Introduction Plato’s Euthyphro is one of the most well-known Socratic dialogues written in ancient Greece. The dialogue was written as a discussion between two figures, the famous philosopher Socrates and a man named Euthyphro. The setting of the dialogue is near the Athenian courthouse where the two meet to discuss of the notions of holiness and piety (Woodruff, 2018). Socrates is someone there to a trial for being impious, while Euthyphro is presented as a figure that will be prosecuting his father in a murder trial. The dialogue between the two is presented in the traditional manner of a Socratic dialogue, where each person expresses their opinions and further inquiries about the other’s position to reach a broader understanding of the subject. As a genre of prose developed and practiced in Greece, the Socratic dialogue is effective in discussing philosophical topics on such things as religion morals law, or other aspects of the human condition. I think that this dialogue to the citizens of the Athens, as their perspective on the issue at the time like, Euthyphro, Was limited by religious belief. A fresher, more radical outlook that allowed people to form their conclusions is surely to yield good results in teaching the individual. Socrates inquires Euthyphro on the nature of piety and justice with the latter being presented as a figure knowledgeable in the topic. The dialogue starts with the suggestion from Euthyphro, who poses that Holiness can be described as persecution of religious offenders. Socrates counters that notion by stating that there are other processes described as holy that do not involve persecution. The prosecution of offenders can be described as only one of the aspects and examples of piety, but not its full definition. The term is then changed to the arrangement of practices that are deemed agreeable by the gods. This explanation, however, is once again shot down by Socrates, who notes that the Gods are unable to find universal agreement within themselves. If the gods are unable to come to a universal conclusion, that means an action would be pious and impious at the same time, making the explanation insufficient. Euthyphro, in an attempt to find a definitive answer to the problem, then poses that something is pious when the gods have reached a universal agreement on that subject. In response, Socrates points out a theoretical contradiction in his argument. The man argues that if the Gods agree that something is holy, their decision must be based on a set of characteristics that also have to be determined by them, meaning that their definition of holy must be based on an already existing one, creating a paradox (10e). Euthyphro’s next attempt to define the term starts with the proposition that piety is a form of justice centered on looking after the Gods. The notion is countered by Socrates saying the Gods do not need human oversight, due to their omnipotence, making the point invalid. The other man then amends his statement, saying that piety is a process of trade, where humans fulfill their part in exchange for divine favors. This last definition brings the dialogue back to its last ending point, with Socrates implying th