寄托天下
查看: 5022|回复: 31
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[备考小组] 秋季提纲互改小组-Issue65 [复制链接]

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
68
寄托币
166
注册时间
2013-12-4
精华
0
帖子
30
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2014-10-12 21:04:08 |只看该作者 |正序浏览
本帖最后由 hj1313 于 2014-10-28 23:17 编辑
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.
已有 1 人评分声望 收起 理由
tesolchina + 1 恶法非法?!

总评分: 声望 + 1   查看全部投币

回应
0

举报

Rank: 4

声望
101
寄托币
769
注册时间
2010-8-25
精华
0
帖子
186

2015 US-applicant

32
发表于 2015-1-12 22:33:37 |只看该作者
王老师好,今天我新写了以下大纲,还请老师评点,多谢啦!

TS (pt1, pt2, pt3): In modern society, we are facing a variety of laws, among which some are deemed just yet the others are deemed unjust by different groups of people. Some of us maintain that every member of the society is responsible for obeying the just laws and resisting the unjust ones. Although I agree that we should surely follow the fair laws, we need to change unfair ones rather than simply violate them. My opponents may argue that individual disobedience of the unjust laws is one of the ways to change them, whilst I reckon that such behavior, which draws the attention of the legislature via causing the social turmoil, is costly in democratic countries and cannot effectively solve the problem in an autocratic nation.

ts (pt1): To begin with, I cannot refute that every person in a society must follow the laws which are generally considered to be reasonable, otherwise the social order will crumble soon. 例如全世界各国都立法禁止杀人,这体现了对生命权的尊重,而几乎人人都认为这法律是公平的。如果人们对这种法律都肆意践踏的话,那么社会秩序必将崩溃。具体的例子,2011 Norway attacks, Anders Behring Breivik, 单枪匹马killed 77 people in two attacks,要是所有挪威人都像他那样,那么挪威早就血流成河了。

ts (pt2): However, faced with a unfair law, a person needs to do his/her best to change it instead of merely violating it. 认为法律不公而个人违法,是逞匹夫之勇的表现,只能给自己带来麻烦,不能推动社会的进步。反之,认为某项法律不公,广邀同道中人,同心协力一起改变法律,才是真英雄所为。比如当年,英国政府为北美殖民地制定了不公平的法律,像随意征税、解散代表会、干涉其对外贸易等。有些人对这些法律不满,自己抗税或是违法与外国人做交易,结果仅仅被英国政府罚款或是投入监牢。而有的人则团结起来,向英国政府多方请愿,均遭失败后,他们就聚在一起,讨论如何改变英国政府强加给北美人民的不公正法律。最后他们写出了The Declaration of Independence,痛斥英国政府恶法,而后组织军队将英国殖民政府的军队赶出北美,自己根据北美的实际情况制定了新的税法和贸易法等,彻底改变了不公正的法律,而他们则成了美国国父。

ts (p3): At the same time, some do not agree with me and point out that to resist a unfair law will automatically force the legislature to alter it. Conversely, I do not think we should confuse the attempt to modify a law and the behavior of only disobeying it.  那些反对我的人的逻辑是这样的,只要各自为战的个人们违反某项法律的次数够多了,引起了社会混乱,立法机构的人看见了,为了平息风波,就会自己改变法律。这也许在民主社会里有效,然而既然是在民主社会里,又何必通过制造混乱来引起政府高层注意,直接选举表示会修改某项法律的官员上台,或是到立法机构游说、请愿、示威,都能达到目的。对于专制政府,个人违法肯定是不能自动改变法律的。比如在苏联,斯大林想要在三十年代初将乌克兰的私人农场集体化,就先将可作为民众领袖的乌克兰知识分子全部逮捕,然后杀掉或是送到西伯利亚,然后颁布了集体化法律。当时乌克兰私人农场很兴旺,很多人反对集体化,但由于缺乏领导,结果只有以个人为单位违法,被苏联当局各个击破,在人造的Ukraine Famine中被整死、饿死了千万有余。

举报

Rank: 4

声望
101
寄托币
690
注册时间
2014-10-30
精华
0
帖子
178
31
发表于 2015-1-4 22:48:44 |只看该作者
本帖最后由 tesolchina 于 2015-1-5 09:01 编辑

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.

TS:
Laws are sets of rules which are made to maintain the justice and stability of a society . Although there may be different opinions on a specific law, obeying laws is a baseline of behaviors in a democratic society, in which the laws are made and modified by all of its people (through an elected legislature). Disobeying unjust laws don't help to fix the root cause of the generation of unjust laws, and will jeopardize the stability of the society.

