YB-1]7月2日作业 by weenbopper

weenbopperUID: 2423595

1、承认好处：从本质说明，它与政府和人民的关系。
2、说明有很多方面不能涉及，而且道德是一个很重要的方面
3、但是还有很多其他方面导致了法律系统中的问题
4、即使把道德内容法律化不光解决不了问题，有时候还会使社会更加不安

180. "Many problems of modern society cannot be solved by laws and the legal system because moral behavior cannot be legislated."



The speaker makes a threshold claim that law can not effectively solve out all kinds of problems in our modern society, after all, never can a law own any possibility to be that comprehensive and well-rounded to cover all aspects. While I wholeheartedly with the threshold claim, the speaker narrowly consider that it is the absence of moral behavior in legislation that result in this phenomena. In fact, even with the help of morality we still can not guarantee the absolute effectiveness of legal system in all kinds of aspects, and my reasons are detailed as follow.

At first, law, which have been designed to eliminate countless disruption and, perhaps most importantly, deal with things that threaten the very survival of the state, undoubtedly benefits us in great depth. Basically, legal system composes the society with government and citizens. To be more detailed, government is a coercive and political force that tend to deploy all the resource and power to serve the interests of the nation and political group in control; the citizen is an inalienable part that ruled by the government; whereas, the law's fundamental obligation is to release the irreconcilable yet hidden pressure between government and its governed citizen. In this sense, law system possesses unparallel position in social system as an efficacious tool to assure peaceful and harmonious circumstances and to bridge the inevitable gap in social system.

Admittedly, we should pour considerable attention on the problems that can not be perfectly solved by law. The most obvious one on the list would definitely be the morality-related problem that mentioned in the statement. Many problems that are out of the range where laws are efficacious can be condemned by morality. The racial discrimination, for instance, still owns significant popularity worldwide, nevertheless, no country even expects to legislate it, not to mention the practical legislation. And there are not any substantial laws to punish the individuals who keep motionless in front of elders or the handicapped. Also, there exists no low that obliges people to donate resource or money to help the victims in disasters.

However, just superficially and haste attribute all the ineffectiveness of legal system to the absence of morality is also irrational. In the first place, the legislators have no means to be that perfect and flawless in legislation; after all, to err is human. And even without mistakes, they also can not be so resourceful and intelligent to take all possibilities in to account. In the second place, instead of being carved in stones, laws have to change to meet the ever-changing needs; especially the exponential booming of technologies makes the problems from bad to worse. This statement brings immediately to mind the Enron, which has take advantage of flaws of legal system to commit accounting, tax and stock fraud, and eventually stimulated the alteration of economical laws directly. In the third place, while people’s behaviors are confined by laws, their nature may remain unaltered; which would highly possible stimulate human’s insurrection, at least in their deep minds. In this sense, once bearing the fluke mind, they would escape the punishment of law at every opportunity. Thus, even the moralized laws also could not efficiently figure out these problems in modern society.

Furthermore, dissolving morality with legal system; instead of solving, would even increase problems, or even diminish the once nationwide harmony . Say a pregnant woman commits intentional murder; from moral perspective, it is unfair to deprive the living rights of this innocent child; however, this particular case would undoubtedly activate the crime rate in an unexpected rate. Therefore, simply combining law with morality would still not be able to make any contribution to this troublesome issue.

In a nutshell, while accepting its ineffectiveness, the suggestion runs contrary to the overwhelming evidence that the combination of morality and law would not release the present pressure in modern society. Actually, this social problem is a ever-complicating issue that concerns to education, law, morality, as well as the standard of citizens, and thus can not be simply analyzed form one aspect and underestimate the others.

weenbopperUID: 2423595

1、
病人的状况不同 a身体结构和健康状况 b 心理健康程度 c 其他原因
2、
得到的其他治疗手段不同
A教授的不同导致器材和手段的不同，而且Dr.Newland 是专门从事这方面研究的
B 用药的剂量或者品牌什么的不同

51. The following appeared in a medical newsletter.
"Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."

In this argument, the arguer recommends the patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain to take antibiotics in their treatment. To justify this claim, the argue cite the result of a study that the group of patients in muscle injuries who were treated by a sports-medicine-specialized doctor, Newland, and regularly took antibiotics own a 40 percent quicker pace than expected; whereas the similar patients who were treated by a general physician, Dr. Alton, and with the illusion of taking antibiotics which actually are sugar pills. A careful analysis and examination would reveal how groundless this conclusion is.

