[i习作temp] i习作temp-issue 53 goal vs means [复制链接]

hq0219
UID：3000186

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 18
寄托币: 232
注册时间: 2011-1-28
精华: 0
帖子: 10

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2012-4-6 21:51:29 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

53) If a goal is worthy, then any means taken to attain it are justifiable.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

Abraham Lincoln, once made a similar statement in the famous Gettysburg Address, that when an end is lawful and obligatory, the indispensable means to it are also lawful and obligatory, a statement to which I fundamentally agree. However, we must not allow undue freedom to achieving an end, otherwise we risk undermining the overall societal stability and other people's innate right.
Admittedly, in cases in which an urgent problem arises where general welfare is at stake, the means to address the urgency should be considered lawful and justifiable if it succeeds to eliminate the harass. Just recall the pervasive chaos and stark opposition between the North and South during the civil war. Under that circumstance, the collapse of U.S. as a union was imminent, and beyond no doubt any resolution stymieing the widening disparity should be employed, even it was war. And history turns out to favor President Lincoln's decision and finally at the closing of Civil war, US survived intact as an integral whole.
Another reason I agree with the statement involves with the merit it implies regarding achieving success. Had human beings ever ceased to spare effort to achieve an end, the overall development would be in stagnation and we would still live under the darkness of ignorance and awe to the Nature. Indeed, it is the exertion and resolution towards accomplishment of our predecessors that ignites the age of enlightenment. History familiarizes us with a myriad of examples: the incessant delving into the tedious research of peas gave rise to the theorization of Mendel's hereditary hypothesis, whereas Owen's pursuit of utopia, worthwhile yet unrealistic, serves the key to the incipient development of a more democratic and egalitarian society. Such personages, with the ends of struggle-worthy ideals borne in their mind, propelled the advancement of our cognizance and development.
Acknowledging the benefits of fighting for a worthy goal, we nonetheless should be cautious of granting exorbitant freedom in pursuing them. A man should under no situation elicit results deleterious to others when he fights for a goal, which might be deemed worthy solely by him. The notorious leader of Italy during World War II, Mussolini, who was blamed as the creator of Fascism, comes to our mind. His ideal of national expansion and the so-called economic salvation for Italy amounts nothing but frenzied chauvinism, whose implementation was at the cost of millions of people’s lives. Less egregious examples include the cabinet minister of Britain, Chris Huhne, who perverted justice in alleging his innocence of over-speeding, while manipulated to require his ex-wife serving as the scapegoat while put him under impunity. In both circumstances, the goal deemed by the perpetrator lawful is indeed unjustifiable with regard to collective interest. We should in no way allow for individuals the leeway to realize their alleged worthy goal, if indeed proves to be harmful.
In sum, I generally agree we should pursue a worthy goal and the means by which is employed could be equally justifiable if it serves to eradicate fundamental social imbalance and would lead to furtherance of mankind. Otherwise, when individual opinions whether a goal is worthy are in collision with each other, it is by no means a judicious to allow anyone carrying out the implementation while ignoring or impeding other people's welfare.

求修改！求拍砖！我421就要考了啊。。。慌！