Socrates asks the following question in response to Euthyphro's definition:.
"Do the gods love piety because it is pious, or is it pious because they love it?- (10a).
This question can be divided into two different questions:.
1. Do the gods love piety because it's pious?.
2. Is it pious because the gods love it?.
The Euthyphro dialogue is Euthyphro's knowledge claim of what piety is. Euthyphro gives examples of what piety is, but he's never able to furnish the true definition that Socrates requires: A universal definition of what piety is.
Socrates' question is whether the love of the gods is even relevant to the meaning of piety. This is a question about causality. On one hand are the gods loving piety- making piety pious. On the other hand is piety- making the gods love it because it is itself pious. Does the loving of the gods cause piety, or is the love for piety caused by the essence of piety.
In one case, piety is dependent on the gods love. It is whatever the gods love, for whatever reason. The gods love things randomly in this case with no reasons. In the other case piety is independent of the gods love, making the gods love depend on what piety is. Here, piety is on it's own value system, and separate from the divine system that the gods base their appreciation on. If the gods appreciate piety or something else, there must be a reason for it. .
In the argument that follows (10a-11b) Socrates explains the circle of the gods love for what is pious because it is pious; and that it is not pious because the gods love it. .
Socrates responds to the third definition when he explains the "ing/ed- distinction in 10a-d:.
A thing is carried because of the act of carrying.
But the act of carrying is not because of the thing carried.
A thing is not "being affected because it is something affected, but it is something affected because it is being affected-.
This holds for love: a thing is loved because of the act of loving.