At first, the arguer fails to take the differences of patients into account. It is highly possible that these two groups of people are sharply different in body structure and health condition, and hence their recuperation would be accordingly altered. The youth, undoubtedly, own a much stronger ability in recovery than the elders; also, the individuals who had some particular chronic diseases that are deleterious to recuperation understandably own a slower procedure, no matter what kind of advanced and rational treatment they are treated. Unless we can guarantee the exact similarity in physical condition, or they share the very same progress in the treatment, which are both very likely, and thus we every reasons to doubt the trustworthiness of this comparative study. Furthermore, even it is far-fetched to suppose the same recovering ability; hardly can these two groups of patients possess one kind of mood of mental condition, which is also crucial to their treatment. Unless the arguer also takes this factor into account, the comparison is unconvincing. Also some other factors, such as patient’s will, their diet and so forth, should be all considered.

Subsequently, the arguer indiscriminately decides(这里觉得用的不好,麻烦帮我想个词....3Q) the same treatment in other fields except for antibiotics. Muscle strain, which own a higher possibility in sports, is much suitable for treatment from Dr. Newland who is specialized in sport medicine, and thus, logically, Dr.Newland’s equipment are more advanced and methods are more sagacious; on the other side, Dr. Alton, a general physician, is adept in dealing with bleeding, epidermis and so forth. Furthermore, even receiving equal treatment, the difference in medicine also plays significant role in recovery. The composition, and even the brand and dosage are considerable.

weenbopperUID: 2423595

占楼,提纲还在纠结中.....

autumnshangUID: 2596023

1、The speaker makes a threshold claim that law can not effectively solve out all kinds of problems in our modern society, after all, never can a law own any possibility to be that comprehensive and well-rounded to cover all aspects. While I wholeheartedly(这是个副词,是不是少了动词) with the threshold claim, the speaker narrowly consider that it is the absence of moral behavior in legislation that result in this phenomena. In fact, even with the help of morality we still can not guarantee the absolute effectiveness of legal system in all kinds of aspects, and my reasons are detailed as follow.(复述+立场:尽管有道德的帮助,我们仍然不能保证法律在各方面绝对有效)
At first, law, which have been designed to eliminate countless disruption and, perhaps most importantly, deal with things that threaten the very survival of the state, undoubtedly benefits us in great depth. Basically, legal system composes the society with government and citizens. To be more detailed, government is a coercive and political force that tend to deploy all the resource and power to serve the interests of the nation and political group in control; the citizen is an inalienable part that ruled by the government; whereas, the law's fundamental obligation is to release the irreconcilable yet hidden pressure between government and its governed citizen. In this sense, law system possesses unparallel position in social system as an efficacious tool to assure peaceful and harmonious circumstances and to bridge the inevitable gap in social system.(法律是用来消除破坏,更重要的是处理那些危害国家的行为,我们从中受益.法律系统把政府和公民联系起来,具体的说就是政府通过法律用政治力量和强制力量来部署资源和权力,从而为国家利益和统治阶级服务;公民是政府统治的一个不可替换的部分;而法律的基本义务是减缓政府和被统治阶级的隐藏的不可调和的矛盾.所以,法律系统在作为一个保证和平和和谐的社会,弥补不可避免的隔阂的有效工具扮演了不对等的角色.)
Admittedly, we should pour considerable attention on the problems that can not be perfectly solved by law. The most obvious one on the list would definitely be the morality-related problem that mentioned in the statement. Many problems that are out of the range where laws are efficacious can be condemned by morality. The racial discrimination, for instance, still owns significant popularity worldwide, nevertheless, no country even expects to legislate it, not to mention the practical legislation. And there are not any substantial laws to punish the individuals who keep motionless in front of elders or the handicapped. Also, there exists no low that obliges people to donate resource or money to help the victims in disasters. (让步,我们应该更关注那些不能被法律很好处理的问题.最明显的就是这个statement提到的与道德有关的问题。很多在法律有效的范围外的问题会被道德谴责。比如，种族歧视仍然很普遍，没有国家期望对它制定法律，更别说实施。没有实际的法律惩罚对长者或有生理缺陷的人缺乏敬意的人。同样，没有法律规定人们应该对灾难的受害人给予物质上的帮助。

