This is a Socratic dialogue.
Socrates (469/470- 399 BC) was the first philosopher born in Athens to know the exact date of birth and death. Socrates and his most outstanding disciple Plato (427- 347 BC) followed him for 8 years. After Socrates was accused of corrupting youth morality and believing in new gods, he was forced to leave Athens for a foreign land, the most beautiful philosopher in history, and Aristotle (384- 322 BC), the most outstanding disciple in Plato's Academy. The teacher of the great Alexander the Great lived a prosperous life and finally died of stomach trouble in Calais. The most learned philosopher, thinker, founder of logic, encyclopedic scientist and ancient Greek philosopher * * * has become an insurmountable Himalayan mountain in the history of philosophy.
Plato's early dialogues are called "Socrates dialogues": Socrates, as an epoch-making figure in the history of western philosophy, can be said to be the man who called philosophy from heaven to earth. When man is the scale of all things, the scale of existence and the scale of non-existence, the emphasis on "artificiality" by the wise will inevitably lead to people's subjective pursuit of value judgment, the prevalence of relativism, and directly lead to anarchy of value and moral confusion. Socrates put forward the objective moral proposition that "virtue is knowledge", and made unremitting pursuit of the objective standards of human moral behavior and value system. Socrates' exploration has the pursuit of universal definition. He discussed moral issues with young people and asked, "What is a certain character?" The answer he wanted was a general definition of this moral quality, but all the interlocutors answered him with some special examples and ended in vain.
The article "Ou Di Lotus" is about Socrates being accused. Before he appeared in court, he discussed what "piety" was with Ou Di Furong, who was keen on religion. Ou Di Furong put forward several concrete examples about piety, but all of them were refuted by Socrates, and no conclusion was reached.
The conversation between the two took place at the gate of the "yamen". Ou Di Furong was surprised to see Socrates come to the yamen, which surprised the officials, moved the government and asked him about it. Socrates told Ou Rong: "No matter this Meredo or anyone else, he saw me clearly, so he sued me in ungodly." This naturally leads to the discussion of "piety". Socrates, a wise man, said to Ou Rong, "Now please talk about those opinions you just asserted. You say, what is piety and what is ungodly? Is piety the same in every behavior? Conversely, is ungodly the opposite of all piety and always the same? Does everything that is ungodly have an ungodly aspect? "
Ou Di Furong agreed with Socrates' last question. He said: Devotion is what I am doing now. It is impious to tell those who commit murder or steal temple property, whether they are your father, mother or anyone else.
This is certainly not what Socrates wanted. "Friend, I just asked you what is piety, and you didn't fully explain it. You just told me that piety is what you are doing, which is accusing your father of murder. "
Socrates went on to say: "What I ask of you is not to say one or two things from many pious examples, but to say the' type' itself that makes pious things pious. Because you said that there is a' phase' that turns ungodly's things into ungodly and pious things into piety. "
So Ou Di Furong put forward another point: God likes piety, but God doesn't like ungodly.
Socrates easily refuted this view: he reiterated Ou Rong's view that piety is not the same as ungodly, but on the contrary. Then Socrates pointed out that just as there are differences of opinion between people on right and wrong, high and low, good and evil, there are also quarrels and differences of opinion between gods. That is to say, some gods feel right, some gods feel right, some gods feel expensive or good, and some gods feel cheap or evil. That is to say, every god loves what he thinks is good and right, but hates the opposite, so it can be concluded that the same thing will be both pious and ungodly, because it seems that the same thing, some gods hate it, some gods like it, so it is both lovely and annoying to God.
Therefore, under the guidance of Socrates' "telepathic labor", Ou Di Furong put forward the view that "all gods love piety and all gods hate ungodly". Of course, this is still not the answer Socrates wants. Just like in MINO, Socrates asked Sicilian rich children, students of gorgias, one of the famous representatives of the school of the wise, what is virtue, but MINO listed many virtues.
The refutation of this view is also wonderful. Socrates said: now let's think about it: is a pious thing loved by the gods because of its piety, or is it loved by the gods because of its piety? The result of this survey, just as a thing is loved not because it is cute, but because it is loved, a thing is loved by the gods because it is liked, so the gods like not piety, and what the gods like is not love by the gods.
Finally, Socrates refuted the view that "all piety is just". This process is somewhat similar to the above argumentation process, or does it come from "Is everything just piety or is everything just piety?" However, from the beginning of the discussion, it is obvious that Ou Di Furong can't keep up with Socrates' thought. Maybe he wants to leave in a hurry. Ou Di Furong said, Socrates, I am in a hurry now. I should go.