triter five

wk4aUID：2616910

17"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."

221"The chief benefit of the study of history is to break down the illusion that people in one period of time are significantly different from people who lived at any other time in history."

个人感觉17比较难写，只写一篇的话那就写17哦，不能再偷懒了。

wk4aUID：2616910

摘录一篇很好的文章。
ISSUE17 最难写的一篇（写得不错，尤其语言令人赞叹，值得学习 by pippo1983）
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: 308          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2007-6-17 10:46:1
立场：完全赞同
1 人的义务不是服从法律，而是服从正义，因此，服从正义的法作为人的义务是没有问题的
2 人同样有义务反抗不正义的法，因为这是服从正义的法的必然要求
3 反抗不正义的法是人类进步的必由之路


The decease of Socrates, a constant qualm in the occidental world, fascinates the greatest wisdom and intelligence to deliberate the relationship between individuals and their laws. Though it is true that stability is one of major virtues of law, the justice of law is more desirable. Actually, the obedience of just laws necessarily require the disobedience and resistance of unjust laws, for just laws are embodiment of justice, which repulses every form of inequality.


Citizens obey justice, rather than laws. Admittedly, above the laws of human exists no laws of god, yet there exists the unshakable faith of good. Born to be free, an individual, as a morally free entity, accepts the chain of laws not for the sake of laws themselves, neither the power nor authorities behind them, but for the sake of his conception of good, and his moral views. Being able to tax his subjects arbitrarily via his force, a tyrant could never gain obedience, as obedience being ultimately a reaction of free will and thus excluding every form of compulsion. On the other hand, human beings, as is self-evident, have the moral responsibility and will to follow their own conception of justice. Hence, once a law is identified as just, it should be obeyed.


In the light of the attitude toward unjust laws, despite of the fact that situation here might be more complex, to confirm the civic responsibility of rebelling unjust law is rational. Some would argue that the right to rebel, which is justified by John Locke and practiced by the American Revolution, could not be comprehended as a responsibility. They might further argue that enjoying the liberty to choose their condition, people should be entitled, by the virtue of being reasonable and cognitive beings, to determine whether to carefully organize their lives and maximize their good under oppressive and unequal legislation, or to shed their blood in struggling for the actualization of equality. However, to be realistic, the obedience of unjust laws consists of the denial of justice, as is demonstrated by the history of the Nazi Germany. In that age of dark, everyone is requested by criminal law to inform against whoever refuses to acclaim absolutism and ethnic elimination. Should a citizen with good faith still obey it, prosecuting and afterwards witnessing his friends and colleagues to be executed? Since no one deserves to alienate another’s life, while the informer could evidently realize that the suspect would suffer capital punishment without appropriate judicial process, he does infringe the natural justice, the justice roots in conscience and common sense. To disobey, or even to resist it has the potential to cost one’s life, whereas to follow it would definitely cost others’ life and his conscience, which is regarded as the most fundamental virtue of being man.

Empirically, no real profound revolution and reformation could be established without the resistance of undesirable laws. Such is human nature that our sense of justice, firm and impulsive as it is, is by no means eternal. It changes with time. Accordingly, the conception of justice of precedents might not suit to contemporary. In the other words, whenever laws fail to serve the pursuit of the good of a particular generation, citizens have the right and duty to abolish them. The Civil Movement, for instance, which stemmed from the dissatisfaction of the condition of American born African, and which derived from the Deep South, soon became a significant march requiring gross political rights and equality. Youngsters from Yale, MIT, and UC Berkley accumulate, march alone street, asking for the discarding of all unjust law that prohibit the right of self-determination, that assist the unjust ration of interests and opportunities. The “Brown v. the Broad of Education” remaining to be an important case in every case book of American constitution, it is apparent that the racial and gender equality and the broadened civil rights our fellow countrymen enjoy should be contributed to the effort and sacrifice in that realistic movement.

As is mentioned above, rebel cost a lot. Nonetheless, the common good would never emerge when citizens, if they should still be regarded as citizens, fail to realize that they are not merely individuals with right and liberties but also social beings with duty and obligation.

lele77521UID：2672123

The author states that there are only just and unjust laws, each person have a duty to obey just laws and disobey unjust laws. This statement is too extreme and arbitrary from my perspective. It has little meaning to distinguish a law is just or not without giving any circumstance, for the reason that the inherent function of laws is to service people. It is naturally relate the attribute of a law with the behaviors of human being. Consequently, a law is a bend of morality, religion and custom in some extent.