5完全同意-4同意-3-中立-2-不同意-1-完全不同意
主旨句提出有层次的观点。 4
主旨句充分回应题目。 3 (没有回应个人和责任这两个概念)
主旨句提到可能的挑战。1


ts1:
In modern democratic societies, the laws are made and approved by the people. Being a member in such a society, one has the basic responsibility to obey the laws which have been enacted.
从公民责任的角度来论述在一个民主社会当中,法律的制定相当于公民之间的契约,本着契约精神,公民应当有遵守法律的基本义务。



5完全同意-4同意-3-中立-2-不同意-1-完全不同意
主题句明确支持主旨句的分论点。5
中间段提出合适的例子支持分论点。1
中间段清晰论述提出的例子如何支持分论点。1



ts2:
Some people may argue that they don't have enough impact to change the unjust laws, so they can only disobey the law instead. The root cause lies in the society system rather than the law itself.
很多人认为他们没有能力改变法律,因此只能靠违反法律表达不满。但是根本原因是社会制度本身。抵制一条不公正的法律不能防止其他不公正的法律的继续产生。

5完全同意-4同意-3-中立-2-不同意-1-完全不同意
主题句明确支持主旨句的分论点。2
中间段提出合适的例子支持分论点。1
中间段清晰论述提出的例子如何支持分论点。1


ts3:
It is common that people have different opinions on whether a law is just or not, however, to express the discontent by simply disobeying the law may weaken the stability of a society.
从不遵守法律所可能带来的社会混乱论述。例如每个人对税法的理解都不相同,很多人觉得税收过高,但是如果这些人都不纳税的话,整个政府和社会的正常运转都将受到影响。又或者有些人觉得杀人不偿命不合理,受害人的家属都去复仇,也会引起社会混乱。

5完全同意-4同意-3-中立-2-不同意-1-完全不同意
主题句明确支持主旨句的分论点。4
中间段提出合适的例子支持分论点。4
中间段清晰论述提出的例子如何支持分论点。4

整体思路
各分论点不矛盾。4
各分论点组成一个整合的观点。2
各分论点的顺序安排合理。2  (挑战应放在最后讨论)


初步尝试用标准化的形式提出反馈 请提出意见

举报

Rank: 8Rank: 8

声望
912
寄托币
6214
注册时间
2006-2-26
精华
4
帖子
2367

寄托兑换店纪念章 US-applicant 19周年勋章

30
发表于 2014-11-3 21:39:18 |只看该作者
ClaretZ 发表于 2014-11-2 21:10
上面同学的提纲是将题目分为obey just laws 和 disobey and resist unjust laws分为两个部分来分别探讨赞同 ...



issue 65
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.



上面同学的提纲是将题目分为obey just laws 和 disobey and resist unjust laws分为两个部分来分别探讨赞同或者不赞同的,这样的考虑比较周到而且比较易于分别说明。
我看到这个题目时,将Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws作为整体进行了讨论,因此立场就是不赞成。而我对Every individual in a society has a responsibility to disobey and resist unjust laws的理解则是个人没有组织性地对不公正的法律进行不服从和反抗,因此容易造成社会不安定。
看了上面同学的提纲,我觉得我的讨论比较片面,讨论深度太浅,理解有偏误,因此会再修改。


现在先把初稿陈列如下:
I do not agree with the claim because it is hard to judge whether the laws are just or not and disobeying or resisting so-called unjust laws will lead the society into chaos.
First and foremost, it is difficult to judge the just and unjust law. 每个人对法律的评判标准不同,因此对同一个法律的看法也不同。例如对税收的法律,采取分级收税的法律对不同收入的人采取的税收方式不同,最终却实现了相对 公平,即采取不公平的方式,达到了公平的效果。而对此法律有人认为公平,有人认为不公平,难以界定。

judge the just and unjust law这个表达有问题 你自己考虑一下怎么改

What is more, disobeying or resisting so-called unjust laws will lead the society into chaos.个人不遵守带来执法困难,导致社会秩序混乱。不遵守和反对不公平法律的方式如果不当容易造成暴乱,甚至推翻政权,造成社会的不稳定。(没有想 到好的例子)


未必会造成暴乱那么严重 但是肯定会产生混乱 造成冲突 导致社会不安 经济受损 等等  

Some people may argue that unjust laws will harm the society so that every individual has the responsibility to disobey and resist them. I, however, insist that people should not disobey or resist the unjust laws while they can suggest the government how to better the legislation, because the improper way of resisting the laws could be more harmful than the unjust laws themselves.

