Morality and Religion We often learn morality from

Morality and Religion

• We often learn morality from religion, but that is an explanation, not a justification

• We often learn morality from religion, but that is an explanation, not a justification • Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro concerns this relationship

• We often learn morality from religion, but that is an explanation, not a justification • Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro concerns this relationship • Socrates isn’t sure what Euthyphro is doing is pious

• We often learn morality from religion, but that is an explanation, not a justification • Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro concerns this relationship • Socrates isn’t sure what Euthyphro is doing is pious • Euthyphro says this means you don’t know what piety is

• We often learn morality from religion, but that is an explanation, not a justification • Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro concerns this relationship • Socrates isn’t sure what Euthyphro is doing is pious • Euthyphro says this means you don’t know what piety is • Socrates: so, what is piety?

1 st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods

1 st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods • Refutation uses “reductio ad absurdum” strategy:

1 st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods • Refutation uses “reductio ad absurdum” strategy: • Take hypothesis H • Show that the logical consequence of H is something contradictory • Therefore H must be false

1 st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods • Refutation uses “reductio ad absurdum” strategy: • The gods disagree about many things

1 st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods • Refutation uses “reductio ad absurdum” strategy: • The gods disagree about many things • So, that means the same things are loved by the gods and hated by the gods

1 st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods • Refutation uses “reductio ad absurdum” strategy: • The gods disagree about many things • So, that means the same things are loved by the gods and hated by the gods • So, the same thing would be pious and impious

1 st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods • Refutation uses “reductio ad absurdum” strategy: • The gods disagree about many things • So, that means the same things are loved by the gods and hated by the gods • So, the same thing would be pious and impious • That’s impossible so H is false

2 nd Attempt • Ok, what all the gods love is what is pious

2 nd Attempt • Ok, what all the gods love is what is pious • Depends on what the meaning of “is” is

2 nd Attempt • Ok, what all the gods love is what is pious • Depends on what the meaning of “is” is

2 nd Attempt • Ok, what all the gods love is what is pious • Depends on what the meaning of “is” is • We use “A is B” for predication as well as definition

2 nd Attempt • Ok, what all the gods love is what is pious • Depends on what the meaning of “is” is • We use “A is B” for predication as well as definition • “The pious is loved by the gods” is true, but isn’t a definition – because it doesn’t account for why the gods would love something

• So, which? 1. It’s good because the gods love it or 2. The gods love it because it’s good

• So, which? 1. It’s good because the gods love it or 2. The gods love it because it’s good Plato: 1 is incoherent

• So, which? 1. It’s good because the gods love it or 2. The gods love it because it’s good Plato: 1 is incoherent 2 means that the moral value is a function of intrinsic properties

3 rd Attempt • Piety is service to the gods

3 rd Attempt • Piety is service to the gods • But the only sense of “service” Euthyphro can come up with is doing what is pleasing to the gods, so he gives up.

3 rd Attempt • Piety is service to the gods • But the only sense of “service” Euthyphro can come up with is doing what is pleasing to the gods, so he gives up. • But he did think that being pious had to be somehow related to justice – so, combined with the result of the 2 nd argument, we can conclude that there is an independent right and wrong, just and unjust, to be discovered by reason.