issue17【areo】第十四次作業

孑。。。UID: 2371205

Although I agree with the author in the sense that it can contribute to the validation of democracy in a society to some degree, considering the nature of laws, the author's assertion become unwarranted, and I doubt both the sufficiency and necessity of doing as the author suggests.

It is true that every individual has a right to judge the standards of laws and disobey some of the generally unjust law by certain legitimate way. Most people are rational enough to tell good from bad, as the prominent president of the USA, Thomas Jefferson recommended. Once he was asked to choose between a government without newspaper and a newspaper without a government, he chose the latter without further thinking, which reveals this excellent politician's belief that people have the ability to judge, so government is not necessary. It is also Jefferson who said that, people should have right to change the law, even constitution. Because of such ideology of law, the American society had benefited much and democracy has been validated.

However, that every single person in the society can disobey any of the law that they believe is unjust may do harm to the stability and justice to society. According to the nature of laws, they are just a balance of interests of different people, and thus can be contradicting to any one in the society. What's more common sense tells us that each person has a different value and interests; therefore if every person judges the law by their own standards, nobody's interests would be protected by such laws which lack authority in such society. Culprits may think their actions may be good to themselves and the laws may be unjust based on their own value, thus according to the author's assertion, they can do whatever they like, however other people's interests have been destroyed. No doubt this will lead to disasters among people in the society and decrease of efficiency in society.

Moreover, further scrutinizing the necessity of the author's proposition, we can pursue better way, that people should obey the laws under common circumstances regardless certain specific law may be contradicting to their own interests and modify the unjust laws through legal means. Since considering the stability and justice in the society and the author’s proposition is improper, obeying the laws in common situation and modifying the unjust laws through legal way may be other choice which can probably be better. Furthermore, legislative has been established by people to make sure that most people have gained the most rights by setting up laws through certain laws concerning the process of legislation.  Everybody not only has the right to doubt the laws which may seem unjust, but also respect the system which established in the past to ensure that democracy has been pursued in the future.

From what has been discussed above, safe conclusion can be drawn: it is more rational for people to obey the laws which have already been set up legitimately, and acquire the right to modify the unjust laws through right ways.

[ 本帖最后由 孑。。。 于 2008-2-18 21:42 编辑 ]

sallyplumageUID: 2343965

issue17【areo】第十四次作業

Although I agree with the author in the sense that it can contribute to the validation of democracy in a society to some degree, considering the nature of laws, the author's assertion become unwarranted, and I doubt both the sufficiency and necessity of doing as the author suggests.

It is true that every individual has a right to judge the standards of laws and disobey some of the generally unjust law by certain legitimate way. Most people are rational enough to tell good from bad, as the prominent president of the USA, Thomas Jefferson recommended. Once he was asked to choose between a government without newspaper and a newspaper without a government, he chose the latter without further thinking, which reveals this excellent politician's belief that people have the ability to judge, so government is not necessary. It is also Jefferson who said that, people should have right to change the law, even constitution. Because of such ideology of law, the American society had benefited much and democracy has been validated.

不了解Thomas Jefferson，但既然他很杰出，之前说“tell good from bad”，不知是否合适。例子有点看不大懂，Thomas Jefferson选择了报纸新闻区政府化，既然他对人们的判断能力有信心为什么without further thinking。
However, that every single person in the society can disobey any of the law that they believe is unjust may do harm to the stability and justice to society. According to the nature of laws, they are just a balance of interests of different people, and thus can be contradicting to any one in the society. What's more common sense tells us that each person has a different value and interests; therefore if every person judges the law by their own standards, nobody's interests would be protected by such laws which lack authority in such society. Culprits may think their actions may be good to themselves and the laws may be unjust based on their own value, thus according to the author's assertion, they can do whatever they like, however other people's interests have been destroyed. No doubt this will lead to disasters among people in the society and decrease of efficiency in society.例子相对论述有点简短。
Moreover, further scrutinizing the necessity of the author's proposition, we can pursue better way, that people should obey the laws under common circumstances regardless certain specific law may be contradicting to their own interests and modify the unjust laws through legal means. Since considering the stability and justice in the society and the author’s proposition is improper, obeying the laws in common situation and modifying the unjust laws through legal way may be other choice which can probably be better. Furthermore, legislative has been established by people to make sure that most people have gained the most rights by setting up laws through certain laws concerning the process of legislation.  Everybody not only has the right to doubt the laws which may seem unjust, but also respect the system which established in the past to ensure that democracy has been pursued in the future.
感觉像是对上文的总结。
From what has been discussed above, safe conclusion can be drawn: it is more rational for people to obey the laws which have already been set up legitimately, and acquire the right to modify the unjust laws through right ways.

第四段像是总结，没有具体事例。
语言要向你学习，比我好。

[ 本帖最后由 sallyplumage 于 2008-2-19 23:36 编辑 ]