EuthyphroPlato
Euthyphro
by Plato · first published 2012
21mentions
9recommended by
18HN commenters
2010–2026first – last mentioned
50% recommend50% neutral
Why HN recommends it
A short, readable Socratic dialogue that serves as a starting point in philosophy. It raises the question of whether something is good because the gods love it, a question that remains relevant today.
Summarised by Claude from recommending comments
Affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.







Euthyphro by Plato.
on “Ask HN: Book under 100 pages that changed your life the most?” ↗…saying this as someone who has recently completed Republic[1], and thoroughly enjoyed it (and fumed at it in some places). Instead, get familiar with some of the earlier, and famous, Socratic dialogues: Euthyphro, Apology (this is referring to a "formal defense", i.e. apologia; not regret), Crito, et al — they're shorter, give you a great flavour of Socrates, and will prepare you for the Republic. An excellent…
on “Socrates’ Examined Life” ↗Well, look at Socrates. Read Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, and Phaedo. It's pretty clear that he believed his philosophy, and both lived and died by it. Although, if you insist on being doubtful, we only know about him through the dialogs which…
on “Review of Ayn Rand” ↗…standard that transcends God that makes it not OK to do certain things even if God says it's OK? (BTW, in case you don't recognize it, this question was first raised by Plato in a famous dialogue called Euthyphro. It's worth reading. And BTW2, if you think that this example is too extreme you should read Jeremiah 19:9.)
on “Why anything? Why this? (1998)” ↗…standard that transcends God that makes it not OK to do certain things even if God says it's OK? (BTW, in case you don't recognize it, this question was first raised by Plato in a famous dialogue called Euthyphro. It's worth reading. And BTW2, if you think that this example is too extreme you should read Jeremiah 19:9.) The argument is actually Aristotle's, Plato just wrote it down, but yes I'm very familiar…
on “Why anything? Why this? (1998)” ↗I heavily recommend the Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Republic, and Phaedrus (in particular) - it’s said all of philosophy is a footnote on Plato until Nietzsche. I think only a summary of Schopenhauer (like a penguin selection or something)…
on “Ask HN: Books you plan to read in 2020?” ↗There must be shorter, easier Socratic dialogues one could read. Maybe Euthyphro, or something: http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/euthyfro.html
on “Teaching binary to 3rd Graders using the Socratic method” ↗My journey in philosophy began by reading Plato’s Euthyphro. It’s a great place to start. http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/euthyfro.html
on “Ask HN: Learning about philosophy” ↗…an extremely fascinating historical document tho). I'm a huge fan of the Alan Bloom version of Plato's Republic. But if we're getting specifically into Plato, I'd feel remiss if I didn't mention the Euthyphro too. There is also a _lot_ to be said in favor of reading the history of philosophy in rough order. It's a conversation through the millennia, and you can't truly understand what an author is saying…
on “Ask HN: How do I get started in philosophy” ↗Plato's works surrounding Socrates' death: Phaedo, Crito, Euthyphro, The Apology. Its fascinating to discover how many thoughts and ideas they had which are still relevant in our societies today. Also, they are incredibly readable, its like taking part in on a conversation…
on “Ask HN: What non-fiction do you read?” ↗…to realize them." I didn't see a definition of "tribalism" in the article. I see references to the "January insurrection" and vague references to other "far-right" things. If you go back to Plato's Euthyphro, you see the character Euthyphro on his way to testify against his own father for mistreating a criminal. This is a very early "moral" moment in our intellectual history; it was practically inconceivable…
on “Are we cut out for universal morality?” ↗…argument is an argument in which you offer premises that you the arguer don’t accept, but which you know the listener does accept, in order to show that his position is incoherent (as in, for example, the Euthyphro dilemma). There is nothing wrong with this type of argument ad hominem." http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html "An ad hominem attack is not quite as weak as mere name-calling. It might actually carry…
on “The Unix Philosophy” ↗…one theological approach to some of the more difficult problems in religion (especially modern Christianity). Is it really widely held though? It's a natural interpretation for anyone familiar with the Euthyphro, but most people have not read Plato. I haven't generally seen strong evidence that adherents have actually adopted the beliefs professed by apologists. Surveys routinely find adherents generally fall…
on “How Two Guys Lost God and Found $40M” ↗…dialogues too. For instance, some dialogues are narrated by Socrates (Lovers, Charmides, Menexenus), others are narrated but not by Socrates (Theatetus, Symposium), others are straight dialogue (Crito, Euthyphro) etc etc. There are a lot of ways to look at it and the best way is probably just to pick up the Apology and start reading it. Second, he says that the dialogues should be examined as a whole. Well,…
on “How to read Plato (1995)” ↗Plato's Euthyphro
on “Why read Aristotle today?” ↗