/lit/ - Literature

>>21861566
I think he was just fucking with euthyphro to show him it is not as easy desition as he thinks. Euthyphro think that justice is what pleases gods, and it's not so simple because we can't be sure what that is

>>21861579
>it's not so simple because we can't be sure what that is

Well in Gorgias he seem know what it is to act with justice since he say that if you are un unjust your soul will be rotten

>>21861566
he learned how to after Euthyphro

>>21861644
But Euthyphro is after Gorgias

>>21861634
I meant we can't know what pleases gods

>>21861681
I know but being just mean that you please the gods since they will judge your soul positively

>>21861755
That’s what Socrates is saying in Gorgias

>>21861644
Is this real?!? What is it?

Doesn't he give an answer to what is ultimately just in phaedo and philebus? In philebus he outlines what the good life is, and in phaedo he further outlines how this type of life is awarded after death.

Also, in regards to euthyphro, don't forget alcibiades' speech in symposium that calls socrates out for his irony, and way of playing with the people he is in dialogue with.

>>21861852
So basically he was just pretending to be retarded. Didn’t read Philebus yet

>>21861926
It basically answers your question, though the reasoning might not be as satisfactory as you want.
There is an enjoyable part in it where he distinguishes the different forms of cringe and proves they are species of bittersweetness (specifically when you are taking pleasure at the ridiculousness of a friend).

>>21861566
>How can you act with justice if you don't know what it is?
That's actually part of the thrust of the argument in the Gorgias, which is tied up with rhetoric. At the start of the dialogue, Socrates asks what Gorgias says rhetoric is, and Polus jumps in and praises it, which Socrates rightly criticizes as both not the answer to his question and as something that would have to come subsequent to knowing what something is. With this in mind, Socrates argues with the three speakers by using their own standard of speaking about the thing without having said what it is first, i.e., he argues for justice rhetorically. This is tied to the problem the interlocutors keep running into: they see that Socrates' arguments follow, but they aren't persuaded. What does become clear from this procedure, however, are the opinions about justice that the interlocutors have.

>>21861566
Euthyphro is from Plato's early period called the "aporia dialogues." These dialogues ask questions that are left unresolved. Gorgias is from the middle period where Plato was shilling his idea of the world of Forms. These dialogues are much more dogmatic.

>>21861664
Not in terms of when they were probably written, but chronologically yes

>>21861770
un salvadoreño

>>21861852
I think his definitive definition of justice is given in Republic, namely each according to it’s part (so as to produce a harmonious whole), which also underpins the ethical framework of the three virtues (temperance, wisdom and courage), which itself stems from the tripartite notion of the soul and the greek notion of arete.

>>21861566
>otherwise you will be judged and fucked in hell
Socrates never said this.

>>21863067
Yes he didn't say that with those words but basically he said that

Read the end of gorgias or phaedo