秋季提纲互改小组-Issue65

youngseeUID：3489314

本帖来自"王老师GRE提纲+全文互改小组"，欢迎关注！你还可以查看更多小组、创建小组

Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.

youngseeUID：3489314

题目中的论述不能在它很好的定义公平与不公平之前赋予每个人权利和责任去对抗法律。我虽然同意人人都得守法，但是如果没有一个一致的定义和每个人都遵守的规章制度，个体对法律的抵抗会导致导致社会动荡，最终成为无政府状态。
The statement can not accord responsibility and rights to every individuals responding to laws before it well defines “just” and “unjust”. While I agree that people should obey just laws, if there are no conclusive definitions that everyone should be agree on and no obligatory disciplines and methods that everyone must defer, individuals freely reflections of the disobedience may cause social unrest and finally come to a state of anarchy.  
法律公平与否的定义应该考虑到人们基本的权益——人人平等，私有财产神圣不可侵犯等等——以及各个集团的利益。如果一个人不接受这个定义，他的抵抗是站不住脚的，因为他代表自己权益的同时有可能侵害他人的权益。比如根据收入制定税收啊。
Conclusive definition of a fair law must take into consideration principal human rights and interests of different groups. No one’s claim of resistance could be tenable without acceptance of this concerted definition because he may represent only his rights and interests while endanger others’.
观念上的统一还是不足以让人们去对抗法律。对抗不公平法律的目的是消除这种不公平，我们需要合理的制度和方法把我们带到这个目的地去。比如非暴力反抗运动，暴力只会带来更深的误解和伤害。
Only conceptual agreement on just laws is not enough for people to confront unjust laws. As the purpose of disobedience is elimination of injustice, we need proper ways and methods to approach our destination.
有的人质疑说被定义和方法限制的反抗是虚弱无力的，然而道德规范会赋予受侵害人群力量和带来其他人的理解和帮助。
Some may argue that resistance constrained by certain definitions and methods agreeable to majority may somehow be impotent and less helpful for its success. However, as unjust laws harm some groups’ basic rights and principals as they are defined, ethics would build them an army and get assistance and understanding of others.

tesolchinaUID：2191404

youngsee 发表于 2014-10-12 21:04
题目中的论述不能在它很好的定义公平与不公平之前赋予每个人权利和责任去对抗法律。我虽然同意人人都得守法 ...

我有兴趣知道你写这句话的时候是怎么考虑的 The statement can not accord responsibility and rights to every individuals responding to laws before it well defines “just” and “unjust”.
其实作为一个statement是不能accord责任或权力的  同时当你提出正义的定义问题时 你将陷入无法自拔的法哲学泥潭里 这对于一篇30分钟的作文来说将是一场灾难。

While I agree that people should obey just laws, if there are no conclusive definitions that everyone should be agree on and no obligatory disciplines and methods that everyone must defer, individuals freely reflections of the disobedience may cause social unrest and finally come to a state of anarchy.

你的if开始的句子我不太看得懂，所以就很难往下讨论了
你后面的几个分论点有些是可以利用的 但是加在一起并不能和主旨句呼应 这是比较大的问题
1+3的模型还是要坚持使用  

请编辑你的帖子 把这个链接 加到里面  王老师的提纲和对各楼层点评

youngseeUID：3489314

谢谢老师点评

关于第一句话：我把这个statement作为一个呼吁来考虑，它如果成为一个思维常识，是不是有可能人们能从这个常识里面得到“天赋人权/责任”？

“While I agree that people should obey just laws, if there are no conclusive definitions that everyone should be agree on and no obligatory disciplines and methods that everyone must defer, individuals freely reflections of the disobedience may cause social unrest and finally come to a state of anarchy.” 改成下面这段

I agree that people should obey just laws However, if there are no conclusive definitions that everyone should be agree on, and no obligatory disciplines and methods that everyone must defer, individuals freely reflections of disobedience may cause social unrest and finally come to a state of anarchy.标红是我接下来两段要讲的内容

tesolchinaUID：2191404

Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.