这个点可以讨论民众如何通过民主改选立法者来改变不正义的法律  

总的来说你的主旨句和分论点都不错
就是在细节支撑上要注意

举报

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
77
寄托币
321
注册时间
2014-10-8
精华
0
帖子
123
29
发表于 2014-11-2 21:10:11 |只看该作者
上面同学的提纲是将题目分为obey just laws 和 disobey and resist unjust laws分为两个部分来分别探讨赞同或者不赞同的,这样的考虑比较周到而且比较易于分别说明。
我看到这个题目时,将Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws作为整体进行了讨论,因此立场就是不赞成。而我对Every individual in a society has a responsibility to disobey and resist unjust laws的理解则是个人没有组织性地对不公正的法律进行不服从和反抗,因此容易造成社会不安定。
看了上面同学的提纲,我觉得我的讨论比较片面,讨论深度太浅,理解有偏误,因此会再修改。
现在先把初稿陈列如下:
I do not agree with the claim because it is hard to judge whether the laws are just or not and disobeying or resisting so-called unjust laws will lead the society into chaos.
First and foremost, it is difficult to judge the just and unjust law. 每个人对法律的评判标准不同,因此对同一个法律的看法也不同。例如对税收的法律,采取分级收税的法律对不同收入的人采取的税收方式不同,最终却实现了相对公平,即采取不公平的方式,达到了公平的效果。而对此法律有人认为公平,有人认为不公平,难以界定。
What is more, disobeying or resisting so-called unjust laws will lead the society into chaos.个人不遵守带来执法困难,导致社会秩序混乱。不遵守和反对不公平法律的方式如果不当容易造成暴乱,甚至推翻政权,造成社会的不稳定。(没有想到好的例子)
Some people may argue that unjust laws will harm the society so that every individual has the responsibility to disobey and resist them. I, however, insist that people should not disobey or resist the unjust laws while they can suggest the government how to better the legislation, because the improper way of resisting the laws could be more harmful than the unjust laws themselves.

举报

Rank: 8Rank: 8

声望
912
寄托币
6214
注册时间
2006-2-26
精华
4
帖子
2367

寄托兑换店纪念章 US-applicant 19周年勋章

28
发表于 2014-10-29 20:56:58 |只看该作者
raikkonen36 发表于 2014-10-29 17:41
People have long expressed much concern on the issue of people’s attitude toward just and unjust la ...

People have long expressed much concern on the issue of people’s attitude toward just and unjust laws. However, a widely recognized consensus on the issue has not yet established, with one voice indicating that every individual should obey just laws and disobey unjust laws. In my view, every individual should obey just laws. Moreover, even if facing unjust laws, every individual should observe those laws. Nonetheless, people can attempt to make a difference in unjust laws within the legal framework of legislation.

这个主旨句终于比较像样了 :lol

Everyone should obey just laws, which lies in the prominent role of just laws in maintaining social stability.  (不明白你为什么要用which lie in 你可以说 because just laws play .. role ... ) (by) Regulating people’s behavior, just laws can provide an environment where people can interact with others in a peaceful and esteemed way and thus facilitate social stability. If people are all blind to just laws, the following scenes would emerge. People can kill others with no punishment; government officers who appropriate a great amount of money still stay in their offices; people who provide the information concerning national security for terrorists are not thrown in jail. Should this situation continue, our society would be in mess. As a result, people should all take obeying just laws on their top agenda, in order to maintain social stability.

你这段里面还是没有指出某个具体法律是良法 然后解释遵守这个法律的必要性


Moreover, everyone still needs to obey unjust laws, which can be attributed to 这个表达用在这里不合适 the significance of defending the authority of laws and as such, maintaining social stability. For instance, in 2003, the US congress passed the bill concerning the US invasion of the Iraq. While the possibility of the invalidity of the bill existed at that time(不明白这个分句的意思), the US force still observed laws and went to the front line, and the US people still did their parts to support the Iraq war, such as paying a higher tax. The bill lasted a few years and was addressed latterly (?) by the senator Obama. The story suggests that even if 后面要跟从句facing the laws with flaws, namely the unjust laws, people still need to comply with such laws. Only with the attitude toward laws, the authority of laws can be defended and thus social stability can be maintained.

你需要更明确的指出为什么侵略伊拉克的法案是恶法  


Nonetheless, people can attempt to make a difference in unjust laws within the legal framework of legislation. Take violating basic human rights as an example. Until 1920, unlike their male counterparts, women in the US did not have a right to vote, which is obviously unfair. After realizing the inequality of women (inequality between men and women) in voting, Susan B. Anthony, an activist for women’s suffrage, launched a campaign to educate Americans about the women’s right to vote and successfully pushed for legislation that granted  women the rights (to vote). The story suggests that people can make a change in unjust laws via influencing the lawmakers, namely within the legal framework of legislation, which not only defends the authority of laws and maintains social stability, but also (promotes the justice within the legislative system) makes legislation system tend to be more just.

由这篇文章可见,你已经掌握了1+3的模型,实现了在段落层面的coherence,相信这样的文章已经达到4分的水平。但是,在句子层面上的表达问题仍然有可能拉低分数。另外,在段落内要确保例子回应分论点。


In sum, considering the significance of just laws in maintaining social stability, people should obey just laws. Moreover, people should still need to comply with unjust laws, based on defending the authority of laws. Nonetheless, people can attempt to make a difference in unjust laws within the legal framework of legislation, which not only defends the authority of laws, but also makes legislation system tend to more just.

