Morality and Religion

1. Morality and Religion

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

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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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?

7. 1st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods

8. 1st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods • Refutation uses “reductio ad absurdum” strategy:

9. 1st 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

10. 1st Attempt • What’s pious is what’s loved by the gods • Refutation uses “reductio ad absurdum” strategy: • The gods disagree about many things

11. 1st 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

12. 1st 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

13. 1st 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

14. 2nd Attempt • Ok, what all the gods love is what is pious

15. 2nd Attempt • Ok, what all the gods love is what is pious • Depends on what the meaning of “is” is

16. 2nd Attempt • Ok, what all the gods love is what is pious • Depends on what the meaning of “is” is

17. 2nd 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

18. 2nd 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

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

20. 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

21. 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

22. 3rd Attempt • Piety is service to the gods

23. 3rd 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.

24. 3rd 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 2nd argument, we can conclude that there is an independent right and wrong, just and unjust, to be discovered by reason.