你新写的主旨句
I agree that people should obey just laws However, if there are no conclusive definitions that everyone should be agree on, and no obligatory disciplines and methods that everyone must defer, individuals freely reflections of disobedience may cause social unrest and finally come to a state of anarchy.标红是我接下来两段要讲的内容

However前面的部分直接回应了题干的一部分，或许可以加一个原因从句
后面的部分 虽然我能看出来你想讨论disobey and resist unjust laws，但是你讲的这些和disobey and resist unjust laws究竟有什么关系，你得解释清楚。
我在3楼已经说过，最好不要纠结于定义

也许你可以按这个主旨句来展开

I agree that people should obey just laws to protect individuals' rights and ensure the prosperity of the society.  On the other hand, people should also obey laws the justice of which is questionable in order to show respect to the rule of law and avoid social unrest. Nevertheless, citizens may try to challenge the unjust laws within the legal and democratic framework of legislation.

youngseeUID：3489314

谢谢老师！

I agree that 1.people should obey just laws to protect individuals' rights and ensure the prosperity of the society. On the other hand, 2.people should also obey laws the justice of which is questionable in order to show respect to the rule of law and avoid social unrest. Nevertheless, 3.citizens may try to challenge the unjust laws within the legal and democratic framework of legislation. 

1.A fair law must take into consideration principal human rights and interests of different groups. When the entire society accept it as just, obeying it may protect their own rights and the interests of the whole society.
人们应该遵守正义的法律，因为社会公认的正义之法能够保护人们的权益和社会的利益。举例，还是举税收分级既不至于让低收入人群生活过于艰难，也能保证政府的收入，使社会能够稳定运转。

2. People should show respect of legal system even when certain laws are unjust. Otherwise social unrest may occur and that people may be deprived of not only rights to claim but also their original posture of justice.
比如香港政改Occupy Central movement在中国政府看来是违法行为，他们占中游行严重影响了香港的正常运作，中国政府不仅没有理会他们的诉求，pro-democracy派别也遭受着香港人内部的指责。

3. Admittedly, some may argue that then obeying all the unjust laws may bring the unprivileged discrimination and sorrow. However, people could challenge them through legal ways.
有人argue如何废除恶法？和平发声，比如在合理的地点游行，发表社论，争取联合国人道主义援助等等。

raikkonen36UID：2871931

主旨句：People should obey just laws in order to maintain social stability and the authority of just laws. However, in some circumstance, people can attempt to challenge unjust laws.

这一段说了守法是为了维护社会稳定，One compelling argument why people should abide by just laws is to maintain social stability. Nowadays, our society has set up a relatively complete law system, based on the experience of the past years and the devotion of great minds in the history of law up to now. By binding people’s behavior, those laws protect people’s rights and provide an environment where people can get in touch with others in a peaceful and esteemed way and thus facilitate social stability. You can imagine that our society will be, when people all are blind to those laws. People can kill others with no punishment; government officers who appropriate a great amount of money still stay in their office; people who provide the information concerning national security for terrorists are not delivered into jail. Should this situation continue, our society would be in mess.

这一段说守法可以维护法律的权威，法律的权威可以起威慑作用。Another compelling argument that people should comply with just laws is to sustain their authority. If people all observer such laws, their authority can be acknowledged smoothly and thus can efficiently prohibit crime from happening by their deterrence. If a thief realizes the consequence of stealing money from others, does he still continue? If a robber is aware of the consequence of robbing others, does he still hold his original idea? If an officer who tries to suburb his leader, in search of higher position, takes possible consequence into consideration, does he firmly conduct such behavior? Following this, if all the crimes can perceive that they will pay a high price for their behaviors, in some sense, the possibility of committing criminal will largely decrease.



