Euthyphro Dilemma

The Euthyphro dilemma is a monotheistic application of the polytheistic problem posed in Plato's dialogue "Euthyphro". Socrates, soon to be tried for impiety (corrupting the youth), comes across Euthyphro who is returning from court after laying charges against his father for the murder of a servant. Socrates asks Euthyphro about what piety is so that he may better defend himself in court.

The question is posed: Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?

This leads to some problems, such as gods disagreeing about piety. But if the pious is loved because it is pious, then it seems to appear as if you don't need the gods to inform you for what piety is, since it exists independent of them.

This problem can be applied to monotheism. Usually 'pious' is replaced with 'good' or 'moral'. I prefer to use good, but moral is equivalent in this argument. You can also say 'morally good' to add some precision, but i find 'good' or 'moral' alone is sufficient.

Monotheistic Proposal: Is what is good commanded by god because it is good, or is it good because it is commanded by god?

The reason this is especially poignant for monotheism is that it is believed that god created everything. So if god created everything, god must've created what is good, otherwise it exists independent of his existence and therefore it diminishes the power [not omnipotent] of god if he can't create what is good.

But, if God created what is good, then prior to his commandment of what is good there can be no justification to what is commanded to be good. therefore his commandment has no justification, thus rendering his commandment tyranical and arbitrary. God could've easily commanded killing babies to be good and we would have to accept that.

There have been some attempts to incorporate the quality of 'goodness' into God's "essence". I don't see how this can be believed to answer the problem, since it still appears as though what is good is defined without God's commandment. Also, this still reduces his omnipotence in that it claims that God cannot change what is good since he simply 'is good'.

So the dilemma provides us with either reducing the power of god or making god tyrannical and not worthy of worship (since you don't have to listen to arbitrary dictations). [need to recheck notes, and refer to oxford handbook of ethical theory or tyrannical nature]