寄托天下 寄托天下
查看: 1869|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[i习作temp] Issue 65 习作求点评 [复制链接]

Rank: 2

声望
60
寄托币
251
注册时间
2016-9-13
精华
0
帖子
25

2016 US-applicant

跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2016-9-13 12:06:49 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览
本帖最后由 freeyangwin 于 2016-9-13 13:06 编辑

Issue 65: Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and disobey 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.

习作:

The debate on whether people should obey just laws and disobey unjust laws has been attracting philosophers, politicians and later on social scientists and law professionals for thousands of years. There are many historical events that demonstrates laws in many circumstances are not disinterested, and can become ineffective and even evil. In these circumstances, it is the public's responsibility to disobey and overrule such laws, and then either make new laws themselves or by forcing the ruling party to make new laws. The French Revolution is a perfect example that supports such an argument. In the late 18th century, the French people, by fighting and bleeding, disobeyed and then eliminated the monarchical law, opening a new era of French and even the European history.

However, the claim that every individual has the responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey unjust laws is arbitrary, and can be dangerous. Such a claim stands on an implied assumption that all individuals in a society, regardless of their age, educational background, personality, and political or economic interests can reach consensus on whether a law is just or not. Unfortunately, previous human experience rarely proves such an assumption to be tenable. During the 1960s to 1970s, many racist groups and individuals disobeyed the Civil Right Act, while African American and other minority groups deem Civil Right Act as a righteous law, a historical breakthrough
Also, in the French Revolution example in the introduction, the French monarchical law system was considered as just laws by almost all French aristocrats and the King, while those laws were regarded as totally unjust by businessmen, craftsmen, and other "new city class". In fact, there has been few times in history when people from different classes, races, educational backgrounds and genders have consensus on whether a law is just or unjust. In other words, the rationality of a law can never transcend the diversity of interests.

Now some people may argue that we know that there are some laws that conform to the universal truth, like the laws that prevent and punish kidnapping, murders, other felonies, and there are also laws that against the universal truth. Then, do people have the responsibility to obey such laws that are there for the universal truth and disobey those laws that go against the universal truth. First, we need to admit that there are laws that protect or go against the universal truth. However, the problem is whether ordinary individuals have the power to obey just laws and disobey laws. The French revolution, for example, claimed hundreds of thousands of lives; the abolition of slavery laws in the South is at the cost of a nation-wide civil war; even the protests in support of laws to protect LGBT right have generated much violence and blood. Therefore, we must ask that, before supporting the claim that each individual should obey just laws and disobey unjust laws, how individuals can fight against the powerful state to disobey unjust laws? Can individuals afford the cost to disobey unjust laws? Without answering these questions, encouraging each individual to disobey unjust laws means nothing but an act of lunacy.

There are also some people who argue that if individuals do not disobey and fight to overrule unjust laws, and leave these unjust laws to deteriorate the strength of the nation and the society is selfish, irresponsibility, and can bring negative effect to the long-term development of human civilization and the unity of society. At this point, we must admit that laws should be constantly revised to be more nonpartisan. From time to time, revolutions and wars are inevitable and necessary to finish the revision of laws. However, we cannot assign this responsibility to every individual in the society. On the contrary, such historical mission to disobey and overrule unjust laws should be seen as a "moral priority" rather than a "responsibility". Again, as what was already mentioned previously, rarely any law is just or unjust for everybody. The rationality of laws shall be judged in specific situations. In the example of French Revolution, we cannot expect the French king to think that it is his responsibility to disobey the monarchical law he promoted and work toward his individual interest. Applying the same logic, we cannot expect businessmen to support laws that raise corporate and trade tax. I believe that it is completely understandable that certain individuals do not disobey laws that are seen as "unjust" by even the majority of the society because no law is unjust to every individual.

Whether individuals should obey just laws and should disobey unjust laws is actually a very abstract, philosophical debate. The claim that every individual should obey just laws and disobey unjust laws overlooks the complexity of this debate, and is trying to bring this discussion to a reductionist answer. Now, as long as we understand that no just law that works for every individual, we will have a tolerance attitude toward some individuals obey and support "unjust" laws.

自己练issue,这篇写的实际有点超时了,而且不是第一次联系只一个topic了。但是怎么写都感觉这个话题特别复杂,简短的讲不完,所以写的每次都显得有点啰嗦。所以特意把这篇话题的习作发到论坛里希望各位大神们帮忙看看有什么可以改进的地方*()*
回应
0

使用道具 举报

Rank: 4

声望
50
寄托币
1169
注册时间
2016-7-7
精华
0
帖子
151
沙发
发表于 2016-9-16 11:00:32 |只看该作者
我是新手小白,大概看了下disobey用的次数是不是有点多,可不可以找些替代词

使用道具 举报

Rank: 2

声望
60
寄托币
251
注册时间
2016-9-13
精华
0
帖子
25

2016 US-applicant

板凳
发表于 2016-9-17 09:54:05 |只看该作者
望眼 发表于 2016-9-16 11:00
我是新手小白,大概看了下disobey用的次数是不是有点多,可不可以找些替代词

谢谢啦!词汇量积累不够啊:dizzy:

使用道具 举报

RE: Issue 65 习作求点评 [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
Issue 65 习作求点评
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-2038460-1-1.html
复制链接
发送
报offer 祈福 爆照
回顶部