issue17 0806G-AWER小组作业 留链互拍

bryanshawUID: 2239455

题目：ISSUE17 - "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."
字数：552          用时：00:38:07          日期：2008-1-21上午 11:23:45

I disagree with the conclusion about the law above, because in my point of view, one can not mistake the justice of a law for the absolutely objective justice of a law. These two kinds of justices are different in essential.

Law is a tool created by legislative institution of a country to control and to rule the civics, and it usually needs to be violent, so it can manage the tough affairs. Now that the laws come out with such identified aim, it can not be fair to all the people in a country. For example, for those who obey the law, the restriction of a law can be mild or even a protection; but for those who disobey the law, all kinds of punishment will make sure that the criminals will not do anything harmful to the society any more. Consequently, people in different social stage may have different ideas of a law: the rulers make laws to make them powerful; the common residents rely on the laws to guide their daily lives and protect them from some dangers; and the criminals hate the law, which will make them agony because the law is really cold. So I make the claim that law is not just to everybody naturally.

Now that laws are designed to build the peace and stability of a society, it should be respected enough and everybody must obey it. People should not have any illusion of disobeying any laws because it is necessary to give punishments to people who are not restricted. For instance,  in the army, soldiers never think about whether the general's order is right or wrong, necessary or not, advanced or not all they must do is just obey them, absolutely obey. Only by doing this can the leaders have their managements in a most effective way. Provided that laws are not of authority any more, the society will be a terrible disaster, and the governors will lose there control without any doubt. Thus, to have a steady society, citizens should obey the laws no matter how they question them, and at the same time, laws should keep the authority.

However, it usually happens that laws may be unsuitable to the developing world, they may be out of date, or they may be mistaken. At this time, people will have an unsatisfied feeling on the laws as well as the governors. How to deal with these situations? The best way in my point of view is to give the power to legislative institution, which will make and modify laws with the development of the society. It is controlled by the governor but also consider the appeals of citizens, it can have a discussion of nationwide when a problem seems to come out, and decide how to modify the laws which is questioned by the public. By this method, both governor and citizens will have a satisfied response. Since no law will be suitable for ever, such institution is in need, and people who have problems can ask them for help.

To sum up, I do not think any one has a privilege to disobey the so-called unjust laws. Laws can never be absolute just, but laws themselves are made to let people obey. The essential meaning of a law is only a rule of the governor, which will help maintain the society. So, every individual should obey the laws.

[ 本帖最后由 bryanshaw 于 2008-1-22 20:21 编辑 ]

钢琴宝宝UID: 2303982

I disagree with the conclusion about the law above, because in my point of view, one can not mistake the justice of a law for the absolutely objective justice of a law. These two kinds of justices are different in essential.

Law is a tool created by legislative institution of a country to control and to rule the civics(这个词好象是公民学,而crivic又是公民的形容词,用citizens是不是好点?), and it usually needs to be violent, so it can manage the tough affairs. Now that the laws come out with such identified aim, it can not be fair to all the people in a country. For example, for those who obey the law, the restriction of a law can be mild or even a protection; but for those who disobey the law, all kinds of punishment will make sure that the criminals will not do anything harmful to the society any more. Consequently, people in different social stage may have different ideas of a law: the rulers make laws to make them powerful; the common residents rely on the laws to guide their daily lives and protect them from some dangers; and the criminals hate the law, which will make them agony because the law is really cold. So I make the claim that law is not just to everybody naturally.

Now that laws are designed to build the peace and stability of a society, it should be respected enough and everybody must obey it. People should not have any illusion of disobeying any laws because it is necessary to give punishments to people who are not restricted. For instance,  in the army, soldiers never think about whether the general's order is right or wrong, necessary or not, advanced or not all they must do is just obey them, absolutely obey. Only by doing this can the leaders have their managements in a most effective way. Provided that laws are not of authority any more, the society will be a terrible disaster, and the governors will lose there control without any doubt. Thus, to have a steady society, citizens should obey the laws no matter how they question them, and at the same time, laws should keep the authority.

However, it usually happens that laws may be unsuitable to the developing world, they may be out of date, or they may be mistaken. At this time, people will have an unsatisfied feeling on the laws as well as the governors. How to deal with these situations? The best way in my point of view is to give the power to legislative institution, which will make and modify laws with the development of the society. It is controlled by the governor but also consider the appeals of citizens, it can have a discussion of nationwide when a problem seems to come out, and decide how to modify the laws which is questioned by the public. By this method, both governor and citizens will have a satisfied response. Since no law will be suitable for ever, such institution is in need, and people who have problems can ask them for help.

To sum up, I do not think any one has a privilege to disobey the so-called unjust laws. Laws can never be absolute just, but laws themselves are made to let people obey. The essential meaning of a law is only a rule of the governor, which will help maintain the society. So, every individual should obey the laws.

