Euthypro Dilemna

For all of you who know what this is: Congratulations! Have fun!For all of you who don't already know, here is the dilemna: First proposed by Plato, the dilemna has pretty much made many theological philosophers bat**** insane, if you'll excuse my French. Here's the dilemna in English:Many if not all religions (especially the Abrahamic Faiths) claim that their God s source of all goodness and morality. However, how do you define "good"? This is where you get into the good part.If "good" is doing what feels right, then you don't need God to explain it.
If "good" is what God says, then we get into the messy area.If God's "good" command are given because they are moral, then you're back to the first part: You don't need God (an intermediary) because you can explain human morality just as well using biology/genetics/whatever.
If, however, morality is "good" because God says so, then you really have no standard for determining goodness! It's really nothing more than saying "God is good because he is good" (circular). By this logic, whatever God commanded would be good and moral and thus he could easily command atrocities. If God commanded you to burn down your neighborhood and kill all your neighbors, would you do it?At this point, most theists would probably respond with the idea that "goodness is an essential part of God's nature." However, this is only moving the goalposts. For one thing, it is still circular (God is good because God is good) and, also, if God's nature was such (hypothetically) that genocide and torture were morally commendable, would you think that moral too? In addition, just because God is a certain way, how do you deem that "good"?T&U

---

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts

​

I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes

​

"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams

Thread copied here from the Euthypro Dilemna thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

Maybe this could be in the Faith and Belief section, actually?I don't know, that just seems to be a better fit.But that's just me T&U

Just a few info, corrections, and nitpicks.Plato was recording from the dialogue between his teacher Socrates and a man name Euthyphro. While Socrates was standing outside the courthouse waiting to be tried for corrupting youths with his skeptical mind, he met Euthyphro who was there to accuse his father of murder. What happened was 2 of his father's slaves fought each other and one killed the other. His father ordered the surviving slave to be tied up and sent someone to the city to ask for advice. Back then, it took days to go the city and back. When the servant finally came back, the slave had died of exposure.Socrates asked the man why he was there to accuse his father of killing a slave. He said that it was the right thing to do. Socrates thought for a minute and asked his question. I would also like to point out another problem with the theists' usual response. By saying god's nature is good, the theists has taken away god's free will. To them, god could never approve of atrocities. This means that god has no free will since it is incapable of committing evil.Get ready for some very long and jargonic posts coming from buzsaw, iano, and other theists here. Watch this, haha.

Thread copied to the Euthypro Dilemna thread in the Faith and Belief forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.