这一段说有时人们可以尝试去质疑不合理的法律，因为这些法律有其历史局限性。Notwithstanding the forgoing reasons that highlight the importance of observing just laws, in some circumstance, people can attempt to question unjust laws. That is because those unjust laws always limit into a specific time. It is such limitation that should encourage people, especially the elites of different divisions in our society, to challenge those unjust laws. For instance, had President Lincoln called for and devoted to emancipating slavery, the black would have hardly enjoyed freedom. Had Marin Luther King queried the labor laws of his time, the black would hardly have had the same employment opportunity as the white. Had there been no the feminist movement, women would have hardly had more opportunities of entering into social strata outside of family than before. It is these people’s devotions that force to make certain change in those unjust laws and make our law system tend to be more just, pushing social progress.

raikkonen36UID：2871931

重复了

tesolchinaUID：2191404

raikkonen36 发表于 2014-10-15 10:18
主旨句：People should obey just laws in order to maintain social stability and the authority of just ...

Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.

你的主旨句和中间三段都没有回应可能的挑战



主旨句：People should obey just laws in order to maintain social stability and the authority of just laws. However, in some circumstance, people can attempt to challenge unjust laws.
对于题目后半部分有责任不遵守和反抗恶法，你的主旨句后半句不够清晰、内容也比较单薄

这一段说了守法是为了维护社会稳定，One compelling argument why people should abide by just laws is to maintain social stability. Nowadays, our society has set up a relatively complete law system, based on the experience of the past years and the devotion of great minds in the history of law up to now. By binding people’s behavior, those laws protect people’s rights and provide an environment where people can get in touch with others in a peaceful and esteemed way and thus facilitate social stability. You can imagine that our society will be, when people all are blind to those laws. People can kill others with no punishment; government officers who appropriate a great amount of money still stay in their office; people who provide the information concerning national security for terrorists are not delivered into jail. Should this situation continue, our society would be in mess.

这一段说守法可以维护法律的权威，法律的权威可以起威慑作用。Another compelling argument that people should comply with just laws is to sustain their authority. If people all observer such laws, their authority can be acknowledged smoothly and thus can efficiently prohibit crime from happening by their deterrence. If a thief realizes the consequence of stealing money from others, does he still continue? If a robber is aware of the consequence of robbing others, does he still hold his original idea? If an officer who tries to suburb his leader, in search of higher position, takes possible consequence into consideration, does he firmly conduct such behavior? Following this, if all the crimes can perceive that they will pay a high price for their behaviors, in some sense, the possibility of committing criminal will largely decrease.

用两段的篇幅来讲前半部分，而只用一段讲后半部分有点避重就轻。关于遵守良法其实没有什么争议，一段讨论就足够了，真正的重点显然是如何面对恶法。




这一段说有时人们可以尝试去质疑不合理的法律，因为这些法律有其历史局限性。Notwithstanding the forgoing reasons that highlight the importance of observing just laws, in some circumstance, people can attempt to question unjust laws. That is because those unjust laws always limit into a specific time. It is such limitation that should encourage people, especially the elites of different divisions in our society, to challenge those unjust laws. For instance, had President Lincoln called for and devoted to emancipating slavery, the black would have hardly enjoyed freedom. Had Marin Luther King queried the labor laws of his time, the black would hardly have had the same employment opportunity as the white. Had there been no the feminist movement, women would have hardly had more opportunities of entering into social strata outside of family than before. It is these people’s devotions that force to make certain change in those unjust laws and make our law system tend to be more just, pushing social progress.

