issue17 aero14次作业

jflycaiUID: 2452449

TOPIC: 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."
WORDS: 278          TIME: 01:00:00          DATE: 2008-2-17 下午 12:28:35

I basically agree with the speaker's statement that it is our obligation to obey just laws. As I see it, most of the laws hitherto valid are just, at least relatively just in normal condition. However, I strongly oppose the speaker’s emphasis on disobedience on unjust laws because there is not absolute just in real world.

To begin with, law, whether just or not, must be obeyed by all individuals in a society as long as it is still valid. Obedience of laws is not only an effective measure to maintain order and stability in society or in a country, but a respect to the very society as a whole. As I see it, laws evolved form moral rules. Social agreements and other regulations of propose behaviors also contribute to its establishment. Although laws are tools of government and authority class in the early years of its history, it had become an assurance for most citizens after centuries of amending and developing. To obey laws is an elementary premise of human behavior, even when we consider it unfair or iniquitous to some extent.

It sounds ridiculous to obey unjust laws for some of us, but it dose make sense if you think twice about it. First, it is impossible to give an exact definition of just laws. It is not uncommon that people have different ideas when commenting one event as they view it in different perspectives. Man may determine that depending on his race, nation, education background, and religion beliefs. As Martin Luther King said, a just law is man made code that squares the moral law or the law of God. Yet what he said just arise another question. Are the moral laws representing justice of mankind? Obviously, Dr. King tried to position his point of view within the mainstream of tradition of Christianity.

Secondly, and the most compelling one, is that As Albert Einstein said those greatest problems cannot be solved at the same level of thinking that created them. This means that we human con not solve any social problems like establish an absolute fair laws system, since we are part of society. We all live in the same planet in the same four dimension space. Unless we find a way to consider more additional dimension, we can not transcend the original problem and ultimately solve it perfectly.

Admittedly, maybe the most optimists have to concede that injustices do exist in many countries. Even in countries as prosperous as the United States there are humble member of society campaign for certain human rights, no mention to those undeveloped ones in which the most fundamental demand of people survival is not guaranteed. Historical and ethical and other unknown factors contribute to the laws presently, fair or unfair. Given the reality of injustice, what could we do? Dismember or overthrow the whole system of legislature? No one’s quest of equality and justice is greater than Martin Luther King. He still did not approval any kinds of violence as a leader of the campaign, and that give younger generation a good example.

In sum, every rational man on earth should obey laws as they are accepted by most of us. As to those controversial ones, we shall seek to a legal and calm way to right them, such as appealing to amendment. Any illegal and violent methods, like siege of the legislature, would not prove the situation but drive us in the wrong direction to chaotic and unrest situation.

[ 本帖最后由 jflycai 于 2008-2-20 22:13 编辑 ]

dahuadebaobaoUID: 2441571

issue 17 aero14次作业

TOPIC: 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."WORDS: 278          TIME: 01:00:00          DATE: 2008-2-17 下午 12:28:35I basically agree with the speaker's statement that it is our obligation to obey just laws. As I see it, most of the laws hitherto valid are just, at least relatively just in normal condition. However, I strongly oppose the speaker’s emphasis on disobedience on unjust laws because there is not absolute just in real world. To begin with, law, whether just or not, must be obeyed by all individuals in a society as long as it is still valid. Obedience of laws is not only an effective measure to maintain order and stability in society or in a country, but a respect to the very society as a whole. As I see it, laws evolved form moral rules. Social agreements and other regulations of propose behaviors also contribute to its establishment. Although laws are tools of government and authority class in the early years of its history, it had become an assurance for most citizens after centuries of amending and developing. To obey laws is an elementary premise of human behavior, even when we consider it unfair or iniquitous to some extent.It sounds ridiculous to obey unjust laws for some of us, but it dose make sense if you think twice about it. First, it is impossible to give an exact definition of just laws. It is not uncommon that people have different ideas when commenting one event as they view it in different perspectives. Man may determine that depending on his race, nation, education background, and religion beliefs. As Martin Luther King said, a just law is man made code that squares the moral law or the law of God. Yet what he said just arise another question. Are the moral laws representing justice of mankind? Obviously, Dr. King tried to position his point of view within the mainstream of tradition of Christianity. （这里我有疑问：一个社会之所以能组成一个整体，他的社会成员的价值观应该是基本相同的，因为价值观决定于社会本身对社会成员灌输的思想与历史，所以社会成员在面对什么是善法什么是恶法时应该不难做出一个判断，当然这个前提是社会成员达成共识。而这个共识并不是不能实现的）

Secondly, and the most compelling one, is that As Albert Einstein said those greatest problems cannot be solved at the same level of thinking that created them. This means that we human con not solve any social problems like establish an absolute fair laws system, since we are part of society. We all live in the same planet in the same four dimension space. Unless we find a way to consider more additional dimension, we can not transcend the original problem and ultimately solve it perfectly. Admittedly, maybe the most optimists have to concede that injustices do exist in many countries. Even in countries as prosperous as the United States there are humble member of society campaign for certain human rights, no mention to those undeveloped ones in which the most fundamental demand of people survival is not guaranteed. Historical and ethical and other unknown factors contribute to the laws presently, fair or unfair. Given the reality of injustice, what could we do? Dismember or overthrow the whole system of legislature? No one’s quest of equality and justice is greater than Martin Luther King. He still did not approval any kinds of violence as a leader of the campaign, and that give younger generation a good example.

（这段开头的论述让我更迷糊了：美国都有恶法，更别提其他穷国了，所以我们得乐观一点――这应该是作者的意思。但是正应因为恶法处处存在，我们才应该努力去争取善法，而不是盲目的保持乐观的态度啊）

（作者最后一段论述让我感觉思路上有些矛盾：人们为什么要遵守善法？因为它是能被大多数人所接收的。

那么为什么不能违抗恶法？因为法律是有社会主体所制定的，只能服从主体的意愿，而实际上也没有什么绝对的恶法。那我要问：为什么人们不能违抗这个主体制定的恶法呢？为什么不能推翻以后再根据自己的利益建立一个更合理的善法呢？）

In sum, every rational man on earth should obey laws as they are accepted by most of us. As to those controversial ones, we shall seek to a legal and calm way to right them, such as appealing to amendment. Any illegal and violent methods, like siege of the legislature, would not prove the situation but drive us in the wrong direction to chaotic and unrest situation.

lz看看偶的也帮哦改改吧 多谢了哦   https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=802242&extra=page%3D1