举报

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
41
寄托币
569
注册时间
2010-8-4
精华
0
帖子
80
27
发表于 2014-10-29 17:41:42 |只看该作者
本帖最后由 raikkonen36 于 2014-10-29 19:00 编辑

People have long expressed much concern on the issue of people’s attitude toward just and unjust laws. However, a widely recognized consensus on the issue has not yet established, with one voice indicating that every individual should obey just laws and disobey unjust laws. In my view, every individual should obey just laws. Moreover, even if facing unjust laws, every individual should observe those laws. Nonetheless, people can attempt to make a difference in unjust laws within the legal framework of legislation.

Everyone should obey just laws, which lies in the prominent role of just laws in maintaining social stability. Regulating people’s behavior, just laws can provide an environment where people can interact with others in a peaceful and esteemed way and thus facilitate social stability. If people are all blind to just laws, the following scenes would emerge. People can kill others with no punishment; government officers who appropriate a great amount of money still stay in their offices; people who provide the information concerning national security for terrorists are not thrown in jail. Should this situation continue, our society would be in mess. As a result, people should all take obeying just laws on their top agenda, in order to maintain social stability.

Moreover, everyone still needs to obey unjust laws, which can be attributed to the significance of defending the authority of laws and as such, maintaining social stability. For instance, in 2003, the US congress passed the bill concerning the US invasion of the Iraq. While the possibility of the invalidity of the bill existed at that time, the US force still observed laws and went to the front line, and the US people still did their parts to support the Iraq war, such as paying a higher tax. The bill lasted a few years and was addressed latterly by the senator Obama. The story suggests that even if facing the laws with flaws, namely the unjust laws, people still need to comply with such laws. Only with the attitude toward laws, the authority of laws can be defended and thus social stability can be maintained.

Nonetheless, people can attempt to make a difference in unjust laws within the legal framework of legislation. Take violating basic human rights as an example. Until 1920, unlike their male counterparts, women in the US did not have a right to vote, which is obviously unfair. After realizing the inequality of women in voting, Susan B. Anthony, an activist for women’s suffrage, launched a campaign to educate Americans about the women’s right to vote and successfully pushed for legislation that granted women the rights. The story suggests that people can make a change in unjust laws via influencing the lawmakers, namely within the legal framework of legislation, which not only defends the authority of laws and maintains social stability, but also makes legislation system tend to be more just.

In sum, considering the significance of just laws in maintaining social stability, people should obey just laws. Moreover, people should still need to comply with unjust laws, based on defending the authority of laws. Nonetheless, people can attempt to make a difference in unjust laws within the legal framework of legislation, which not only defends the authority of laws, but also makes legislation system tend to more just.

举报

Rank: 4

声望
44
寄托币
990
注册时间
2009-8-6
精华
0
帖子
214

US-applicant

26
发表于 2014-10-29 13:55:40 |只看该作者
tesolchina 发表于 2014-10-29 13:29
整体感觉不错 这里指出两个小问题 如果能注意会对语言表达有很大的帮助

It is a good concern

多谢王老师,COCA语料库早上刚刚注册,还在摸索怎么用,希望通过多读多写能更靠近地道的表达

那个内容具体清晰这点之前读The elements of style的时候也经常看到作者提到,在练的时候容易不注意,也希望能通过多练形成习惯下意识留意到

刚刚写了一篇ARGU2的题纲,顺便求王老师有时间的时候批改^^

举报

Rank: 8Rank: 8

声望
912
寄托币
6214
注册时间
2006-2-26
精华
4
帖子
2367

寄托兑换店纪念章 US-applicant 19周年勋章

25
发表于 2014-10-29 13:29:11 |只看该作者
整体感觉不错 这里指出两个小问题 如果能注意会对语言表达有很大的帮助

It is a good concern
valid concern是可以的 但是good concern却不行为什么 这就是搭配 搭配是约定成俗的 真正会用一个词不仅要知道意思 还有知道这个词通常和什么词在一起用  
推荐你查搭配词典
http://www.ozdic.com/collocation-dictionary/concern 但是词典里也没有 valid
所以还是要用语料库
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mo ... age=5#pid1778938577

除了valid, legitimate也可以和concern 搭配 在COCA语料库里可以查到


simply because he or she wants to lower the cost
这里差了点补充信息
cost是指什么的cost呢
比如 cost of operation
labor cost
加上一些限定词可以让文章更清晰 内容更丰富  

举报

Rank: 4

声望
44
寄托币
990
注册时间
2009-8-6
精华
0
帖子
214

US-applicant

24
发表于 2014-10-29 00:54:30 |只看该作者
tesolchina 发表于 2014-10-27 23:13
全文

I partly agree  不建议用partly agree这种模糊的表达  with the speaker’s claim about reac ...