However, just superficially and haste attribute all the ineffectiveness of legal system to the absence of morality is also irrational. In the first place, the legislators have no means to be that perfect and flawless in legislation; after all, to err is human. And even without mistakes, they also can not be so resourceful and intelligent to take all possibilities in to account. In the second place, instead of being carved in stones, laws have to change to meet the ever-changing needs; especially the exponential booming of technologies makes the problems from bad to worse. This statement brings immediately to mind the Enron, which has take advantage of flaws of legal system to commit accounting, tax and stock fraud, and eventually stimulated the alteration of economical laws directly. In the third place, while people’s behaviors are confined by laws, their nature may remain unaltered; which would highly possible stimulate human’s insurrection, at least in their deep minds. In this sense, once bearing the fluke mind, they would escape the punishment of law at every opportunity. Thus, even the moralized laws also could not efficiently figure out these problems in modern society.（草率的把所有法律实效归咎于道德的缺失是不合理的。首先，在法制方面，立法者不是那样完美，毕竟，人会犯错。就是没有错误，立法者也不能考虑所有的可能。其次，法律不是一成不变的，而不得不为满足变化的需求而改变；特别是技术的快速发展使问题更糟。比如，Enron，利用法律系统的漏洞在财务，税收和股票上欺诈，最终刺激经济法律改变。第三，当人们的行为被法律约束的时候，他们的本性没变；很有可能刺激人的叛乱，至少在心里。因此，一旦存在侥幸心理，他们企图在每个可能的机会逃脱法律的制裁。）
Furthermore, dissolving（这个词的意思是消融的，不是不能解决的，改为ineffective） morality with legal system;（，） instead of solving（problems）, would even increase problems, or even diminish the once nationwide harmony . Say a pregnant woman commits intentional murder; from moral perspective, it is unfair to deprive the living rights of this innocent child; however, this particular case would undoubtedly activate the crime rate in an unexpected rate. Therefore, simply combining law with morality would still not be able to make any contribution to this troublesome issue.（再次，道德内容法律不但不能解决问题，甚至会增加麻烦，或减少社会和谐。假如一个怀孕的女人犯了谋杀，从道德的角度看，剥夺那个无罪的孩子的生命是不公平
的，但是，这个典型的case无疑会增加犯罪率。所以，简单的把法律和道德联系起来仍然不能解决很多麻烦的问题。）

In a nutshell, while accepting its ineffectiveness, the suggestion runs contrary to the overwhelming evidence that the combination of morality and law would not release the present pressure in modern society. Actually, this social problem is a ever-complicating issue that concerns to education, law, morality, as well as the standard of citizens, and thus can not be simply analyzed form one aspect and underestimate the others.
（总之，当承认它的无效时，也就表明把道德和法律联系起来不能减少现在的社会压力。实际上，这是一个涉及教育，法律，道德和公民准则的负责问题，不能简单的从一方面来分析，而低估其它因素）
我觉得没什么问题，只是认真看了，翻译了，有很多借鉴的地方    不过我对那个商业道德法律和个人道德法律是个什么概论没搞懂，还想请教请教