Phil 301- Prof Schroeder_ Purdue University (Exam One)

First Definition of Piety

Piety is “what I am doing right now”: prosecuting my father for his wrongdoings (pursuing justice is pious)

Socrates- argues that this is an example of piety and not the actual definition

Second Definition of Piety

Piety is what is dear to the gods

Socrates- argues that the gods constantly disagree, so what is dear to them is subjective

The Euthyphro Dilemma 

Is something pious because the gods love it,
or do the gods love it because it is pious?

Does knowing the definition of something allow people to properly categorize it?

No because we perceive things differently, so even if we think we “know” something our knowledge of it could be incorrect, therefore, we cannot properly categorize it.

The New Definition of Piety

“What is loved by all of the gods is pious” But is something loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods? (Euthyphro Dilemma)

Socrates- disagrees with this definition and says that Euthyphro is telling us what gods do with pious things, not what the definition of pious is

Early Accusers and their charge

The early accusers are the general public and playwrights

They charged Socrates with Naturalism (impiety/atheism), sophistry (making bad arguments appear good), and corrupting the youth

Defense against early accusers

General Strategy- maintains rationality and uses philosophical understanding

Alt explanation of behavior- Socrates tells the jury that he is the wisest among men because he can recognize his own ignorance (something other people cannot do)

Alt explanation of reputation- He thinks people hate him because he exposes their ignorance, embarrasses them in public, and young men imitate him

Formal Accusers and formal charges

Meletus, Anytus, Lycon

They formally charged him with corrupting the youth.

Defense Against Formal Accusers and formal charges

General Strategy- Uses rationality and philosophical thinking

First Line of Attack- One person alone cannot corrupt the youth, and if he corrupts it is unintentional

Second Line of Attack- He believes in Daimonia, which is the belief that spirits are gods or children of gods, therefore he cannot be impious because he believes in spirits/divine agents

Third Line of Attack- He is fulfilling a divine mission, and he is not corrupting he is offering a moral awakening

Five Reasons Socrates isn’t Ashamed

1. What matters is acting justly, avoiding death does not matter

2. He is following a divine command he obeys God not man.

3. Fear of death is based on ignorance.

4. He is a gadfly benefitting the city of Athens.

5. Silencing him or stopping his actions would harm the city of Athens, not benefit them.

Two-Fold Purpose of Elenchus

The overall result of these steps is refutation (to test and expose false beliefs), and moral improvement (to stimulate the search for truth and virtue).

Phaedo v Apology on the soul

Apology treats the soul ethically- the soul must be cared for through virtuous living

Phaedo treats the soul metaphysically- the soul is eternal, non-corporeal, and capable of surviving death

Both dialogues affirm that what matters the most is the soul, and that true philosophy is concerned with the soul’s well-being, not the body

Cyclical Argument

The soul continues to exist after the death of the body (Reincarnation) because things come from their opposite (Life→ Death)

Cyclical Argument Objection

We cannot assume all opposites follow a cycle. “New” souls entering the world because birth rates outweigh the death rates.

The Recollection Argument

Our minds (and souls) existed before we were born because we have the ability to perceive perfection/ perfect equality

The broader understanding of this philosophy is to explain where we get knowledge

Objection to the Recollection Argument

I disagree with the statement that we cannot get something that is perfectly “F” in mind through perception. People aren’t born knowing what perfection is— they learn what it is.

The Affinity Argument

Socrates distinguishes between the physical world and the non-physical world in relation to “Forms” and since the soul is more similar to the invisible, eternal, and unchanging world than it is to the visible, changing, mortal body— it is more likely to be immortal.

Objection to the Affinity Argument

I disagree with the statement that the soul is relatively similar to the forms and therefore it is either composite or nearly so. Ice and glass example.

The Exclusion of Opposites Argument

The soul is the principle of life, and it would be contradictory for the source of life to admit death. The soul, by its very nature, is deathless and immortal.

Objection to The Exclusion of Opposites Argument

Even if the soul brings life and is associated with the form of life, that doesn’t prove it is exempt from destruction.

The Scattering Worry Theory

Proposed by Cebes and Simmias aimed especially at the Affinity Argument

Even if the soul existed before life, how do we know it continues to exist after death? Is it possible the soul scatters like smoke or breath?

Cebes’ Cloak Objection

This is a challenge to the claim that Socrates makes where he says souls are immortal. The cloak = the body and the man = the soul. The soul could outlive several bodies (like reincarnation) — but still die eventually.

The First Sailing

Socrates’ reliance on natural science and empirical causes (like science and physics) Socrates became disillusioned by this thinking and understood that simply seeing things with our eyes doesn’t explain the “why”.

The Second Sailing

A turn from materialism to idealism. Socrates abandons his oars and relies on the wind instead. He focuses on abstract reasoning and the theory of forms. He also focuses on the “why” behind something and invokes much deeper meanings into life.

Socrates’ Response to the Cloak Objection (Part One)

“Soul is essentially life” The soul is incompatible with death — it cannot "die" because it is the very principle of life (Fire and Cold example)

Socrates’ Response to the Cloak Objection (Part Two)

“Forms clarify essence” Since death is the opposite of life, and the soul is tied to life essentially, it must be deathless/immortal. (The form of Life is the opposite of death)

Socrates’ Response to the Cloak Objection (Part Three)

“Purification of the Soul” Immortality is not enough — it’s the quality of the soul that determines its fate after death. (Good souls are purified and rise up while impure souls are held down and reborn)

The Harmonia Objection

Proposed by Simmias in response to the Affinity Argument

He thinks that the soul is just a harmony or a proper arrangement of body parts. Simmias compares the soul to musical harmony (harmony cannot exist without the strings of a lyre) in his objection to the Affinity Argument. So, since the soul is potentially dependent on the body it could vanish when the body dies or is destroyed.

Socrates’ Response to the Harmonia Objection (Line One)

The soul rules the body, it is not ruled by the body

—The soul often opposes bodily desires and can also override physical impulses

Since harmony is passive, it cannot truly encompass the relationship between the soul and the body

Socrates’ Response to the Harmonia Objection (Line Two)

The soul exists before the body does (The Recollection Argument)

The soul can remember truths, and it exists before the body does

Since harmony cannot exist before the instrument, it also cannot fully encompass the relationship between the body and the soul

Socrates’ Response to the Harmonia Objection (Line Three)

Not all souls are equal— but all harmonies are

Souls can’t be equally tuned (some are more virtuous or more righteous than others), but harmonies can be equally tuned

The soul isn’t merely a byproduct of the body, but a harmony is a byproduct of the strings of a lyre