issue180 第32次作业(模考3) ,求拍拍

pinuoUID: 2328081

1.       同意，一般的道德行为不能立法，应当通过加强道德建设来达到。但有些当道德不能解决可以求助于法律
2.       法律和道德都是社会的行为规范，法律是强制性的，道德是非强制性的。还有其他的如，宗教，ritual, etiquette.
3.       有些问题不能用law解决，只能通过moral来解决。
1>    法律行为让道德来约束，道德show weakness when face the problem which law is supposed responsible for.因为道德的强制力不够；重大的问题，道德很难约束。Ex, stealing ，robber不能通过说教来解决
2>    道德的行为法律化，会使法律管的太细，可能会侵犯个人的基本权益。
如 Marital inconfidenty
          3> 加强道德教育
4.       道德没有标准答案，法律必须要明确，无二义性。
5.       一个正直的人，总是在道德的范围内做事，不会触及法律，而一个道德很差的人总是冲破道德，而在法律上擦边球，这样的行为可以通过法律也可以通过道德来解决
例子：中国的包二奶，原来人们认为时道德问题，现在已经立法来解决了。
     6.In sum


TOPIC: ISSUE180 - "Many problems of modern society cannot be solved by laws and the legal system because moral behavior cannot be legislated."
WORDS: 562          TIME: 00:44:39          DATE: 2007-8-30 11:37:34

Laws and morals share many common points in that they are both designed to direct and regulate the behaviors of members in the society, but serve differet social functions becasuse of their special charactors though it is hard to linate a explicit line between what is the function of laws and what is the function of morals. It is unreasonable and practically unfeasible to swich their roles, that is we cannot expect moral to do the things within realm of laws and verse so. Lots of emerging problems of current world cannot challenge the function of laws and legal system is only because they fall into the categary of moral behaviors and we cannot legislate these behaviors.

Few will argue, moral resmable many charactors of laws. They both desiged to regulate the behaviors of the people in the society, and told them what behaviors is supporsed to be right and which is wrong, accordingly, which behaviors is encouraged to do and which is forbidened. And we can found other forms of such regualtion, for example, religon, ethics, epittitise and the like, which all generated from  society development, and serve varied function, work side-by-side to guarantee the social orders and protect the interests of sociel members.

Laws, body of regualtion, constituated of constituation, regualtion and other rules, are the most powerful regulation which protect the rights and freedom of individuals. The most distinguished character of laws is enforecement, that is anyone who break the laws--whether he like or don't like -- he will be punished, be fined, sentence to prision. The one who do the things exlicitly forbidened has to take legal responsibility for his behaviors, and this is guaranteed by enforcement not by his will or the others will. One typical example is a famous judger in Chinese history, named Baozheng, who earn his reputation in that time he was living and was prised by the people after that because of is fair, disinterest and decisive. He once sentenced the prince a death punishment because the prince break the law, and he also did not foregive his san when his wrongdoing was discovered.

Unlike laws, morals are relied most on poeples volunteer not on enforcement. They are derived from the custom and history of one nation. One behaviors are generaly thought be harmful to the other social members or to the sociey as a whole will be regarded as immoral behaviors. But the people who do immoral things will not surely be punished enforcefully, though they will be criticised or even condemed by the public.

It is far from straightward issue to distinguish which is the work of law and which is the work of moras. In history, there are some rulers who want to govern the people only by laws. Their governmetn turn out to be dictators' rulings. While someone who merely rely on moral to regulate the sociey also faied eventually, and found the society development into chaos because the weakness of moral. In short, too much enforcement will make the regulation rigid while too much moral, more often than not, will lack authorities and hard to be performed.

In sum, we cannot use laws to regulate the behaviors which supposed to be the function of moral, which may be less flexable and too strict. Whether to choose laws or morals always have to be decided by a case-to-case consideration.

pinuoUID: 2328081

Laws and morals share many common points in that they are both designed to direct and regulate the behaviors of members in the society, but serve different social functions because of their special characters though it is hard to lineate an explicit line between what is the function of laws and what is the function of morality. It is unreasonable and practically unfeasible to switch their roles, that is we cannot expect morality to do the things within realm of laws, and similarly laws serve as a poor substitute of morality. Lots of emerging problems of current world can challenge the function of laws and legal system is only because they fall into the category of moral behaviors, and we cannot legislate these behaviors with laws.

Few will argue, morality resemble many characters of laws. They both designed to regulate the behaviors of the people in the society, and told them what behaviors is supposed to be right and which is wrong, accordingly, which behaviors is encouraged to do and which is forbidden. They differ, however, in their strength. And we can found other forms of such regulation, for example, religion, custom, ethics and the like, which all generated from  society development, and serve varied function, work side-by-side to guarantee the social orders and protect the interests of social members.

Laws, body of official rules and regulation, generally found in constitution, legislation, judicial opinions, that is used to govern a society and control the behaviors of its members. The most distinguished character of laws is that they are enforced by the courts; that is anyone who break the laws--whether he like that law or not -- he may be forced to pay fine, pay damages or go to prison. The one who do the things explicitly forbidden by laws has to take legal responsibility for his behaviors, and this is guaranteed by enforcement not by his will or the others will. One typical example is a famous judger in Chinese history, named Baozheng, who earn his reputation in that time he was living and was praised by the people after that because of his fairness, and wise. He once sentenced the prince a death punishment because the prince broken the law, and he also did not forgive his san when his wrongdoing was discovered.

Unlike laws, morality concerns interpersonal relations and interrelations between the person and group. One’s behaviors which are generally thought be harmful to the other social members or to the society as a whole will be regarded as immoral behaviors. But the people who do immoral things will not surely be punished, though they will be criticized or even condemned by the public.

It is far from straightforward issue to distinguish which is the work of law and which is the work of morality. However, both of them serve as a poor substitute of the other. History is replete with such examples, there are some rulers who want to govern the people only by laws, and his government turns out to be dictators' rulings, while someone who merely rely on moral to regulate the society also failed eventually, found the society development into chaos because the weakness of morality.

Especially, it is nearly impossible to legalize the immoral behaviors. First, people may hold different moral opinions towards the same issue, and it is a little hard to distinguish who is right and who is wrong (例子). Second, most of immoral behavior involve with privacy, which make they are hard be dealt with laws which require public to guarantee their fairness. Third, it will impair people’s freedom to let laws invade the realm morality (例子).


In sum, laws and morality, both serve to direct or regulate the people’s behaviors, have some delicate difference in the functions. Thus we cannot use laws to regulate the behaviors which supposed to be the function of morality. Though it seems easy and effective to use laws to do the work of morality, the potential harem they inflict on the people’s rights far outweighs its benefit. Whether to choose laws or morals always have to be decided by a case-to-case consideration.

[ 本帖最后由 pinuo 于 2007-8-31 02:24 编辑 ]