多谢王老师指正

1.之前对justify的意思理解有偏差,想当然把它当成是判断的意思了,指出之后才发现,感谢!
2.我现在阐述这块比较难做到详略得当,试着模仿一下王老师的结构和写法。
3.语法问题要更仔细些


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.


全文修改版

The speaker claims about how to deal with just laws and unjust laws.I agree with this assertion insofar as every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws. However, I disagree with the speaker's claim that every individual should disabey and resist unjust laws.When laws are unjust, individuals should try to change it instead of disobeying and resisting it. And to judge whether a law is just, one should not consider his own interest but majority's interests through veil of ignorance.

To begin with, if laws get wide recognition from specialists and the public, every person has a responsibility to obey those laws, because they bring order, the key to make whole society stable and advanced, which may benefit both individuals and the society. Without constraint of traffic laws, people will struggle in traffic chaoes and waste time on the road, while with guidance of traffic laws, anyone who run a red light will be punished. With the traffic flow is in order, people could could be more efficient in time management, sparing more time for working and studying. As a result, the society will be advanced in economy and science.

1 However, when a law is considered unjust, for example, violating basic human rights, individuals should try to change it through legislation rather than disobeying it. 2 For example, until 1920, unlike their male counterparts, women in the US did not have to right to vote, which was obviously unfair.  3 Susan B. Anthony, an activist for women’s suffrage, first chose to disobey the law and cast her vote in her hometown. 4 She was arrested but made little difference in changing the laws.  5 Later on she launched a campaign to educate Americans about the women’s right to vote and successfully pushed for legislation that granted women the rights. 6 This story suggested that to change unjust laws individuals should first obey the law and then try to change it through influencing the lawmakers.  

(模仿老师的写法尽量换种表达把这段修改了一遍,希望表达没问题,rather than学到,自己想的时候思路只到change这一层,没有再往下具体到通过立法,再次学到
However, when laws are unjust, especially when laws violate basic human rights, individuals should try to change through legislation rather than disobeying it. For exmaple,until 1920,only men were empowered by laws the right to vote in United States, which was unfair for women.Susan B. Anthony,a feminist,broke the law to vote in her hometown in 1872 but failed to change inequity in voting. Then she launched a campaign to get support from the public for women's rights in voting and make the authority to compromise to revise laws. Anthony's story indicates that instead of fruitlessly disabeying unjust laws, we should try to change it through influencing the lawmakers)

1 Some people may argue that individuals can always claim a law is just or unjust based on their own interests and resisting laws can become rather arbitrary.2  I think this is a valid concern. 3 One solution to this problem is to use the concept “veil of ignorance” proposed by John Rawls.4 In other words, to judge whether a law is just or not, individuals should not take their own particular positions in the society. 5 For example, an individual citizen should not resist the law of increasing income tax simply because he or she is making a lot of money subject to the taxation.6 Instead, individuals should look at a law from the original position where nobody knows which positions s/he will take in society. 7  For example, one should decide whether income tax law is just or not as if s/he does not know about his/her monthly income.   

(自己写的时候合instruction这点确实没有时时去注意到,还有像老师这样点到具体的例子也要学之,也是试着修改一下加深理解
Some people may call in question about the criteria to judge whether a law is just. It is a good concern, otherwise violating laws can become rather arbitrary. One solution to this problem is to judge through "veil of ignorance", which is proposed by John Raws. John Raws suggests that individuals should not take their own particular positions in the society when judge whether a law is just or not. For exmaple, a employer should not resist minimum wage law simply because he or she wants to lower the cost. Instead, individuals should judge a law from the original state where nobody knows which role s/he will play in society. For example, one should decide whether minimum wage law is just or not as if every has equal chance to be employee.)

In sum, for just laws, we should obey and support them; for unjust laws, we should try to modify it instead of simply breaking it. The criteria to justify a law should not be biased with sex, race, nationality or individual tastes. And to establish a just society, government should play important role in establishing legal mechanism to collect people’s opinion about current laws and constantly improving legal system.
已有 1 人评分声望 收起 理由
tesolchina + 1 不错 楼下有回复

总评分: 声望 + 1   查看全部投币

一个慢慢滚向PHD的橙子

举报

Rank: 8Rank: 8

声望
912
寄托币
6214
注册时间
2006-2-26
精华
4
帖子
2367

寄托兑换店纪念章 US-applicant 19周年勋章

23
发表于 2014-10-28 10:53:39 |只看该作者
raikkonen36 发表于 2014-10-27 11:32
Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjus ...

我觉得你基本上是在写全文
建议你先只写四句话的英文 然后简略用汉语解释如何展开  下面有我的一些具体意见

Issue 65

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.

Every individual should obey just laws. Moreover, some people, especially the elites from different divisions in a society, can attempt to challenge unjust laws. Nonetheless, if every individual all questions unjust laws, it would cause some problems.

