=七月流火= 第4次作业 Issue 17 by sasakikojiro 欢迎大家来拍 有拍必回！

SasakiKojiroUID: 2678315

I-17 topic
"There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly,   to disobey and resist unjust laws."






Supposing just laws and its opponent, unjust laws, the author contends that it is more important to every individual in a society to disobey and resist unjust laws than to obey just laws. I concede that in few inspects exists a unjust laws and individuals is necessary to disobey and resist it, in most respects, however, I am convinced that it is a responsibility for everyone to obey just laws in a society.


Laws, a set of rules that guarantee the stability and security of our society. As a proverb in Chinese, "no thing can accomplished without norms or standards", these norms or standards as a word "laws". Without laws, contemporary society seems like a infernal. Therefore, for instance, feudal period, when the male-power deep in the community and the thought of blood, these females either gentle or rude and unreasonable, either obeyed or willful, can only be ended in tragedy. But now, what have done today? With little flaws of laws, male and female are quite fairly.


However, there is no standard or norm to measure whether a law is just or unjust. According to  Chinese Marriage Law, polygyny is forbidden. But some Arab states, such as The United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and The State of Qatar, where polygyny is allowed. Besides, it is pointed out that the imposition of import food in Korea is much higher than in China in law. Then, synthesizing the two facts, can we conclude that The United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia...and Korea is leading a better life than we are? The answer is absolutely no! We may found it is vogue to a male who has a several wives in China, also, if Chinese import imposition as high as Korea, somewhere, there would be a riot. It is the people that judges the laws' just or not, it is possible that even a just law has its two aspects: fairly to someone, and unfairly to the other.



Moreover, there is no necessary to disobey and resist unjust laws even if enormous number of people dead because of it. As a remarkable writer once said, "There is no unjust law in the world, these unjust ones will finally isolated by human and times ". Socrates, credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy, he is an enigmatic figure known only through the classical accounts of his students. While Socrates purposefully gave a defiant defense to the jury because"he believed he would be better off dead", since there is a chance to escape, he still chose to stay for the reason: having knowingly agreed to live under the city's laws, he implicitly subjected himself to the possibility of being accused of crimes by its citizens and judged guilty by its jury. Today, we still respect Socrates of what he has done, but never excoriate ancient Athens for their laws.



To reiterate, unjust laws is quite a unnecessary thing that need not we pay much attention to it. Since the dramatically and drastically development of the society, unjust laws, from human, will finally for the human.

ianking7368UID: 2655993

=七月流火= 第4次作业 Issue 17 by sasakikojiro

I-17 topic "There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly,   to disobey and resist unjust laws." 我觉得文章整体思路清晰：  从法律的意义谈起；  分析没有绝对正义的法律；人们不能“抵抗”不公正的法律 存在问题：                  需要点明各个分论点之间的逻辑关心。 法律维持正义和社会秩序，然而绝对的正义是达不到的， 所以，我们不能因为所谓法律不公正就违法，肯能的危害有。。。                 有一些基本的语法错误， 在长句中有却成分的情况                  对分论点的分析不够全面深入，有些比较偏颇                  例子没有足够的说服力，可以想一下更好更贴切的例子                  这只是我个人的想法，多多包涵                  加油 ：） Supposing just laws and its opponent, unjust laws, the author contends that it is more important to every individual in a society to disobey and resist unjust laws than to obey just laws. I concede that in few(some) inspects (there) exists a unjust laws and individuals is(are) necessary to disobey and resist it, in most respects, however(in most of the time), I am convinced that it is a responsibility for everyone to obey just laws in a society. Laws, a set of rules that guarantee the stability and security of our society(定义很好). As a proverb in Chinese, "no thing can (be) accomplished without norms or standards", these norms or standards as a word "laws"(缺谓语). Without laws, contemporary society seems like a infernal（不好，太过了）. Therefore, for instance, feudal period, when the male-power deep in the community and the thought of blood, these females either gentle or rude and unreasonable, either obeyed or willful, can only be ended in tragedy(好像缺谓语，而且有些没有看懂，thought of blood?). But now, what have done today? With little flaws of laws, male and female are quite fairly（with a wholesome system of law, men and women enjoy the same rights and equality）. However, there is no (absolute and universal)standard or norm to measure(judge) whether a law is just or unjust. According to  Chinese Marriage Law, polygyny is forbidden. But some Arab states, such as The United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and The State of Qatar, where polygyny is allowed. Besides, it is pointed out that the imposition of import food in Korea is much higher than in China in law. Then, synthesizing the two facts, can we conclude that The United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia...and Korea is leading a better life than we are（Chinese, 呵呵，考官是美国人）? The answer is absolutely no!(可以从这个角度分析，不同地区的情况不同，所以没有放之四海而公平的法律) We may found it is vogue to a male who has a several wives in China, also, if Chinese import imposition as high as Korea, somewhere, there would be a riot. It is the people that judges the laws' just or not, it is possible that even a just law has its two aspects: fairly to someone, and unfairly to the other.(这段的举例有些牵强，不能很好的证明结论，可以分析说明，绝对的公平本来就是不存在的。) Moreover, there is no necessary to disobey and resist unjust laws even if enormous number of people dead because of it（？）. As a remarkable writer once said, "There is no unjust law in the world, these unjust ones will finally isolated by human and times ". Socrates, credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy, he is an enigmatic figure known only through the classical accounts of his students（这里没有必要说这个啊）. While Socrates purposefully gave a defiant defense to the jury because"he believed he would be better off dead", since there is a chance to escape, he still chose to stay for the reason: having knowingly agreed to live under the city's laws, he implicitly subjected himself to the possibility of being accused of crimes by its citizens and judged guilty by its jury. Today, we still respect Socrates of what he has done, but never excoriate ancient Athens for their laws.（问题同上一段，例子没有说服力， 可以换一个角度， 既然法律要维持社会稳定，那么违法就会导致社会混乱，可能人们最初抵抗法律的接口是不公正，可他们的行为却导致了更大的不公正） To reiterate, unjust laws is quite a unnecessary thing that need not we pay much attention to it. Since the dramatically and drastically development of the society, unjust laws, from human, will finally for the human.

