Socrates and Euthypro, two men of same times, and knowledge come together and converse on a subject that makes each other question and defend each other's respected beliefs and convictions. It is a discussion that seems sometimes one sided, and ironic, repetitive and confusing. This is in result of the method that Socrates uses as he engages in conversation with people who seem to be experts on a subject as Euthypro claims to be, a theologian of the ways of religion. .
Socrates is brought to Euthypro is search of wisdom, and not only does he not get what he is looking for he disrupts Euthypro's thinking and actually teaches him instead of being taught by Euthypro. Socrates is the philosopher in this piece of work and uses his sense of irony to confuse Euthypro who is the philodoxer. The question that is trying to be answer in their discussion is what is the true definition of someone or something being pious or holy and what is impious or not holy? .
Euthypro concludes that "E: I would certainly say that the pious is what all the gods love, and the opposite, what all the gods hate is impious" (Euthyphro). He is saying that for something to be holy the gods must approve it, and for it not to be the gods must disagree with it. Euthypro, follows his explanation by telling Socrates that he is putting his father on trial for murder, Euthypro says "I say that the pious is to do what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer, be it about a murder or temple robbery or anything else, whether the wrongdoer be your father your mother or anyone else; to not prosecute is impious.
Socrates was not satisfied by the vague and unfulfilling answers that Euthypro and often would ask him questions such as " What then do we say about the pious, Euthyphro? Surely that is being loved by all the gods, according to what u say?" Also "This is the kind of thing I was asking before, whether where there is piety there is also justice, but where is justice there is not always piety, for the pious is a part of justice.
