Oidipous’s question seems to attack the way in which the informant has spoken rather than confronting the substance of the claim that Polybos is not his biological father. That has never given serious consideration to this possibility, even when it was explicitly questioned, led him to misjudge the god. [Mpe] When it comes to semantics of the old man’s statement, the latter has just called him “son,” which suggests a paternal relationship that cannot credibly be reduced to “nothing.” But knowing that “he who plants the seed” refers in fact to Laios, the audience can consider that he is indeed nothing because he did not raise his son and he is now dead, having fallen victim to an action that Oidipous took because he believed the man he met and killed on the road was “nothing” to him. Indeed, since Apollo instructed Oidipous that he must take his father’s life, one can infer that it was also Apollo’s view that Oidipous should regard his biological father as if he were nothing to him. This must be because Laios set the god’s word at nothing when he conceived Oidipous and he set Oidipous’s life at nothing in order to defeat prophecy. All these considerations supply the audience with a meaningful answer to Oidipous’s question, how biological fatherhood can be found to have no value: this relationship has as much value as father and son give it within the context of their relationship to their gods, such as Apollo, who, as he goes to great lengths to bring wellbeing to mortals through the counsel and direction he offers, displays his commitment to act as a “father” to all mortals. [Mw] [Ad] [Ap] [Mi]