第一段:说明都要遵守公平的法律。Every individual should obey just laws in order to maintain social stability, which is the precondition of economic development. Nowadays, our society has set up a relatively comprehensive legislation system, based on the experience of the past years and the devotion of great minds in the history of law up to now. Regulating people’s behavior, just laws can provide an environment where people can get along with others in a peaceful and esteemed way and thus facilitate social stability. 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. 说了维持遵守法律的重要性,维持社会稳定。法律可以通过约束人的行为来维持社会稳定。

中间段的论述需要有一定的章法 不能太随意
如果你要论述遵守正义法律的必要性 可以先在抽象的层面上讲 为什么要遵守正义的法律 比如社会稳定和经济发展的需要 等等
然后你要具体讨论某一项正义的法律 注意只讨论一项 并根据你前面讲的一般性规律来解释为什么遵守这项法律是必要的 以及 不遵守会导致怎样的不良后果  讲完之后 如果觉得不够可以再讲一个例子 最后重复一下一般性的原则   



第二段:说明部分人可以尝试去质疑那些不公平的法律Moreover, some people, especially the elites from different divisions in a society, can attempt to challenge unjust laws. That is because those unjust laws always limit into a specific time不懂. It is such limitations that should 限制如何鼓励?encourage people who have insightful view on laws to challenge those unjust laws. For instance, 当林肯总统看到在奴隶制下,奴隶的悲惨遭遇震惊时,他决定将尽全力废除奴隶制,他指出了奴隶制的不公平和废除奴隶制的种种好处,但是遇到巨大障碍,最后在 他不懈努力下,最终废除了奴隶制,推动了美国经济的发展。

奴隶制及废奴运动导致南北战争 这个例子如何支持你所讲的精英应该挑战恶法?


第三段:说明如果所有都去质疑的话,会造成一些问题Nonetheless, if every individual all questions unjust laws, it would cause some problems. The people who have insightful view on laws always account for a relatively small share in a society, meaning that the majority always do not understand why those unjust laws are unjust. Therefore, if such people all question unjust laws, some problems would emerge. 首先,他们可能会觉得所有的法律都是unjust,这样的话就连那些just laws 可能也不会遵守,这样对维持社会稳定不利。第二,他们可能会被某些政客,利益集团,利用,煽动他们达到某些目的,同样会对社会造成不利影响。

这一段没有具体例子 如何支持你的观点 而且这种只有精英才能挑战法律的观点 和西方全民参与的民主自由理念大相径庭 要让人信服估计很困难

第一个分论点 要遵守良法 没问题
建议第二个分论点先讲 即使恶法也要遵守 否则会带来冲突 冲击法治和法律尊严
第三 可以通过合法的手段来尝试改变恶法 比如和平的游行示威 写信给议员 等等

例子方面 比较棘手 尽量不要写太复杂 了解不多的法律如废奴问题
目前我觉得比较合适的例子 包括版权法、税法、国会授权的军事行动


举报

Rank: 8Rank: 8

声望
912
寄托币
6214
注册时间
2006-2-26
精华
4
帖子
2367

寄托兑换店纪念章 US-applicant 19周年勋章

22
发表于 2014-10-27 23:13:25 |只看该作者
lisa_C 发表于 2014-10-27 14:54
(试写了一下全文,不过感觉考场上这么多字应该写不出来,一限时就退回原形>_


全文

I partly agree  不建议用partly agree这种模糊的表达  with the speaker’s claim about reaction 选词  (how to deal with) just laws and unjust laws. Obviously, individuals should obey just laws. But when laws are unjust, individuals should try to change it instead of disobeying it. And to justify a law (to judge whether a law is just) , one should not consider his own interest but majority's interests.

To begin with, if laws get wide recognition from specialists and the public, every person has a responsibility to obey those laws, because they bring order, the key to make whole society stable and advanced, which may benefit both individuals and the society. Without constraint of human right laws, the emperor皇帝从哪里来的 can make arbitrary decision about who will live and who will die; while with protection of laws, people don't need to worry that they will be killed by no reason. People's safety is guaranteed by laws and police department, anyone who damage others will be punished. Thus people can concentrate better on working and studying. As a result, people's living level will be improved and the whole society is advanced in economy.

你能不能具体说一种毫无争议的正义的法律
建议不要写人权法这种抽象而又艰深的法律 写一下不要冲红灯不要醉酒驾驶 不要偷盗这类最简单的正义法律不好么  


However, when laws are unjust, especially when laws violate basic human rights, individuals should try to change what is unjust instead of simply disobeying it. Admittedly, unjust laws will bring misfortune and disorder, and people should resist it. While disobeying laws is just one way to show dissatisfaction about unjust laws, generally an unwise way,表达  举例之前要尽量精简  Susan B. Anthony's story tells us that essentially the most important thing is to change it指代什么 . Until 1920, American woman have 时态 no right to vote according to laws. In 1872, Anthony went against the law and voted in her hometown. With no doubt, she was arrested directly. If she just simply disobeyed the law, it would be the end of the story and other than punishment 这也不是改变on her, nothing would be changed. 你这里想说违法并不能改变什么,要想改变必须通过影响立法者  Nonetheless, Anthony took further action -- She lectured and canvassed across the nation for woman's right to vote, and finally in her effort这里对立法的影响要多写一点 , America passed laws to give woman voting right in 1920. Disobeying is just individual behavior and it has few impact on whole legal system, the authority will not compromise to change. To launch a campaign is one way to get more support from the public and to end unjust laws.


