Good and Bad Citizens: Euthyphro’s logic vs Analects’ moral choices
Both Plato’s Euthyphro and Confucius’s Analects coincide in interpreting good citizenship through the knowledge of piousness. Confucius’s Analects at first may appear as a stronger ideological discipline of good citizenship because all actions committed by humanity are based on moral and ethical choices. However, Plato’s Euthyphro accentuates that good citizens should follow reason and knowledge to based their choices and consequences, thus defining “good” to be based on the knowledge you possess. Although Confucius’s Analects may seem stronger because the act of a “good citizen” is introduced through moral reasoning, Plato’s Euthyphro provides a stronger definition of how humanity urges a good reasoning so that a social order is achieved through the use of logical assumptions and commonalities from one’s knowledge because rational reasoning is made from one’s true understanding of what they choose to belief as right or wrong rather than Confucius’s concept of obedience.…show more content… The first and second part will show how morality and traditional obedience in The Analects may see stronger. The third part will briefly define what it means to be “good” in the book of Euthyphro. Finally, the argument is going to shift to answer the question of why Euthyphro offers a better discipline for “good” citizens. This argument will be broken down into four sub-arguments. First, it will prove why knowledge is stronger than Confucius’s idea of morality. The argument will then move on into contrasting logic and tradition and why logic is stronger. The forth argument will consist in proving why reason is stronger than ethics. Finally, the argumentation will conclude, by analyzing Socrates’s examination of true belief and prove that other belief should be vague in each