One brief function of law is to govern a society and to control the behavior of its members. For example, those behaviors such as theft, murder and failure to pay the debt undoubtedly would be punished according the relative law. From the standpoint of morality, a normal man has no reason to disobey it. Under this circumstance, we all have a duty to obey the fundamental law which helps to maintain a peaceful, orderly, relative stable society.

Sometimes, however, whether a law is just or unjust depends on the object it serves, because the fairness of some law relies on the perspective of human being. A typical example is euthanasia. Some countries admit the legitimacy of euthanasia and some against it. For some nations consider that human life is the most unique gifts given by God, each of us has only one opportunity to live in this world, so it should follow the natural law to terminate one's life. Mercy-killing is an inhumanity way to deprive of life. Other countries like Holland contend that they create a human way to help people who cannot bear the pains or other sorrows end their life. May be it is meaningless here to argue whether the law about euthanasia is just or unjust without in general idea. The attribute of the law is according to the different religions among those countries.

In addition, some controversial laws are totally depending on the individuals’ custom or interest. A democratic society admits the validity of diversity thoughts as long as it’s reasonable. There is no further example than homosexuality can evince this viewpoint. Attitudes toward homosexual behavior, sexual orientation toward people of the same sex, varied with time and place. During the first of the 20th century, attitudes toward homosexuality were overwhelmingly negative, Gay men and lesbians were both viewed as mentally unstable. Still now, a lot of Chinese cannot accept this behavior. But some western countries have passed laws permitting same-sex marriages. The homosexual families also have right to be foster parents if they like. It is a universal law that the human ideas may probably change over time, which also indicate that there is no absolutely evaluation about some laws.

In conclusion, considering the possibilities which may affect the attributes of law as mush as we can, we could analyze the issue under different preconditions and then understand its meaning profoundly.
我的作文字数永远超不过500.呜呜。

wk4aUID：2616910

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."

Equipped with three symbols: a sword symbolizing the court's coercive power; scales representing the weighing of competing claims; and a blindfold indicating the impartiality, Lady Justice regulates the rule of law. Mostly, society remains harmonious as people obey her. However, there are times when the blindfold is taken off, the scale is at an angle and the sword pinks the innocents. That is when people should resist her who no longer represents justice.

Written in 350 BC, the Greek philosopher Aristotle declared, "The rule of law is better than the rule of any individual." Based on justice, law shapes politics, economics and society in numerous ways and serves as a primary social mediator in relations between people. The problem, however, is the judgment for its justice. For law-making institutions, they try to balance the whole society, taking every aspect into consideration. As a result, this general principle inevitably sacrifices the benefits of some minorities. And as for individuals, they tend to consider more about their own interests. Comparisons with others usually lead to a conclusion of a partiality of law. After all, the fundamental role that law severs is to adjust conflicts rather than eliminating them. As long as Lady Justice maintains a balance, the whole society would be counting on her. Especially for many developing countries, the steady development overwhelms.

Firmly as we obey justice, resolute we are when it is necessary to overthrow Lady Justice with a tilted balance. "Civil Disobedience", a venerated architectural landmark would then be admired and preserved. In the 1940's it was respected by the Danish resistance, in the 1950's it was cherished by people who opposed McCarthyism, in the 1960's it was influential in the struggle against South African apartheid, and in the 1970's it was discovered by a new generation of anti-war activists. It is without any doubt that people are always ready to pursuit a law which really represents freedom and justice.  Blood and lives we may loose during the fight, but a promising future is waving.

However, our Lady Justice may encounter with some embarrassment when the justice is taken advantage of for vicious purpose. Dennis M, one of the leaders of Ku Klux Klan, once came to a TV station company in Kansas, requesting his video named Ethic and Ration to be broadcasted. This video is obvious about racial discrimination. Though such an unexpected request was protected by law in that every citizen is the US share the freedom of speech, the TV station refused to broadcast the sensitive material because it is actually anti-ethic and anti-ration, also in consideration of the feeling of its subscribers. But it is difficult to handle the law with loopholes. At last, the head announced that the company is a private property and he has the right to refuse Dennis's request according to the property law. The TV station company has set an excellent example that civil disobedience is not necessarily connected with protecting justice, even for the justice purpose.