我试下重写你这一段 尽量简单

1 However, when a law is considered unjust, for example, violating basic human rights, individuals should try to change it through legislation rather than disobeying it. 2 For example, until 1920, unlike their male counterparts, women in the US did not have to right to vote, which was obviously unfair.  3 Susan B. Anthony, an activist for women’s suffrage, first chose to disobey the law and cast her vote in her hometown. 4 She was arrested but made little difference in changing the laws.  5 Later on she launched a campaign to educate Americans about the women’s right to vote and successfully pushed for legislation that granted women the rights. 6 This story suggested that to change unjust laws individuals should first obey the law and then try to change it through influencing the lawmakers.  

1 提出分论点
2 简单介绍例子的背景
3 具体讲这个人违法
4 违法的后果及无用
5 改变策略 影响立法
6 总结 由例子提炼分论点

Finally, no matter whether the law is just or unjust, individuals should dare to question it and improve it, but the criteria used to justify a law 你这个地方概念有点问题 不是要justify law  也不是像你说的无论正义与否都要质疑和改善 这一段的重点应该是如何判断法律是否正义  
could not be based on individuals' interests. People have their own interests. And if individuals just consider their own interests when they justify a law, there's no hope to establish a just society. Interest groups, especially those who have most influence on settings of laws, can do their best to gain social resources and privileges. Lower class people would be treated unjustly, facing miserable and hopeless life. What's more, if anyone can disobey the law when he consider the law as unjust law based on his own judgment, laws may lose power to direct people's behavior and keep the whole society in order. Different people have different demands, so it is difficult to reach consensus unless people eliminate all of personal biases and prejudices in this process. So people should judge a law through veil of ignorance, a way of thinking claimed in John Rawls’s book, a theory of justice. The criteria to justify laws should not biased according to sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes. Behind such a veil of ignorance all individuals are born equal, people are rational, free, and morally equal beings.

还是太长了 一段话 6句已经到顶了  
注意这一段要回应题目的要求 anticipate challenge

1 Some people may argue that individuals can always claim a law is just or unjust based on their own interests and resisting laws can become rather arbitrary.2  I think this is a valid concern. 3 One solution to this problem is to use the concept “veil of ignorance” proposed by John Rawls.4 In other words, to judge whether a law is just or not, individuals should not take their own particular positions in the society. 5 For example, an individual citizen should not resist the law of increasing income tax simply because he or she is making a lot of money subject to the taxation.6 Instead, individuals should look at a law from the original position where nobody knows which positions s/he will take in society. 7  For example, one should decide whether income tax law is just or not as if s/he does not know about his/her monthly income.   

举报

Rank: 4

声望
44
寄托币
990
注册时间
2009-8-6
精华
0
帖子
214

US-applicant

21
发表于 2014-10-27 14:54:16 |只看该作者
本帖最后由 lisa_C 于 2014-10-27 15:01 编辑
tesolchina 发表于 2014-10-27 08:12
这篇可以考虑写全文了


(试写了一下全文,不过感觉考场上这么多字应该写不出来,一限时就退回原形>_<,这个是不限时写的,veil of ignorance用到了倒数第二段)

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.

全文

I partly agree with the speaker’s claim about reaction to just laws and unjust laws. Obviously, individuals should obey just laws. But when laws are unjust, individuals should try to change it instead of disobeying it. And to justify a law, one should not consider his own interest but majority's interests.

To begin with, if laws get wide recognition from specialists and the public, every person has a responsibility to obey those laws, because they bring order, the key to make whole society stable and advanced, which may benefit both individuals and the society. Without constraint of human right laws, the emperor can make arbitrary decision about who will live and who will die; while with protection of laws, people don't need to worry that they will be killed by no reason. People's safety is guaranteed by laws and police department, anyone who damage others will be punished. Thus people can concentrate better on working and studying. As a result, people's living level will be improved and the whole society is advanced in economy.

