Socrates’ Euthyphro
Socrates remains to be one of the most respected postmodern Greek philosophers who valued for their contribution to classical moral philosophies and western school of thought. As a philosopher, he championed social and moralistic values and criticized the philosophies of the Athenians. In an encounter with Euthyphro, Socrates is inspired by his willingness to prosecute his father for a crime of murder. Socrates in o his way to his trial charges against the city of Athens, alleged corruption of the youth, and failure to recognize and respect their gods, which was punishable by death. In the discussion, Euthyphro uses the word piety do describe those who oppose his decision. Socrates is interested in his teachings and instruction; thus, flatteringly urges Euthyphro to teach him religious matters.
One of the prominent issues in the dialogue is the definition of holiness and piety. Euthyphro refers to the prosecution of religious offenders as part of the devotion of which Socrates is not amused. He asserts his decision to be a pious act to Zeus contrast to the impious anger and expectation by his relatives for prosecuting his father, who he believes is a wrongdoer.
During his trial, Socrates deviates from the conventional procedures in his suit and fails to make a case for himself directly but instead chooses to explain his philosophies.
Contrary to expectation, Socrates fails to make a formal apology before the jury ad neither does he try to escape his charges. He argues plainly without any fallacy and provocations despite earlier disenchantment with the court(36a). He also makes an explanation for his critic philosophers against the laws which he considered to be corrupted. His behavior in court is also influenced by ignorance. He attributes his philosophy and behavior to his wisdom, which he considered prophetic and unmatched in the whole of Greece.
Socrates intentionally fails to defend the guilty verdict and unconventionally suggests a penalty be administered. He unconventionally and illogically refuses imprisonment, exile, and fine as an alternative penalty for his crime. He goes ahead to declare the death penalty a deserved for not leading a quiet and normal life based on material possession similar to his fellow-subjects(37b-e). Despite being found guilty of his charges, he fails to make a proper choice for the penalty by jokingly suggesting for a great feast in his honor and service to the state. The failure to make an effective defense is deliberate and provocative.