2 ms·

The post I was replying to suggested that the government should not be punishing someone who could do great work in relevant chemistry work. My point was that

The post I was replying to suggested that the government should not be punishing someone who could do great work in relevant chemistry work. My point was that the government may have a need for rockets and bombs, but that they will find the chemists with a conservative approach to science and work ethics rather than free thinkers. I do agree that the world needs more free thinkers, but the government does have substantial power in determining what sort of people will do society's intellectual work. For what it's worth, this is a problem that goes back a long way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Socrates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Socrates

jlgreco 14y ago
Socrates should have never even been at that trial; I've got to say that I have always found Socrates' response to Crito to be immensely dissatisfying. It seems to me that it assumes the true nature of the law will never take take one by surprise, and (although it may have been practical at the time) I think it is a mistake to think that opting out of the law before being a victim of it is a practical thing to expect of people. His reasoning is basically just a more principled cry of "if you don't like it, leave it": "we further proclaim to any Athenian by the liberty which we allow him, that if he does not like us when he has become of age and has seen the ways of the city, and made our acquaintance, he may go where he pleases and take his goods with him. None of us laws will forbid him or interfere with him. Any one who does not like us and the city, and who wants to emigrate to a colony or to any other city, may go where he likes, retaining his property." Immensely dissatisfying. I cannot stand Plato's telling of that entire series of events.