"The concept of 'individual responsibility' is a necessary fiction. Although societies must hold
individuals accountable for their own actions, people's behavior is largely determined by forces
not of their own making."
分析题目：个人职责的概念，是必要的fiction 我个人理解fiction作用比较大，应当是关键词之一。然后说：尽管社会认为个人对行为负责，但实际上并非如此，而是被非个人本身的力量所决定。实则后面一句是默认前提，而第一句则是论断，分析到这儿，就发现necessary比较重要了。那么我们选择立意就有几条路了：1。承认fiction，分析是否necessary 2。考虑前提的正确性，也就是质疑fiction的正确性，那么就可以分析是外力还是个力决定了人们的行为，还是两者都有，那么孰重孰轻？这时看到题目中的largely就有用了，又一个key word。
I fundamentally agree with the speaker's first contention 作者明显的分开来论证, for unless we embrace the concept of "individual responsibility" our notions of moral accountability and human equality, both crucial to the survival of any democratic society, will whither同意部分赞同了该概念的必要性 但并未提及fiction概念. However, I strongly disagree with the second contention--that our individual actions are determined largely by external forces. Although this claim is not entirely without support很漂亮的双重否定, 简要的提了反对的理由it runs contrary to common sense and everyday human experience.开篇很漂亮。同意什么不同意什么 立场鲜明，破题也很到位，尽管绕过了fiction的讨论，但作为一篇awa作文已经可以了。关联词简单但很舒服。由此推测：将分两个大的部分来写~~分别是支持部分和反对部分，反对部分的理由，应该围绕sense and everyday human experience，至少是有关。这样才符合文章的结构缜密性
The primary reason开门见山，但因为很多人用这种方式起body段，效果并不好。可以尝试变换句型和说法 that individual responsibility is a necessary fiction is that a society where individuals are not held accountable for their actions and choices is a lawless one, devoid of any order whatsoever. body中的让步结构，写了精神病换的特例，其实用特例做例子是不太恰当的，因为特例大多用于驳论，而作立论，样本不够大Admittedly, under some circumstances a society of laws should carve out exceptions to the rule of individual responsibility--for example, for the hopeless psychotic who has no control over his or her thoughts or actions. 让步后的转折Yet to extend forgiveness much further would be to endanger the social order upon which any civil and democratic society depends. A correlative argument for individual responsibility involves the fact that lawless, or anarchist, states give way to despotic rule by strong individuals who seize power. History informs us that monarchs and dictators often justify their authority by claiming that they are preordained to assume it--and that as a result they are not morally responsible for their oppressive actions. Thus, any person abhorring despotism must embrace the concept of individual responsibility用专制和强权来反证：没有这个概念是不可以接受的 并且，从开始作者就界定了individual responsibility在道德范围内——这是“大事化小的手法”，把问题界定了，或限制了，概念缩小了，容易写。这个body写了必要性的主要原因，法律，民主等的正面性来做公理般的论证。其实立意角度并不深刻，分析也不能说透彻，值得借鉴的是行文的流畅性，句间的衔接很舒服，总分总的小结构走得也很好，感觉最后的thus总结比较巧妙，而且不生硬，也不过于主观。.
As for the speaker's second claim, it flies in the face of our everyday experiences扣紧thesis，跟前面推测相符 in making choices and decisions. Although people often claim that life's circumstances have "forced" them to take certain actions, we all have an infinite number of choices; it's just that many of our choices are unappealing, even self-defeating.这是展开的点：可以继续写detail以作evidence Thus, the complete absence of free WIU would seem to be possible only in the case of severe psychosis, coma, or death.很小的body，几乎没有evidence，但三句话就走出一个很漂亮的thus来，关键是第二句，although的用法不可小觑
Admittedly, the speaker's second contention finds support又一次很好的照应开头段！结构十分严谨 from "strict determinist" philosophers, who maintain that every event, including human actions and choices, is physically necessary, given the laws of natureother force具体化. 开始举例论证genetic makeupRecent advances in molecular biology and genetics lend some credence to this position, by suggesting that these determining physical forces include our own individual genetic makeup. But, the notion of scientific determinism opens the door for genetic engineering, which might threaten equality in socioeconomic opportunity, and even precipitate the development of a "master race." Besides, since neither free will nor determinism has been proven to be the correct position, the former is to be preferred by any humanist and in any democratic society.两者中作者选择前面的看法，并且再次用权威来增强说理的力度
In sum, without the notion of individual responsibility a civilized, democratic society would soon devolve into an anarchist state, vulnerable to despotic rule. Yet, this notion is more than a mere fiction作者在最后竟然没有丢掉看似忽略的概念，技巧性的批判了fiction的说法. The idea that our actions spring primarily from our free will accords with common sense and everyday experience呼应. I concede that science might eventually vindicate the speaker and show that our actions are largely determined by forces beyond our conscious control. Until that time, however, I'll trust my intuition that we humans should be, and in fact are, responsible for our own choices and actions.结尾最后两句虽然罗嗦，但仍然十分严谨的扣在了最后一个body上，可以说结尾段一点遗漏都没有，这是这篇文章的特色
