Analects of Confucius

The Euthyphro is a dialogue between Euthyphro and Socrates on how he (Euthyphro would punish his father who causes the death of his servant. Euthyphro seeks the advice of Socrates on the action to take against his father. On the other hand, the Analects is a dialogue between the governor of She, who inquires about a man in his village named straight body and Confucius. He wants to know if it was right for the man to testify against his father who stole a sheep. Both the stories address a similar issue in which their counterparts seek their opinions on how a son can act towards his father’s wrongdoings.

However, the answers given by the two philosophers in the two stories are quite different. In the Analects, Confucius answers that the straight people are different in his village. Fathers cover up for the wrongdoings of their son while the sons cover for their father's doings. In his answer, Confucius could be implying that it is not right to testify against one’s father. Or rather, the blood ties are stronger than any crime. Or he could be implying that stealing a sheep was a crime so small to destroy the family bonds.

On the contrary, Socrates when answering the question observes that only a man knows how to prosecute his father righteously. As they continue with their discussion, Socrates’ questions leave Euthyphro in a dilemma on how he would execute his father. The Socrates dialogue with Euthyphro ends up in a debate on what is holy and what is unholy unlike in the Confucius dialogue. In the two responses, it is clear that Confucius dismisses any act of justice while Socrates gives Euthyphro a chance to think before going any further.

Euthyphro believes on the piety of the gods rather than filial piety. He believes that the gods accept something that is holy. He believes that prosecuting those do wrongs is holy and not that prosecuting them is unholy. Euthyphro believes that he is an expert in religious matters, and he should do what is holy. Doing holy acts does not mean you are unholy. Thus, he meant to prosecute his father.

The reactions of Socrates and those of Confucius were different in that Confucius was quick in refute the governor’s idea of the son providing evidence against his father. He simply answered that in his village being straight would be different as son would cover up for crimes committed by the fathers while the father would do likewise for his son. On the other hand, Socrates avoided a direct answer as he informed Euthyphro that only a wise son could [prosecute his father righteously. He tries to make Euthyphro come to some sense by inquiring what he considers to be holy. His way of asking and answering questions ends up to heated debate on what is holy and what is unholy.

The two stories tries to come up with the most appropriate action one can take against his or her relatives who have committed crimes. At times, it poses a dilemma on whether to prosecute and testify against a close relative, and this may hinder or enhance justice. For some, it would be right to consider the family ties first before thinking of justice.

Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at MeldaResearch.Com in pre written college essays. If you need a similar paper you can place your order from pay someone to write my research paper services.