Citizens, would certainly suffer when Lady Justice is absent-minded. But greater pain occurs when we dislodge her. As the builders of society, we should never forget that justice is for our better life. In this case, we choose the less detrimental way, regardless amenable or disobedient to the law.

wk4aUID：2616910

The author states that there are only just and unjust laws, each person have a duty to obey just laws and disobey unjust laws. This statement is too extreme and arbitrary from my perspective. It has little meaning to distinguish a law is just or not without giving any circumstance, for the reason that the inherent function of laws is to service people. It is naturally relate the attribute of a law with the behaviors of human being. Consequently, a law is a bend of morality, religion and custom in some extent.
个人觉得啊，不需要复述题目，很简练的点到就可以了。考官能不清楚题目吗？看了肯定会觉得啰嗦。后半段语言很顺。
One brief function of law is to govern a society and to control the behavior of its members. For example, those behaviors such as theft, murder and failure to pay the debt undoubtedly would be punished according the relative law. From the standpoint of morality, a normal man has no reason to disobey it. Under this circumstance, we all have a duty to obey the fundamental law which helps to maintain a peaceful, orderly, relative stable society.
先正面论述，不错。
Sometimes, however, whether a law is just or unjust depends on the object it serves, because the fairness of some law relies on the perspective of human being. A typical example is euthanasia. Some countries admit the legitimacy of euthanasia and some against it. For some nations consider that human life is the most unique gifts given by God, each of us has only one opportunity to live in this world, so it should follow the natural law to terminate one's life. Mercy-killing is an inhumanity way to deprive of life. Other countries like Holland contend that they create a human way to help people who cannot bear the pains or other sorrows end their life. May be it is meaningless here to argue whether the law about euthanasia is just or unjust without in general idea. The attribute of the law is according to the different religions among those countries.
这个点我倒是没有想到，赞。例子也很好。你觉得没话写，那么可以在例子后多展开评论。
In addition, some controversial laws are totally depending on the individuals’ custom or interest. A democratic society admits the validity of diversity thoughts as long as it’s reasonable. There is no further example than homosexuality can evince this viewpoint. Attitudes toward homosexual behavior, sexual orientation toward people of the same sex, varied with time and place. During the first of the 20th century, attitudes toward homosexuality were overwhelmingly negative, Gay men and lesbians were both viewed as mentally unstable. Still now, a lot of Chinese cannot accept this behavior. But some western countries have passed laws permitting same-sex marriages. The homosexual families also have right to be foster parents if they like. It is a universal law that the human ideas may probably change over time, which also indicate that there is no absolutely evaluation about some laws.
你想的点子到全是这种比较有争议的嘛，或许想想那些种族隔离政策，纳粹的人种法等等也是一种启发。
In conclusion, considering the possibilities which may affect the attributes of law as mush as we can, we could analyze the issue under different preconditions and then understand its meaning profoundly.
我的作文字数永远超不过500.呜呜。

字数永远不是问题，ETS给了篇满分的文章，还有两段没写呢！才四百多字。加油练习语言和逻辑吧

emily_feifeiUID：2626151

昨天生病了后来~诶~

lele77521UID：2672123

哦，那你先照顾好自己身体啊。祝你早日恢复。

wk4aUID：2616910

昨天生病了后来~诶~
emily_feifei 发表于 2009-8-1 09:25

pat pat

emily_feifeiUID：2626151

今天几乎没做什么~只把17的提纲写了~
周末没有任务的话我明天把17写完贴上来~I‘m Back！

wk4aUID：2616910

今天几乎没做什么~只把17的提纲写了~
周末没有任务的话我明天把17写完贴上来~I‘m Back！
emily_feifei 发表于 2009-8-1 23:18

welcome back!

emily_feifeiUID：2626151

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:559
"Law should be believed; otherwise it would be an empty shell." Socrates would rather choose to die than hurt the laws he believed in. Though he was unjustly sentenced to death, his descendants survived to see a more and more just legal system.

Back to the topic, how can we distinguish the just laws from the unjust ones? According to the definition, laws are enforced by the national power; hence the interests of the ruling class are protected by the laws. What is meant by this is that if the society is governed by slave owners, the mass slaves would probably face unjust treatment, which ironically would be reckoned as legal. Similarly, when feudal classes take over the power, farmers could hardly find a shelter under the legal system. From this angle, laws are impartial to the ruling classes; while partial to the ruled ones. Throughout the long course of the history, the ruling classes always assert that their legislation was fair to all the nationals should obey the legislation.