However, when laws are unjust, especially when laws violate basic human rights, individuals should try to change what is unjust instead of simply disobeying it. Admittedly, unjust laws will bring misfortune and disorder, and people should resist it. While disobeying laws is just one way to show dissatisfaction about unjust laws, generally an unwise way, Susan B. Anthony's story tells us that essentially the most important thing is to change it. Until 1920, American woman have no right to vote according to laws. In 1872, Anthony went against the law and voted in her hometown. With no doubt, she was arrested directly. If she just simply disobeyed the law, it would be the end of the story and other than punishment on her, nothing would be changed. Nonetheless, Anthony took further action -- She lectured and canvassed across the nation for woman's right to vote, and finally in her effort, America passed laws to give woman voting right in 1920. Disobeying is just individual behavior and it has few impact on whole legal system, the authority will not compromise to change. To launch a campaign is one way to get more support from the public and to end unjust laws.

Finally, no matter whether the law is just or unjust, individuals should dare to question it and improve it, but the criteria used to justify a law could not be based on individuals' interests. People have their own interests. And if individuals just consider their own interests when they justify a law, there's no hope to establish a just society. Interest groups, especially those who have most influence on settings of laws, can do their best to gain social resources and privileges. Lower class people would be treated unjustly, facing miserable and hopeless life. What's more, if anyone can disobey the law when he consider the law as unjust law based on his own judgment, laws may lose power to direct people's behavior and keep the whole society in order. Different people have different demands, so it is difficult to reach consensus unless people eliminate all of personal biases and prejudices in this process. So people should judge a law through veil of ignorance, a way of thinking claimed in John Rawls’s book, a theory of justice. The criteria to justify laws should not biased according to sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes. Behind such a veil of ignorance all individuals are born equal, people are rational, free, and morally equal beings.

In sum, for just laws, we should obey and support them; for unjust laws, we should try to modify it instead of simply breaking it. The criteria to justify a law should not be biased with sex, race, nationality or individual tastes. And to establish a just society, government should play important role in establishing legal mechanism to collect people’s opinion about current laws and constantly improving legal system.

错字
Unfortune-misfortune
Disabeying- disobeying
Lauch-launch
Previledge - privilege
Judgement- judgment

举报

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
41
寄托币
569
注册时间
2010-8-4
精华
0
帖子
80
20
发表于 2014-10-27 11:32:48 |只看该作者
本帖最后由 raikkonen36 于 2014-10-27 11:42 编辑

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.


Every individual should obey just laws. Moreover, some people, especially the elites from different divisions in a society, can attempt to challenge unjust laws. Nonetheless, if every individual all questions unjust laws, it would cause some problems.


第一段:说明都要遵守公平的法律。Every individual should obey just laws in order to maintain social stability, which is the precondition of economic development. Nowadays, our society has set up a relatively comprehensive legislation system, based on the experience of the past years and the devotion of great minds in the history of law up to now. Regulating people’s behavior, just laws can provide an environment where people can get along with others in a peaceful and esteemed way and thus facilitate social stability. 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. 说了维持遵守法律的重要性,维持社会稳定。法律可以通过约束人的行为来维持社会稳定。

第二段:说明部分人可以尝试去质疑那些不公平的法律Moreover, some people, especially the elites from different divisions in a society, can attempt to challenge unjust laws. That is because those unjust laws always limit into a specific time. It is such limitations that should encourage people who have insightful view on laws to challenge those unjust laws. For instance, 当林肯总统看到在奴隶制下,奴隶的悲惨遭遇震惊时,他决定将尽全力废除奴隶制,他指出了奴隶制的不公平和废除奴隶制的种种好处,但是遇到巨大障碍,最后在他不懈努力下,最终废除了奴隶制,推动了美国经济的发展。


第三段:说明如果所有都去质疑的话,会造成一些问题Nonetheless, if every individual all questions unjust laws, it would cause some problems. The people who have insightful view on laws always account for a relatively small share in a society, meaning that the majority always do not understand why those unjust laws are unjust. Therefore, if such people all question unjust laws, some problems would emerge. 首先,他们可能会觉得所有的法律都是unjust,这样的话就连那些just laws 可能也不会遵守,这样对维持社会稳定不利。第二,他们可能会被某些政客,利益集团,利用,煽动他们达到某些目的,同样会对社会造成不利影响。

举报

Rank: 8Rank: 8

声望
912
寄托币
6214
注册时间
2006-2-26
精华
4
帖子
2367

寄托兑换店纪念章 US-applicant 19周年勋章

19
发表于 2014-10-27 08:12:38 |只看该作者
lisa_C 发表于 2014-10-23 00:17
Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjus ...

这篇可以考虑写全文了

举报

RE: 秋季提纲互改小组-Issue65 [修改]
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

问答
Offer
投票
面经
最新
精华
转发
转发该帖子
秋季提纲互改小组-Issue65
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1778363-1-1.html
复制链接
发送
报offer 祈福 爆照
进群抱团
25fall申请群
微信扫码
小程序
寄托留学租房小程序
微信扫码
寄托Offer榜
微信扫码
公众号
寄托天下
微信扫码
服务号
寄托天下服务号
微信扫码
申请遇疑问可联系
寄托院校君
发帖
提问
报Offer
写总结
写面经
发起
投票
回顶部