The Plato Paradigm

What scholars tend to treat as a flawed philosophical argument is actually much worse than that. The dynamics of the dialogue require Socrates to appear impressed by Hippias, while Hippias must appear good (by being expert) to Socrates. Socrates is beneficial in that he continually applies dialectic and attempts to make Hippias think dialectically; Hippias is harmful, especially here, where he att...

Hippias acts as if he is the expert on reputation (eudoxia), on how to appear beneficial despite not being beneficial. Socrates is obliged to frame everything he says in a way which allows Hippias to believe that his audience of one is continually impressed by him. To create more dissonance within this stricture, Socrates invents what I call the Questioner, a rude man who criticizes Socrates; Socr...

This is a four-part summary of Hippias Major. I had analysed this dialogue already in the 1980s, and published the analysis in 1991. A thorough read-through of this particularly eristic dialogue would take around 80 episodes. There are other dialogues I would like to analyse now, so it seemed reasonable to produce a short summary updating the published analysis - Hippias Major: an Interpretation....

This final episode of the Euthyphro series discusses the central idea, its aspects, the paradeigmata, the deigmata, and a red herring 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

The characters are not only remarkably consistent, but they are also extreme and clear-cut. 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

The dialogue's surface argument is philosophically unsatisfactory, to say the least 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

In this last section of the dialogue, we see Euthyphro choosing to walk away rather than propose another definition of the holy (to hosion). Socrates still praises Euthyphro for his wisdom, but in such a way that anyone with thicker skin than Euthyphro would rethink his prosecution of his father. Socrates claims to want to know what the holy is not only to prevent his own case from coming to court...

The art of commerce seems not to benefit both sides, humans and gods, but humans only. Euthyphro, equating pleasant things with gratitude (keCHARISmena, with CHARIS), explains that the gods receive gratitude (i.e, thanks for goods received from them) in the form of presents. Euthyphro does not see why this is a problem, even when Socrates spells the problem out - the holy as the god-beloved has al...

By means of question and answer, Euthyphro's suggestion that holy are those things pleasing to the gods, performed through the sacrifices and prayers of humans, is transformed into the holy being the techne of commerce, whereby humans and gods obtain from each other things which they need. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting a...

We learn a little more about dialectic. The questioner allows the questioned to feel in charge of the conversation, but it is in fact the questioner who steers the conversation by means of the type of questions asked. One of the examples in this dialogue is the sustained attempt by Socrates to turn every concept Euthyphro raises into a version of techne. He has construed Euthyphro's therapeia as t...

When pressed to explain what the gods actually do in their therapeia, Euthyhphro avoids the question but actually reveals an important aspect of the holy. Humans, subservient to the gods, pray and do things pleasing to the gods, and these things are holy; things displeasing to the gods are disrespectful and unholy. It is up to the court of the archon basileus to turn away the anger of the gods in...

Euthyphro attempts to explain what he means by dividing justice into the therapeia of gods and the therapeia of men, but Socrates continues to treat therapeia ("tending") as if it is techne (craft). Last time the therapeiai made animals better, while this time the therapeiai lead to positive ends, such as health. Euthyphro's portrayal of the relationship between men and gods as between slaves and...

Euthyphro has defined justice as the therapeia (tending) of gods on the one hand and the therapeia of men on the other. Socrates treats therapeia as if it is techne (skill, craft, art), suggesting that there is an expert for every therapeia, and Euthyphro the expert on the gods naturally agrees. However, while the therapeia of animals leads to their improvement, the therapeia of the gods cannot po...

Euthyphro has made what might appear to be a division of the genus justice into two species - the tending of gods and the tending of men. He has in fact allowed the holy to become the species of justice exemplified by Socrates' court case, and being unable to leave his own court case for a single minute, he has his exemplify justice as the tending of men. When Socrates begins to use "tending" (the...

Euthyphro gives the answer to Socrates' question that the holy is that part of justice which is the therapeia of the gods, while the rest of justice is the therapeia of humans. 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

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...