结构:总起,提出自己观点->法律本身不对每个人公正->人们应当尊重和遵守法律->当法律不适应世界发展时,应当修改它->总结,人们应当遵守法律

非常认真读了几遍,努力想改点什么小的问题,就找了上面括号里的那一个.觉得你的文章挺不错的,感觉你写文章跟我是差不多一个类型的,我是说逻辑上的啦,我对这个问题的分析跟你的几乎完全一致.看了很多别人的文章,北美风格异常严重,感觉你的没有那种故意去造句的感觉.因为真的觉得跟我风格比较像,语言也没什么错误,读了这么多遍,实在挑不出什么毛病来, 恩 向你学习,支持你.继续加油.

[ 本帖最后由 钢琴宝宝 于 2008-1-23 21:17 编辑 ]

iq28UID: 2152875

题目：ISSUE17 - "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."
字数：552          用时：00:38:07          日期：2008-1-21上午 11:23:45

I disagree with the conclusion about the law above, because in my point of view, one can not mistake the justice of a law for the absolutely objective justice of a law. These two kinds of justices are different in essential. （开头的理由要简洁但也不能不把话说明白了。突然提出了一个absolutely objective justice的概念，然后说这两者不能混淆，这和题目有直接联系么？）

Law is a tool created by legislative institution of a country to control and to rule the civics, and it usually needs to be violent, so it can manage the tough affairs. Now that the laws come out with such identified aim, it can not be fair to all the people in a country. （由法律的目的提到了法律不能对所有人都公正，衔接还是很紧密的，如果后面能收回来明确说出所以法律完全公正那最好了。不知道提到的violent后面有没有对应。）For example, for those who obey the law, the restriction of a law can be mild or even a protection; but for those who disobey the law, all kinds of punishment will make sure that the criminals will not do anything harmful to the society any more. （这个例子和公正与否没有太直接的联系。还有，）Consequently, people in different social stage may have different ideas of a law: the rulers make laws to make them powerful; （就本题目而言，提到制定法规的人可能会把话题扩大太多导致无法收回来，说少了又和题目不直接挂钩，最好不要讲。）the common residents rely on the laws to guide their daily lives and protect them from some dangers; and the criminals hate the law, which will make them agony because the law is really cold. So I make the claim that law is not just to everybody naturally.（问题：只是讲到了不同的人和法律之间的关系，并没有直接讲到法律是否公正。有人依赖有人讨厌，这个和公正与否还是有距离的。这里最起码要详细解释公正与否还是由人来决定的，而人会根据自己的利益得失来评判法律的公正性。如果本段只是在讨论法律的作用，那么相对于这篇文章的长度来说篇幅太大了。）

（本段和上段的联系不是很自然，公平讲完了还没讲到）Now that laws are designed to build the peace and stability of a society,（两句话之间没有必然的因果关系。如果就凭借法律的目的所以我们就得遵循他，那么这个题目也没有太多好说的了。前面一个段落从法律和不同人群的关系角度讲了不少，可以从这个层面引发下去继续讲。） it should be respected enough and everybody must obey it. People should not have any illusion of disobeying any laws because it is necessary to give punishments to people who are not restricted. （还是和以前一样的问题，惩罚不代表不公平，厌恶法律也直接等于不公平，题目要你讨论的是对于不公正法律的态度，而不是讨论是否要对法律的惩罚或者对个人带来的坏处作出抗争，尽管后者可以作为论证前者的有用材料。）For instance,  in the army, soldiers never think about whether the general's order is right or wrong, necessary or not, advanced or not all they must do is just obey them, absolutely obey. （这个例子又和上文完全脱节了。上面讲到的是punishment和obey的关系，这里的例子证明的是服从和制度系统运作的关系。）Only by doing this can the leaders have their managements in a most effective way. Provided that laws are not of authority any more, the society will be a terrible disaster, and the governors will lose there control without any doubt. Thus, to have a steady society, citizens should obey the laws no matter how they question them, and at the same time, laws should keep the authority.（首先段落脱节了；其次讲到了很多law为什么必须被遵循的原因，虽然也可以论证，但是忽略了just 和unjust这个问题的论证还是有答题不全之嫌。）

However, it usually happens that laws may be unsuitable to the developing world, they may be out of date, or they may be mistaken. At this time, people will have an unsatisfied feeling on the laws as well as the governors. （和前后不够协调的一句话，试着说得更有概括性和正式一点。）How to deal with these situations? The best way in my point of view is to give the power to legislative institution, which will make and modify laws with the development of the society. It is controlled by the governor but also consider the appeals of citizens, it can have a discussion of nationwide when a problem seems to come out, and decide how to modify the laws which is questioned by the public. By this method, both governor and citizens will have a satisfied response. Since no law will be suitable for ever, such institution is in need, and people who have problems can ask them for help.（如果可以认为unsuitable，out of date和mistaken是unjust的意思的话，关于obey和disobey的问题在哪里呢？修正法案确实是对付不合理法律的方法，但是不能忽视题目给你的限定啊。）

To sum up, I do not think any one has a privilege to disobey the so-called unjust laws. Laws can never be absolute just, but laws themselves are made to let people obey. The essential meaning of a law is only a rule of the governor, which will help maintain the society. So, every individual should obey the laws.