However, should the nationals buy their words and guard the legal system without any doubts? Absolutely not! Multiple events have already proved that. For instance, the French Revolution overthrew Louis XVI, who finally went to his destination, guillotine, together with his laws. Obviously, human beings have the right to trust in justice. Retrospect the development of human society, we discover that only when governing classes rely on the mass people and democracy, their laws are possibly regarded as just. Otherwise, laws are unfair. When Nazi controlled the majority of Europe, their brutalness and heartlessness swept over the Europe. Even the existence of Jews was illicit; as a result, a sizable number of Jews were liquidated. The laws of elimination of Jews were nothing but anti-humanity. At the cost of breaking the strict laws, some Germans saved a lot of Jews.

Indeed, facing those unfair laws, a person with conscience can never live in peace if one obeys them. Though being seemingly powerful, these unjust laws are written to be ephemeral and be resisted. Admittedly such defiance could face sacrifice; yet human society gains advancement through these heroic events. We remembered clearly when Barack Obama mentioned Ann Nixon Cooper who is a 106-year-old black woman in his Election Speech. She underwent the darkness and brightness days of the U.S.: from being abandoned to vote for her gender and the color of her skin to being able to touch the screen and reach for her ballot. Witnessing all the great changes she went through, we should never let our memory of Martin Luther King who led the African-American Civil Rights Movement fade through the time. He fought for the rights of the black who were discriminated by the white, who had no right to study with the white in a same school, and who were abused by the white police but could not appeal for legal protection. He stood high upon, proclaiming aloud that "I have a dream". Though not perfectly, America has changed and will be changed in the future.

Taking into account what has been discussed above laws represent the willingness of the ruling class; whereas, human beings have the right to pursue the truth, good and beauty. Obeying the fair laws serves to secure the nations; while fighting against the unfair ones leads a progress of the society.

emily_feifeiUID：2626151

4# wk4a

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."

Equipped with three symbols: a sword symbolizing the court's coercive power; scales representing the weighing of competing claims; and a blindfold indicating the impartiality, Lady Justice（扫下盲，她是谁哦？还是就是抽象的~） regulates the rule of law. Mostly, society remains harmonious as people obey her. However, there are times when the blindfold is taken off, the scale is at an angle（再解释下咯~） and the sword pinks the innocents. That is when people should resist her who no longer represents justice.（你的比喻用得更不错了~）

Written in 350 BC, the Greek philosopher Aristotle declared, "The rule of law is better than the rule of any individual." Based on justice, law shapes politics, economics and society in numerous ways and serves as a primary social mediator in relations between people. The problem, however, is the judgment for its justice. For law-making institutions, they try to balance the whole society, taking every aspect into consideration. As a result, this general principle inevitably sacrifices the benefits of some minorities. And as for individuals, they tend to consider more about their own interests. Comparisons with others usually lead to a conclusion of a partiality of law. After all, the fundamental role that law severs is to adjust conflicts rather than eliminating them. As long as Lady Justice maintains a balance, the whole society would be counting on her. Especially for many developing countries, the steady development overwhelms. （你还从个人的角度考虑了下公正与否~我没想过~）

Firmly as we obey justice, resolute we are when it is necessary to overthrow Lady Justice with a tilted balance. "Civil Disobedience", a venerated architectural landmark would then be admired and preserved. In the 1940's it was respected by the Danish resistance, in the 1950's it was cherished by people who opposed McCarthyism, in the 1960's it was influential in the struggle against South African apartheid, and in the 1970's it was discovered by a new generation of anti-war activists. （这堆例子我怎么几乎都不懂~囧）It is without any doubt that people are always ready to pursuit a law which really represents freedom and justice.  Blood and lives we may loose during the fight, but a promising future is waving.

However, our Lady Justice may encounter with some embarrassment when the justice is taken advantage of for vicious purpose. Dennis M, one of the leaders of Ku Klux Klan, once came to a TV station company in Kansas, requesting his video named Ethic and Ration to be broadcasted. This video is obvious about racial discrimination. Though such an unexpected request was protected by law in that every citizen is the US share the freedom of speech, the TV station refused to broadcast the sensitive material because it is actually anti-ethic and anti-ration, also in consideration of the feeling of its subscribers. But it is difficult to handle the law with loopholes（没看懂）. At last, the head announced that the company is a private property and he has the right to refuse Dennis's request according to the property law. The TV station company has set an excellent example that civil disobedience is not necessarily connected with protecting justice, even for the justice purpose.
（这个角度很特殊啊~这例子你哪找的？）
Citizens, would certainly suffer when Lady Justice is absent-minded. But greater pain occurs when we dislodge her. As the builders of society, we should never forget that justice is for our better life. In this case, we choose the less detrimental way, regardless amenable or disobedient to the law.
（你总是能挖到一个很特殊的思考点~厉害~）

