Why was socrates punished?
490503
Lots of useful info here....\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates
534499
it can help since philosophy and specialy socrates philosophy helps people to see the true face of life or of different situations\ntry to find something to read about the Socratic Method or method of elenchos
663960
Nothing at all.....yes they should be punished to the fullest extint of the law.  How does it look for the people who are put in place to enforce the law constantly break it and get away scott free?  This may go on but it takes courageous individuals who know of this type of inappropriate behavior to come forward and make this unsavory deeds known.  No matter what the cost....a philosopher once said....without struggle there is no success.......
845073
Yup, Odysseus tricked by  telling Polyphemus that his name was No-One(?). When he was blinded, the rest of the cyclops asked him who was the culprit who did this to which Polyphemus responded No -one. On hearing this, the rest of the cyclops thought the blindness was afflicted by the Gods and asked Polyphemus to pray to their father Poseidon for help.
1052417
There is no adequete punishment for being tardy anymore.  Educators are not allowed to have  the guts to be tough anymore.  Our soceity will pay for it, just stay tuned.
753907
well frnd he might have got the right punishment for his deeds but how could you justify the existence of such a court which is itself not under law... he deserves the punishment but definitely lawfully...
1156104
He probably violated his parole, or committed another infraction, or both.\n\nBest of luck and God bless.
207867
Yeah, I agree it wasn't bright on his part. He was punished for it, and most people don't even care to ever see him again after it. He made a mistake, and hopefully he's sorry about doing it. \nI gotta agree with BungieBabe too. The media also does it as well.
834183
This goes to the suggestion, attributed by a Y! Q/R Answerer on the French list, to a commentator on a French Radio talk show "Grosses Têtes" citing Jules Ferry (19th Century Minister of Education, who is credited with the establishment of the right to free secular education in France): that instead of capital punishment, convicts should have their eyes gouged out.\n\nI've been unable to confirm the attribution, and am still trying.
834509
Socrates takes the position that requiting injustice by retaliation or warding off evil by evil ("anti-dike") is always wrong, and is just as wrong as committing injustice ("a-dike") in the first place. Socrates tells Crito that this opinion, that it is wrong to resist evil, never has been, and never will be held by the vast majority of mankind. He thinks it is an important moral yardstick, adding that people who do not agree on this point have no common ground and must necessarily despise ("kata-phronein") each other. He says that this premise will be taken as true for the purpose of their discussion (49d).\n\nCrito says he agrees with Socrates, that "anti-dike" is as wrong as "a-dike", but in fact, neither seems to trouble him. Crito has no more qualms about bribing a friend's way out of prison than he had bribing his own way in for a morning visit. Neither man seems to notice that, according to Socrates, they should not even be friends because they are so far apart morally.\n\nSocrates' claim that "resisting evil by any means other than persuasion is evil" is an ancient statement of moral pacificism. Socrates rests its logical defense entirely upon a analogy. He says that a citizen stands in relation to the state as the child does to the parent, as the slave does to his master. He says that the state has brought him into the world (by regulating marriage), nurtured and educated him. Socrates says that he is the offspring ("ek-gonos") and slave ("doulos") of the state and has no right to "destroy" the state by failing to obey it (50e) after it has been so beneficient to him.\nJust about everyone believes that death is an evil for the person who dies.  Yet there are well-known difficulties for this view.  Perhaps the most important difficulty was raised by Epicurus in the following famous passage from his “Letter to Menoeceus”:\n\nNagel asserts that death, the most terrifying of ills, is nothing to us, since so long as we exist, death is not with us; but when death comes, then we do not exist.  It does not then concern either the living or the dead, since for the former it is not, and the latter are no more. \n\n  Anything that is bad for someone must be bad for that person at a particular time.  There is no time at which death is bad for the one who dies.  (Death is not bad for someone before she dies; it is not bad for her once she dies, because from that point on she no longer exists.)  Therefore, death is not bad for the one who dies.\n\nWhile some still find this argument attractive, most find its conclusion to be obviously false; thus much effort has been expended trying to refute its premises.
