In: Psychology
The dialogue ends inconclusively: Euthyphro has not been able to arrive at a satisfactory definition of the pious. Does this mean the whole discussion between Socrates and Euthyphro was a complete waste of time? Why or why not?
It was the claim by Euthyphro that he is an expert in the matters of religions. Socrates asked him to suggest Socrates the religious issues in order to help in his case. He then asked him to define holy and unholy. Euthyphro said that person who commits injustice is unholy and not publishing them is unholy. Then he gave an example that Zeus is most just and ideal for people. Even he prosecuted his father on doing injustice. Hence, it is right to punish the person who commits injustice.
Socrates, she was not satisfied with the answer because he wants the definition of holy not an example because an example cannot be the definition of anything.
It is correct that dialogue is the disappointment for those who are looking for the definition of diety.
The overall discussion between Socrates and Euthyphro is important because the main purpose of philosophy is not to give the answer to the asked questions but question the given answer in order to find the real truth behind it.