to hosion (the holy) to prosecute his father (the prosecution will remove the pollution of murder). Socrates has contrived a portrayal of the gods whereby they are in conflict with each other primarily because they disagree who among them acts justly or unjustly in any given action. This nonsensical portrayal is based on opinions held by Euthyphro, which is why Euthyphro...

Socrates continues his questioning of Euthyphro's reply that the holy is what is loved by the gods. Euthyphro insists that all the gods love his prosecution of his father's unjust killing of one of their bondsmen. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Socrates continues to examine Euthyphro's suggestion that the holy (to hosion) is what is loved by the gods. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Socrates asks for a paradigm of the holy, effectively a definition of the holy (to hosion). Euthyphro suggests the god-loved, the dear-to-the-gods (to prosphiles). Socrates begins his examination of the definition by asking over what we have disagreements. We do not disagree over things which may be measured objectively. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Gre...

The stage is set for the ostensibly more philosophical part of the dialogue. Socrates has made Euthyphro his unofficial teacher; Euthyphro accepts that he was the one who brought up the notion of one thing common to many things (idea is a general aspect; eidos is a particular aspect). Everything is ready for a discussion of the common aspect of to hosion (the holy), next time. Here I read through...

Given that they are paradeigmata of aspects of the idea of the holy (to hosion), Euthyphro and Socrates are faithfully extreme in features pertaining to those aspects. Euthyphro believes everything about mythology. Belief in mythology may therefore be understood to be a feature of one of the aspects of the holy. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text a...

How does Euthyphro intend to use his mythological justification for prosecuting his father? Socrates apparently doesn't know what Euthyphro does, which he says is why he will agree with Euthyphro, his teacher, the one who knows, concerning the holy. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplato...

Socrates asks his "teacher" Euthyphro what the holy and the unholy (hosion, anosion) are, and Euthyphro explains that prosecuting his unjust father is holy. He points to the precedents of Zeus binding his unjust father Kronos, and Kronos castrating his unjust father Ouranos. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be...

Socrates takes the next steps towards becoming Euthyphro's student of holiness (to hosion, he hosiotes). In the process he sneakily introduces irreverence (to asebes, he asebeia) and the concept of aspect (idea, cf. eidos). Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Since Euthyphro claims to know about divine things - the holy and the unholy (hosion and anosion) - accurately, Socrates prepares the ground for a discussion of the holy by pretending to become a pupil of Euthyphro (although Euthyphro is not a sophist) as if in order to defend himself against Meletus, either in his trial, or in a counter-trial. Socrates and Euthyphro are both extreme characters, s...

Euthyphro describes the events leading up to the death of the person on whose behalf he is prosecuting his father. Euthyphro's family claim his prosecution of his father for murder to be anosion (unholy), but he claims to know exactly what hosion and anosion mean. He and his family appear to agree that what is anosion causes miasma (pollution). Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating a...

Euthyphro explains why a murderer should be prosecuted by a family member. Both the murderer and the family member have pollution (miasma) and need to remove it through a trial in a court of law. We also have our first indirect mention of the concept hosion. Since this will be under discussion throughout the dialogue, we may simply delimit it here as pertaining to the gods. It is often translated...

Socrates and Euthyphro turn to a discussion of Euthyphro's prosecution, and Euthyphro defends his decision to prosecute his father for murder. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Being and appearance: Euthyphro regards himself and Socrates as fellow predictors of the future; the Many regard Euthyphro as mad (lacking a sophia), but Socrates as possessing a sophia concerning new gods with which he corrupts the young; Socrates, for dialectical purposes, appears to attribute to Euthyphro sophist-like qualities, such as a sophia (the ability to predict the future) and exhibitin...