Young Euthyphro stands in a courtroom, and greets Socrates, the great learned philosopher. To which Socrates exchanges greetings. They discuss the reasons why they are both at the courtroom. Socrates inquires, and discovers that Euthyphro has placed his father on trial for murder.

In the text, the problem quickly arises through an ambiguity of language. Murder, an act with intention, and killing, an act without intention, are interchanged improperly in Euthyphro's initial statement to Socrates. Beyond this misusage of syntax however, through Euthyphro's account of the events, the truth could be found. The first death he speaks of is the death inflicted by the farmhand. Euthyphro explains that this killing was committed in a drunken rage (4c6). Though still a horrible crime, because of he was intoxicated, there was no intent involved, because the farmhand did not realize that his actions would lead to death. In his drunkenness the farmhand could have not realized his streghtn of the magnitude of the situation when he killed the other farmhand. Because of a lack of intent, it was simply a killing, though he was still responsible for the death because he was neglectful enough to drink enough to alter his state of mind, which caused his actions. However when Euthyphro's father bound the farmhand and placed him in a ditch he "gave no thought or care to the bound man, as being a killer, and it was no matter if he died" (4d2-3). The father understood that what he did to the bound man would lead

to his death but he did not care. The father understood that a lack of food and a lack of shelter, particularly in the cold would most likely lead to any man's death. This shows a certain level of intent, not to murder the man, but not to save him, which is an equal charge. Euthyphro then explains that it does not matter whether the person standing trial is a relative or if the person who was murdered was a peasant. This idea is a foundation for all ideas of justice. Justice, in its personified form, is always portrayed as blind. This idea of a blind justice ensures that justice will be equally provided for everyone no matter what social standing, or prominent relationships. This is further displayed in the same personification of justice with the holding of a balance that is always level. No side has any initial force on it, swaying justice one way or the other. Because of these reasons it makes no difference whether it is the father who murdered or simply a slave that was murdered. It only mattered that one human being ended the life of another human being with the intent to do so. Therefore Euthyphro has the legal right to persecute his father, adding to the cogency of his beliefs.

For Socrates' sake, Euthyphro puts the situation in more contemporary terms. He explained that a similar occurrence happened to Zeus. Zeus' father unjustly swallowed Zeus' brothers. For this, the god of the gods castrated his father as a form of punishment, exacting justice upon his father. Euthyphro refers to Zeus after this is revealed as "the best and most just of the gods," implying that Zeus' way is potentially the best way (5e5-6a1). This, monotheistic view of Zeus being the final say on piety, is reflected throughout the dialogue by both parties constantly saying "by Zeus," again placing a great deal of importance on Zeus. However without denying that Zeus is the final say on piety, Socrates reminds Euthyphro that the gods quarrel constantly. Socrates, while refuting a later definition of Euthyphro's, uses this idea of constant conflict between the gods to show that it is impossible to do what the gods agree on in

order to be pious. This is Socrates' only defense. While Zeus was the only god of justice that Euthyphro invokes, Socrates uses the quarrels of the other god's to point out their failures in judgement. However Socrates ignores calls that Zeus is the greatest, most just god, arguing instead that the others are not as just nor great. Finally Socrates dismisses Euthyphro's point instead of refuting it, saying it is not a definition merely an example, yet not attempting to prove it an unacceptable example.

Furthermore Euthyphro maintained an important, non-violent stance on the issue that his father refused to take. According to nonviolent principles one combats hatred or violence without the use of more hatred. The first farmhand failed at a nonviolent life-style by killing another man, no matter whether there was intention or not. However he was willing to give himself up to the gods, which according to nonviolent thinkers throughout history, are the only few that are capable of dealing out justice. He did this by not resisting the father. Euthyphro never mentioned any resistence even when the man was left to die after being thrown into a ditch. Euthyphro's father ignored Zeus, agreed to be the most just of the gods, and took justice into his own hand by being responsible for the farmhand's death. Finally Euthyphro was placed in the same position as his father. He correctly decides to put his father's fate in the hands of the gods and prosecuted him, instead of taking justice into his own power. Euthyphro admits that there is a higher power than himself. He has placed the gods in control of his father's future, which is the nonviolent approach. If Euthyphro was in fact a man of nonviolence, he could cogently prosecute his father for murder. Even if there was not consciously intent on killing, as the farmhand wasn't, they were both