In Euthyphro opinion, pious is what is good and pleasing to the gods, and impious is what is not pleasing and good to the gods. However, Socrates has disagreed with this meaning of the nature of pious because he does not believe there is a set scale of what is defined as good or bad to the gods. Depending on the situation, someone may find a murder of a murderer wrong, and some find it just. No evidence is supporting this act as pious or impious to the gods; therefore, who is to say the punishment for doing this crime? Also, the measure between right and wrong of man can vary per situation. It is the right of a group of positive affirmation of the crimes punishment to decide if a murder of a murderer is just. At first glance, it seems that Socrates is speaking in circles; however, Socrates is saying the nature of pious has no …show more content…
In Deuteronomy 12:26, it says, “Only your holy things which you have….” This would have pushed Socrates to question the holiness of the items. Moses had a vision of his people to follow God, and the religious ethics to follow were all given to him by God through the Ten Commandments. If Socrates went by Euthyphro dilemma question: “pious is loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods,” then he could enter the Ten Commandments into the pious spot. ‘The Ten Commandments is loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods’ would be a guesstimate of what he would