语言还是可以的。
不过扣题不够紧密，虽然很多段落只要加上点睛的句子就可以很好的扣住题目，但是没有那些话看上去文章就跑题了。
加油！

钢琴宝宝UID: 2303982

看了斑竹拍的才找到差距,我实在觉得很难看出个什么所以然,一定要学习之.

fionn1129UID: 2399724

issue17 0806G-AWER小组作业留链互拍

题目：ISSUE17 - "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."字数：552          用时：00:38:07          日期：2008-1-21上午 11:23:45I disagree with the conclusion about the law above, because in my point of view, one can not mistake the justice of a law for the absolutely objective justice不明白是什么意思of a law. These two kinds of justices are different in essential.这个论点是题目想要讨论的吗？略微疑惑，继续阅读中……
Law is a tool created by legislative institution of a country to control and to rule the civics, and it usually needs to be violent, so it can manage the tough affairs. Now that the laws come out with such identified aim, it can not be fair to all the people in a country. 这个such identified aim是指to control and to rule the civics吗？感觉后面的分析与这句不是很贴切，而且后面的这一段算是example吗？For example, for those who obey the law, the restriction of a law can be mild or even a protection; but for those who disobey the law, all kinds of punishment will make sure that the criminals will not do anything harmful to the society any more. Consequently, people in different social stage may have different ideas of a law: the rulers make laws to make them powerful; the common residents rely on the laws to guide their daily lives and protect them from some dangers; and the criminals hate the law, which will make them agony because the law is really cold. So I make the claim that law is not just to everybody naturally.对这一段的论点我个人持保留态度。根据搂主的描述，是那些受到惩罚的人觉得法律不公正，这个好像不是just的意思吧……难道这是前面提到的just and absolutely objective justice的区别？困惑。

Now that laws are designed to build the peace and stability of a society,（我觉得这个分句搂主用now that不太合适。个人觉得now that的后面通常应该跟一个已经得到论证或者说明的观点，但是这个地方并不是，更何况前面一段说law是一个rule and control civic的工具）it should be respected enough and everybody must obey it. People should not have any illusion of disobeying any laws because it is necessary to give punishments to people who are not restricted.没有扣住just和unjust的题眼哦For instance,  in the army, soldiers never think about whether the general's order is right or wrong, necessary or not, advanced or not all they must do is just obey them, absolutely obey. Only by doing this can the leaders have their managements in a （这个地方应该是the吧）most effective way. Provided that laws are not of authority any more, the society will be a terrible disaster, and the governors will lose there control without any doubt. 如果这句反面的分析能够紧接着前面的这个军队的例子来论证，我想应该会更好吧。 Thus, to have a steady society, citizens should obey the laws no matter how they question them, and at the same time, laws should keep the authority.

However, it usually happens that laws may be unsuitable to the developing world, they may be out of date, or they may be mistaken.（我想这个大概是搂主对unjust law的阐述吧， 但是根据wb字典的解释，unjust的意思是injustice, 它强调的应该是公平不公平，我觉得搂主的阐述略微有点偏）At this time, people will have an unsatisfied feeling on the laws as well as the governors. How to deal with these situations? The best way in my point of view is to give the power to legislative institution, (作者在第二段已经提到过Law is a tool created by legislative institution of a country to control and to rule the civics ，这里再说赋予legislative institution权力是不是有点自相矛盾？)which will make and modify laws with the development of the society. It is controlled by the governor but also consider the appeals of citizens, it can have a discussion of nationwide when a problem seems to come out, and decide how to modify the laws which is questioned by the public. By this method, both governor and citizens will have a satisfied response. Since no law will be suitable for ever, such institution is in need, and people who have problems can ask them for help.

个人觉得这段的论述有点不清晰，先是give the power to legislative instituation,然后是have a discussion of nationwide。另外，我想搂主这段大概是想阐述对disobey的替代方法，个人觉得应该有所提及会比较过渡自然些To sum up, I do not think any one has a privilege to disobey the so-called unjust laws. Laws can never be absolute just, but laws themselves are made to let people obey. The essential meaning of a law is only a rule of the governor, which will help maintain the society. So, every individual should obey the laws.

总评：觉得楼主离“紧扣题目”的要求还略微有些差距，不过应该还有时间，楼主A Za A Za fighting!
最后，不要忘了回拍我啊
Issue103
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-630569-2-1.html