1# SasakiKojiro

knx1029UID: 2609556

I-17 topic "There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly,   to disobey and resist unjust laws." Supposing just laws and its opponent(这个词不太恰当，opposition?或者换一种表达), unjust laws, the author contends that it is more important to（应该是for） every individual in a society to disobey and （to）resist unjust laws than to obey just laws. I concede that in few inspects(aspects) exists a unjust laws and individuals is necessary to disobey and resist it(这句话语法有问题.... 至少要用there be吧？), in most respects, however, I am convinced that it is a（the） responsibility for everyone to obey just laws in a society. Laws, a set of rules that guarantee the stability and security of our society. As a proverb in Chinese, "no thing can accomplished without norms or standards", these norms or standards as a word "laws".(没有谓语...) Without laws, contemporary society seems like a infernal. Therefore, for instance, feudal period, when the male-power is deep in the community and the thought of blood, these females either gentle or rude and unreasonable, either obeyed or willful, can only be ended in tragedy.(语法问题...) But now, what have done today? With little flaws of laws, male and female are quite fairly. 感觉用男女作为法律的例子，不是特别好... However, there is no standard or norm to measure whether a law is just or unjust. According to  Chinese Marriage Law, polygyny is forbidden. But some Arab states, such as The United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and The State of Qatar, where polygyny is allowed.请检查一下这句话的主谓宾 Besides, it is pointed out that the imposition of import food in Korea is much higher than in China in law. Then, synthesizing the two facts, can we conclude that The United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia...and Korea is leading a better life than we are? The answer is absolutely no! We may found it is vogue to a male who has a several wives in China, also, if Chinese import imposition as high as Korea, somewhere, there would be a riot. It is the people that judges the laws' just or not, it is possible that even a just law has its two aspects: fairly to someone, and unfairly to the other.  感觉imposition的例子不好，可以详细地展开说一下polygyny.而且，有很多语法问题。注意，一个句子，除非有连词，否则只能有一个主谓宾。。。以下不再找语法问题...注意多用句号... Moreover, there is no necessarynecessity to disobey and resist unjust laws even if enormous number of people dead because of it. As a remarkable writer once said, "There is no unjust law in the world, these unjust ones will finally isolated by human and times ". Socrates, credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy, he is an enigmatic figure known only through the classical accounts of his students. While Socrates purposefully gave a defiant defense to the jury because"he believed he would be better off dead", since 改成even ifthere is a chance to escape, he still chose to stay for the reason: having knowingly agreed to live under the city's laws, he implicitly subjected himself to the possibility of being accused of crimes by its citizens and judged guilty by its jury. Today, we still respect Socrates of what he has done, but never excoriate ancient Athens for their laws.   关于不必要去违背法律，用苏格拉底的例子不是特别好。可以多说一下自己的理由，比如毕竟法律是代表了当时大部分人的利益和意愿的。 To reiterate, unjust laws is quite a unnecessary thing that need not we pay much attention to it(太chin-English了...而且语法结构阿....-_____-||||). Since the dramatically and drastically development of the society, unjust laws, from human, will finally for the human.

我认为语法的问题比较大....
还有就是例子不是特别适合....虽然例子很好充字数，我觉得作者应该还是多写一下自己的推理和理由。