注意题目讲的是每个人都有责任不遵守和抵制恶法。你这一段并没有正面回应“每个人”和“不遵守”这些关键词。这里涉及的例子很多，但是每一个都是一笔带过，没有深入的讨论。你需要在例子中找到很多人不遵守某项法律的情节，并尝试从中提炼观点。

tesolchinaUID：2191404

youngsee 发表于 2014-10-14 16:20
谢谢老师！

你还没有继续改呢？

tesolchinaUID：2191404

raikkonen36 发表于 2014-10-15 10:18
重复了

请问对我的修改意见有什么想法或回应？

raikkonen36UID：2871931

tesolchina 发表于 2014-10-17 07:50
请问对我的修改意见有什么想法或回应？

正在修改，语言表达这些方面的问题呢或者其他问题，老师你能指出下吗？不然自己没方向啊

youngseeUID：3489314

tesolchina 发表于 2014-10-17 07:50
请问对我的修改意见有什么想法或回应？

老师……现在改了，非常抱歉拖了这么久

tesolchinaUID：2191404

raikkonen36 发表于 2014-10-17 17:14
正在修改，语言表达这些方面的问题呢或者其他问题，老师你能指出下吗？不然自己没方向啊

One compelling argument why people should abide by just laws is to maintain social stability. Nowadays, our society has set up a relatively complete law system, based on the experience of the past years and the devotion of great minds in the history of law up to now. By binding people’s behavior, those laws protect people’s rights and provide an environment where people can get in touch with others in a peaceful and esteemed way and thus facilitate social stability.

语言的修改工程浩大，建议你尝试模仿写得还可以但又不是那么艰深或者语句水平不是那么地道遥不可及的文章（比如我的部分习作）。随便抽几句你的文章来看

One compelling argument why people should abide by just laws is to maintain social stability.
-> One compelling reaon why people should abide by just laws is that doing so is essential for  maintaining social stability.

Nowadays, our society has set up a relatively comprehensive legal system, based on the experience of the past years and the devotion of great minds in the history of legislation up to now. By regulating people’s behavior, those laws protect people’s rights and provide an environment where people can interact with others in a peaceful and esteemed way and thus facilitate social stability.

你可以看出我的修改主要是在选词上 也就是说你的句型还是挺好的  

tesolchinaUID：2191404

youngsee 发表于 2014-10-14 16:20
谢谢老师！

I agree that 1.people should obey just laws to protect individuals' rights and ensure  ...

不知道你编辑前的版本是怎样的？
下次还是直接回帖修改 这样会保留记录

I agree that 1.people should obey just laws to protect individuals' rights and ensure the prosperity of the society. On the other hand, 2.people should also obey laws the justice of which is questionable in order to show respect to the rule of law and avoid social unrest. Nevertheless, 3.citizens may try to challenge the unjust laws within the legal and democratic framework of legislation.

ok 用我的主旨句做框架没问题 考试的时候也可以用 但措辞必须是自己的

1.A fair law must take into consideration principal human rights and interests of different groups. When the entire society accept it as just, obeying it may protect their own rights and the interests of the whole society.
人们应该遵守正义的法律，因为社会公认的正义之法能够保护人们的权益和社会的利益。举例，还是举税收分级既不至于让低收入人群生活过于艰难，也能保证政府的收入，使社会能够稳定运转。

例子也不错 或许可以直接说政府有权收税本身就是为了能提供服务 所以市民和企业必须纳税


2. People should show respect of legal system even when certain laws are unjust. Otherwise social unrest may occur and that people may be deprived of not only rights to claim but also their original posture of justice.
比如香港政改Occupy Central movement在中国政府看来是违法行为，他们占中游行严重影响了香港的正常运作，中国政府不仅没有理会他们的诉求，pro-democracy派别也遭受着香港人内部的指责。

占中这件事比你想象的要复杂，不方便在这里展开讨论。或许还是考虑一下别的例子吧。比如美国国会授权布什总统侵略伊拉克，美国老百姓即使认为是恶法，也还是要支持，服兵役等等。  



3. Admittedly, some may argue that then obeying all the unjust laws may bring the unprivileged discrimination and sorrow. However, people could challenge them through legal ways.
有人argue如何废除恶法？和平发声，比如在合理的地点游行，发表社论，争取联合国人道主义援助等等。

接着用伊拉克战争的例子，老百姓通过民主选举选出奥巴马这个反战的参议员做总统，就是对恶法的一种抵制。