Using

A detailed Summary of Using

How can Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" be used to help understand "Euthyphro?"

I chose this form of the question assuming the shorter story would help unlock the lengthier one. Normally an allegory is filled with symbols that have meaning on a higher level, so despite its shortness may be more complex. However, after Socrates tells his story about the prisoner in the cave, he is helpful enough to explain how we should interpret the objects, and events, to understand Plato's view of the structure of reality, the relationship between the philosopher and society, the stages of enlightenment, and the questioning nature and doubts that are features of the philosophical temperament.

For Plato, two realms of reality exist. The lower level, he symbolizes by the world of the cave. But there is a higher realm symbolized by the world outside the cave. Say you are the prisoner and witnessed the fire, then extinguished it. It has changed. But the burning fire was a symbol for fire itself; the idea of fire in your mind was not erased. There are two "fires". One which you see, touch, taste, feel, and smell, is part of the lower, changing realm. The other is unchanging, the idea of fire that is different from the physical symbol of fire you j

ust put out. Plato called these ideas "forms". If you and all sentient beings died, the idea, or form, of fire, would still exist in the higher, nonphysical realm of reality. Everything you know with your senses are copies of forms. Plato's symbols for these imperfect copies were the shadows of the objects behind the prisoners. To be enlightened is to escape from the lower world of the cave (the world of the senses), and ascend into a higher, unchanging realm of the perfect forms. The highest form was the Form of the Good. Symbolized by the sun, the Good was the last thing seen by the prisoner, and the most difficult to see. Furthermore, just as the sun was experienced as the source of warmth and light, the Good is to be seen as the source of reality and truth.

Second, we should be able to substitute the word "piety" with its definition. So we end up with something like (C), which poses an impossibility. If the gods really think that a act is pious and therefore recognized as pious, then it has to be pious independent of them regarding it and cannot therefore be pious because it looks pious to the gods. On the other hand, if we take the other option and say that an act becomes pious by being loved by the gods, then that act cannot be pious because it is pious; it only gets to be pious as a result of their loving it. We end up describing an effect: piety is having something happen to it. In any case, accepting either the gods' perception (or their attitude) merely reveals that perception or attitude; it doesn't provide a definition. Thirdly, the existence of "general" idea that makes all pious things pious must precede the attitude of the gods (or the perception of humans). Neither can be the source of the general idea that has to precede them. The second option, therefore, cannot work even if Euthyphro were to select it as an avenue of definition. So "loved by all the gods" is not a definition at all.

Euthyphro offers his second definition when he proclaims, "Piety is that which is dear to the gods." Euthyphro soon admits that there is a likelihood of disagreeme

Some common words found in the essay are:
Euthyphro Euthyphro, Allegory Cave, Suppose Piety, Euthyphro Socrates, Euthyphro Plato, Form Symbolized, Allegory Socrates, loved gods, act pious, pious pious, piety loved, dear gods, piety justice, gods euthyphro, definition piety, piety loved gods, dear gods euthyphro, justice euthyphro, idea makes pious, cave prisoner, gods act pious, piety dear gods,

Approximate Word count = 1403
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)

Category: Miscellaneous