lele77521UID：2672123

这是昨天的，我没找到你们发的文章就也没发，随便帮我看一眼就行。
221"The chief benefit of the study of history is to break down the illusion that people in one period of time are significantly different from people who lived at any other time in history."
总观点：从哲学的角度说，任何事物都是普遍性与特殊性的统一体。
Entity of the universality and particularity
The speaker considers history tell us that human beings, as the high grade animal in nature for thousands of years, are significantly different in different periods. I admit that people nowadays are different from their predecessors in some extent. However, I still contend that the basic nature of humankinds are never and will not changed, in other words, each of us is entity of universality and particularity from the philosophical angle.


As a saying said that history repeats itself in the large because human nature never changes. The essential nature of humankinds is constantly the same for centuries. Fearing of death, striving for better life, desiring of freedom, unlimited expanding desire and the like are the nature of human kinds, even including most of other animals in the world. Though it is known to all that death is an irreversible part of life, just like we have the right to pursue our dreams in a democratic society, we also have the “right” to died, most of people cannot accept it positively. Further more, people who lived（这句话怎么改能通顺一些） from prehistory to modern society never stopping to work hard for a better life, though the level is varying with time, their solitary goal-better their present life, which is another human nature, has never changed. In addition, just look bank those wars about slavers in history, one can better understand that it is also human nature to be freedom; the statue of liberty embodies the spirit of freedom in contemporary society. The most important essential nature is human unlimited desire, whether physical plane or spiritual plane, largely promoting the process of human history. Just review those great inventions such as automobile, telephone, computer, and all kinds of art, we(为什么不能用逗号？) can feel the allure of human desire. May be it is the realistic reason why there so many people are pursing wealth day and night; so many students are working hard for getting the first-rate education. They all have dreams, though difference, but have one purpose in mind, to satisfy their desire.

However, history also tells us that people in different period have different task, human beings changed the world rapidly, at the same time, and they(为什么要加and才可以) are changed by the whole word. Humanity has progressed over hundreds of thousands of years, especially in the civilization level, which can be embodied by the history building, from Great Wall to Bird’s nest in China; ability to manage the society, which can be illustrate by those famous manager in all fields; and also human thoughts, there are so many research outcome in humanity, increasing papers published in Nature or Economics everyday.


Therefore, we have to admit that the history vividly tell us the people in different times not only difference, but also have similarity from the dialectical angle. In a word, human beings are constantly variable and relatively stable in the long process of history.

emily_feifeiUID：2626151

TOPIC: ISSUE221 - "The chief benefit of the study of history is to break down the illusion that people in one period of time are significantly different from people who lived at any other time in history."
WORDS: 549          TIME: 00:57:53          DATE: 2009-8-7 9:56:19

Being fascinating, history always plays as a magnet for thousands of scholars or common people. It is a mirror, reflecting the past, present, and the future. The process of learning it creates a boon for human society.

Retrospect to history, human beings waved "good-bye" for the primitive days very long ago. We fly into the sky, stepped onto the moon, and dived deeply into the ocean. So arrogant are many of us that they regard themselves as the difference, total surpassing their ancestors. However, history serves to demonstrate that the humanity of people varies so little from one period to another. What the reality is that human beings are never free of our complex emotions: joy, rage, jealousy, love, lust, and so forth. Opening our history scroll, we discover that wars and conflicts never vanish from this planet from the old days to the present. Only knowing this, human beings would be humbled to appreciate the brilliant ant gorgeous heritage left by our forerunners.

Obvious learning history breaks down the illusion that people are significantly different from the ones who in the past, but we should bear in mind that the study of history should not be distorted by attributing the present-day thoughts to the old days. History has pasted, lying there, and waiting for us to open it. For every period had its unique characters, if we are led by the thoughts of today, we may probably reach a wrong destination: the societies in the past resembles so much of that of today, or they became difficult to understand. What should we do is to unveil the origins of history from the people in present.

