标题: issue178 legislation&law Vs human nature 越来越不象样子了,好象。 [打印本页] 作者: blooming_lee 时间: 2003-7-16 09:24:31 标题: issue: legislation&law Vs human nature 越来越不象样子了,好象。
It is possible to pass laws that control or place limits on people's behavior, but legislation cannot reform human nature. Law cannot change what is in people's hearts and minds.
==========
==========
There is not doubt that laws can control and place limits on people's behavior, while it is not obvious whether legislation could reform human nature or could change what is in people's hearts and minds. After deep research of the role that legislation, as well as that of the laws, plays in this democratic society, which is marked both with individual freedom and social unity, the intricate relation between people's nature and the restriction of people's nature could be appreciated as follows.
It is of great importance to notice the dynamic role that legislation plays on people. Legislation, which has been conceived as limitations generally wrongly, is the way that government expects the people to combine with. Admitted there are some limits put on people's behaviors, which are morally extreme behaviors threading the stability of the society, generally speaking, people feel free and save by abiding the laws. Legislation, to some extent, is the protector of individual freedom; this conception is widely accepted by most people in most nations in the world. As people are apt to do according to the rules, gradually there is going to be a behavior and moral standard; namely 'what should be done and what should not' or 'what's right and what's wrong'. Since the background defers, legislation in different nations defer from that of each other. Nevertheless once the standard was established, people are tending to take it with the expectation to be accepted by the fellows in the same circumstance. Thus in this sense, legislation owns the initiative forming people's nature, and consequently limits people's behavior without much fierce conflict.
But referring to the more elaborate issue on reforming, things become more complex. Normally, every kind of reforming takes place only in the situation that furious conflicts burst, such as rebuilding of the political system after revolution or alternation of power form one administration to another. In such cases, when the conflict is indispensable, legislation plays a tough role, which is enacted with forces apparently. To gain a transparent understanding of the consequence of forced legislation, by seeing form the historical standpoint, it is not hard to find out factual elements triggering the riots, and one is easy to conclude that forced legislation, which killed the spirits of liberty and democratism, is always the last and then most stupid choice of a desperate government. Oppositely, promising government knows how to take advantage of legislation, especially when the hidden goal is to reform. The tricky point is to let 'guiding' take place of 'reforming'. To be simple, most of the time reforming by legislation with enforcement meets with conflicts and ends up with failure; while guiding is to change people's nature by cultivating, which is more humanistic and more acceptable.
As said above, legislation could, if enacted in the correct way, affect or eventually reform the human nature; but it is not a universal dogma that the legislation and laws will settle every problem. Taking the Protestantism for example, when the American colonists first break away form Britain, the Constitution gives people the right to take whatever religion fits his/her belief. It is wise to separate legislation and religion since sometimes problems just could not be settled by legislation, especially when racial and cultural and religious differences involved. Thus in such circumstance, legislation should give away, respecting the basic human rights.
In conclusion, legislation and laws are of initiative and play a dynamic role in forming, as well as limiting, people's behavior. Further more, reforming of people's nature by legislation is virtually possible, as long as it is allowed for the procedure to take time and to be in a more harmonious pace. At last, when confliction between the government and the people could not be smoothed, legislation should have a loose control on certain dilemma or controversial issues, such as religion enforcement. All in all, legislation and laws are just tools to keep a union together and make it function efficiently. On some occasions they can be utilized to achieve certain goals such as changing people’s mind, while on others cannot. Thus using this tool efficiently requires analysis on each unique case. And only after deep study one can answer the question of what, and to what extant, legislation can do with people’s behaviors and human nature.
第三段,当谈到改革,事情更复杂了。这时法律扮演着暴力的角色,会扼杀自由,是愚蠢的,相反的,费解Oppositely, promising government knows how to take advantage of legislation, especially when the hidden goal is to reform. The tricky point is to let 'guiding' take place of 'reforming'. To be simple, most of the time reforming by legislation with enforcement meets with conflicts and ends up with failure; while guiding is to change people's nature by cultivating, which is more humanistic and more acceptable. 是不是说法律要起引导作用吧。
同意zhamia的看法
首段没提出自己的观点,只是说看下面的分析。
二段说法律的动态重要性。接下来先说说法律的作用,由于法律规定的渗透,人们会形成一些新的行为标准。接着说各个国家立法不同,people are tending to take it with the expectation to be accepted by the fellows in the same circumstance. 这句的fellows指的是什么根本没看出来。最后总结立法可以创造人的本性,因此可以限制人的行为。
三段说随着改革的推进,事情变得复杂了,下面说改革是在激烈的冲突中产生的,举了例子说明当冲突必不可少时,法律是强制性的,从历史角度看,旧政府压制暴动的强制性立法是错误的。相反,引导人们改革则是更好的办法。最后总结有强制性的法律来进行改革最终走向失败,而引导则是更人性化的方式。
There is not doubt that laws can control and place limits on people's behavior, while it is not obvious whether legislation could reform human nature or could change what is in people's hearts and minds. After deep research of the role that legislation, as well as that of the laws, plays in this democratic society, which is marked both with individual freedom and social unity, the intricate relation between people's nature and the restriction of people's nature could be appreciated as follows.
It is no doubt that laws can restrain and place (why use place? what do you want to say?) limitation on people's behavior, while it is remaining elusive that whether legislation could reform human nature or alter those established in hearts and minds. The role of legislation as well as the laws in this democratic society being marked with both individual freedom and social unity, the intricate relation between people's nature and the confinement of people's nature might be elucidated as following.
PS: the last sentence I did not understand. what do you want to say?
If you are not sure if the complicated sentence can express clearly what you wish to say, you can just use the simple sentence.
It is of great importance to notice the dynamic role that legislation plays on people. Legislation, which has been conceived as limitations generally wrongly, is the way that government expects the people to combine with. Admitted there are some limits put on people's behaviors, which are morally extreme behaviors threading the stability of the society, generally speaking, people feel free and save by abiding the laws. Legislation, to some extent, is the protector of individual freedom; this conception is widely accepted by most people in most nations in the world. As people are apt to do according to the rules, gradually there is going to be a behavior and moral standard; namely 'what should be done and what should not' or 'what's right and what's wrong'. Since the background defers, legislation in different nations defer from that of each other. Nevertheless once the standard was established, people are tending to take it with the expectation to be accepted by the fellows in the same circumstance. Thus in this sense, legislation owns the initiative forming people's nature, and consequently limits people's behavior without much fierce conflict.
It is of paramount importance to notice the dynamic role that legislation acts on people. Legislation, which probably has been inappropriately conceived as limitations, is the way that government expects people to combine with. (? I suspect this point!) People feel free and safe by abiding by the laws, notwithstanding some forced limitations do apply on people's behaviors which deadly threat the stability of our society. Legislation, to some extent, is the protector of individual freedom; this conception is widely accepted by most people in most nations in the world. As people are apt to do according to the rules, gradually there is going to be a behavior and moral standard; namely 'what should be done and what should not' or 'what is right and what is wrong'. Since the background defers, legislation displays diversities in every nation. Nevertheless once the standard is established, people are tending to take it with the expectation to be accepted by the fellows in the same circumstance. Thus from this perspective, legislation owns the initiative forming people's nature, and consequently limits people's behavior without much fierce conflict.作者: blooming_lee 时间: 2003-7-17 03:46:35