811365
Socrates was such an influential thinker.  With students as great as Plato, it was ridiculous to condemn a man who produced such a great outcome of philosophy.  I don't think Socrates is comparable to some of the true lunatics today.  I do not favor censorship, but if people outwardly try to harm others or cause others to become corrupt, of course they deserve retribution.  This would be instances such as the suice groups online that encourage others to kill themselves.
1182755
Let's rewrite your question like this:\nIf we are free to light a torch under our fingertips, why do we suffer pain?\n\nIn most circumstances, God does not have to explicitly punish us for disobedience, he just lets the consequences happen.  It's only when the consequences are too distant and the person causing the trouble is someone who really wants to learn the right way to life that God steps in and punishes (I Corinthians 11:32, Hebrews 12:4-11).\n\nBTW, your knowledge of angels is sorely lacking.  Angels too have free will; that is how Lucifer came to rebel against God.  And if they didn't have such free will, it would be unjust to judge them -- as it will be the responsibility of the saints to do (I Corinthians 6:3).
48567
Socrates \n(469-399 B.C.E.) In his use of critical reasoning, by his unwavering commitment to truth, and through the vivid example of his own life, fifth-century Athenian Socrates set the standard for all subsequent Western philosophy. Since he left no literary legacy of his own, we are dependent upon contemporary writers like Aristophanes and Xenophon for our information about his life and work. As a pupil of Archelaus during his youth, Socrates showed a great deal of interest in the scientific theories of Anaxagoras, but he later abandoned inquiries into the physical world for a dedicated investigation of the development of moral character. Having served with some distinction as a soldier at Delium and Amphipolis during the Peloponnesian War, Socrates dabbled in the political turmoil that consumed Athens after the War, then retired from active life to work as a stonemason and to raise his children with his wife, Xanthippe. After inheriting a modest fortune from his father, the sculptor Sophroniscus, Socrates used his marginal financial independence as an opportunity to give full-time attention to inventing the practice of philosophical dialogue.
755659
Simple answer:  Because bad thing happen to good people.\n\nIf nothing bad ever happened to good people, you would not need laws.  If anyone who did something bad was punished...visably...quickly...and justly...by some cosmic force, you would not need laws.  However, that does not happen.  While God does dole out the enternal reward or allow you to be tormented, he tends to reserve this for the afterlife.\nIn THIS life, we need jails.
907466
Physical pain is nothing compared to how the mind can hurt you. Hester’s mental anguish from being an outcast of her settlement is caused by her punishment. She felt alone and isolated from the world. Is this all this torment worth the price of adultery? It is far too severe for a crime such as adultery. A punishment should only hurt the people that are guilty of the crime, but the punishment also affects Pearl, Hester’s daughter. Pearl was treated like her mother, an outcast from society. Why should an innocent young child have to suffer from her mother’s immoral mistakes?
565417
Because it's for the greater good - see the chafetz chaim. Slander is only a problem if the harm to the person you are slandering is pointless. If there is something to be achieved by the slander, then there is no philosophical problem. Otherwise society would fall apart.
889926
socrates was not just a philosopher, he was the leader of a spiritual movement.\n\n the statements refers the his greek beliefs about the soul\n i will leave that part of it up to you--- however here is a brief explaination of the more literal and less inferred meaning of his statement-\n\n in reality all the things we "know" we in fact believe to be true\n they are not reality, they are images in our mind based on our experiences, nothing more, nothing less\n\n\n while they may indeed reflect reality accurately, they are not reality\n because (for example an apple)\n the apple is the apple\n our beliefs about what the apple is, our knowledge about the apple\n is a belief, an idea, not the apple\n only the apple-(reality) is the apple -(reality)\n\n in reality all the beliefs that we have, may be false\n and in reality we believe all things, and know nothing for sure\n ... this is true regardless of how sound the reasons for our belief may be\n\n--\n socrates is speaking firstly about, the merits of knowing the limitation of the human mind-(thoughts) and the limitations of knowledge\n\n and secondly discussing the sophist-(spiritual philosophical movement) view of the truer knowledge that is being itself, and is not a thought