Do you wish this now to be our definition of holiness and unholiness? Euthyphro. What is to hinder, Socrates? Socrates. Nothing, so far as I am concerned, Euthyphro, but consider your own position, whether by adopting this definition you will most easily teach me what you promised. Euthyphro. Well, I should say that what all the gods love is holy and, on the other hand, what they all hate is unholy. Socrates. Then shall we examine this again, Euthyphro, to see if it is correct, or shall we let it go and accept our own statement, and those of others, agreeing that it is so, if anyone merely says that it is? Or ought we to inquire into the correctness of the statement? Euthyphro. We ought to inquire. However, I think this is now correct. Socrates. We shall soon know more about this, my friend.
The quote: Just consider this question:—Is that which is holy loved by the gods because it is holy, or is it holy because it is loved by the gods?
Euthyphro. I don’t know what you mean, Socrates. Socrates. Then I will try to speak more clearly. We speak of being carried and of carrying, of being led and of leading, of being seen and of seeing; and you understand—do you not?—that in all such expressions the two parts differ one from the other in meaning, and how they differ. Euthyphro. I think I understand. Socrates. Then, too, we conceive of a thing being loved and of a thing loving, and the two are different? Euthyphro. Of course. Socrates.