If so, then there are a lot more meanings of learning history. Thanks to it, we are able to avoid so many mistakes from the miseries. Without history, the road ahead us is filled with darkness. Take China for instance. Hundreds of years ago, China was so self-contented that she refused to communicate and cooperate with outside. While she was lavishing her seemingly abundant resources, the West went through the Industrial Revolution which made them more and more strong and powerful. Finally, the explosion of the bombs awaked the Chinese, but it was too late: many regions became the colonies of the West. Learning from all the failures, Chinese government carried out the "Reform and Opening up" policies thirty years ago, aiming to reconstruct the nation and bringing prosperity back. Furthermore, history sometimes helps us predict the future. Thirty years ago, the United States was bogged down in the financial crisis; thirty years later, another economic crisis is sweeping over almost every country. From the history, we are certain that we would weather the storm undoubtedly; but we are also told that without proper guidance and strict monitoring regulations, the next crisis is just at the corner.

Taking into account what has been discussed above learning history illuminates that our humanity changes so little along the long course of history. Additionally, history tells more than that: it teaches us lessons and sometime gives prediction about tomorrow in order to guide us to the right direction and avoid making the same mistakes. But in the first place, on no account could we afford to impose our thoughts of present onto the study of history.

emily_feifeiUID：2626151

13# lele77521

这是昨天的，我没找到你们发的文章就也没发，随便帮我看一眼就行。
221"The chief benefit of the study of history is to break down the illusion that people in one period of time are significantly different from people who lived at any other time in history."
总观点：从哲学的角度说，任何事物都是普遍性与特殊性的统一体。Entity of the universality and particularity

The speaker considers history tell us that human beings, as the high grade animal in nature for thousands of years, are significantly different in different periods. I admit that people nowadays are different from their predecessors in some extent. However, I still contend that the basic nature of humankinds are never and will not changed, in other words, each of us is entity of universality and particularity from the philosophical angle.（题目是说历史研究打破了假象：不同时代的人不同。言下之意就是历史研究说明不同时代人是相同的。所以感觉你题意理解反了啊，按你的观点你是赞同题目的，何来这个however? 此外，我认为这题的关键在于一个chief，是否是chief benefit就见仁见智了。）

As a saying said（As the saying goes） that history repeats itself in the large because human nature never changes. The essential nature of humankinds is constantly the same for centuries. Fearing of death, striving for better life, desiring of freedom, unlimited expanding desire and the like are the nature of human kinds, even including most of other animals in the world. Though it is known to all that death is an irreversible part of life, just like we have the right to pursue our dreams in a democratic society, we also have the “right” to died, most of people cannot accept it positively. Further more, people who lived（这句话怎么改能通顺一些） from prehistory to modern society never stopping to work hard for a better life(Furthermore, people whoever lived in prehistory or modern society never stopping to work hard for a better life), though the level is varying with time, their solitary goal-better their present life, which is another human nature, has never changed. In addition, just look bank(back) those wars about slavers in history, one can better understand that it is also human nature to be freedom; the statue of liberty(大写) embodies the spirit of freedom in contemporary society. The most important essential nature is human unlimited desire, whether physical plane or spiritual plane(???), largely promoting the process of human history. Just review those great inventions such as automobile, telephone, computer, and all kinds of art, we(为什么不能用逗号？) (前面算是一个祈使句，那就是完整的句子，连接两个完整的句子怎么能用逗号呢~)can feel the allure of human desire. May be it is the realistic reason why there so many people are pursing wealth day and night; so many students are working hard for getting the first-rate education. They all have dreams, though difference, but have one purpose in mind, to satisfy their desire.（我明白你这段的意思，说人性没有变，可是感觉论证得很零散）

However, history also tells us that people in different period have different task, human beings changed the world rapidly, at the same time, and they(为什么要加and才可以)（你把and和前面的逗号去掉就行了） are changed by the whole word. Humanity（人性是什么，我的理解是人的本性，这是你上面那段话的主要内容，你的意思应该是人类社会human society） has progressed over hundreds of thousands of years, especially in the civilization level, which can be embodied by the history building, from Great Wall to Bird’s nest in China; ability to manage the society, which can be illustrate by those famous manager in all fields; and also human thoughts, there are so many research outcome in humanity, increasing papers published in Nature or Economics everyday.
（感觉看到这段，你又意识到题目中的chief，又看了一遍你开头，感觉这段是再补几枪。说实话，看到这，我始终有点迷惑你的观点究竟是什么。）
Therefore, we have to admit that the history vividly tell us the people in different times not only difference, but also have similarity from the dialectical angle. In a word, human beings are constantly variable and relatively stable in the long process of history.（这个观点其实非常好，但可惜的是感觉你在文中没有很好地阐明。）
（我明白了，你是在说变与不变这个深奥的哲学思想啊。可能我智慧不够，没能很好领悟你的核心思想，等组长回来，让他瞅一眼）