ISSUE17 0610G-PRACTISE小组作业 有链必回，真诚中～

biess330UID: 2188313

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.

[BEGIN:]我认为观点极端
1,解释law
2, obey the law benefit a lot, disobey the law suffer a lot. 例子;hammurabi
3  认为公正与否取决个人的信仰利益等 euthanasia和污染问题
4,高速发展的今天 法律应该适应发展

The speaker assert that law can divided into two parts, just and unjust; it is undoubted that every citizen should obey just laws and against unjust laws. I think this assertion is too extremely; first it is not properly and irrationally to give law such definition, second despite law sometimes to some degree are so call unjust, yet we should obey, and we should promote or mend the law rather than disobey and even resist law.

Law, a formal regime, order and regulate human activities and relations through the systematic force by government and the nation. Actually, law is a tool for mandating the country and the territory, is catalyzes for improving and promoting the country to be better place to live in. Therefore, indicating the law as just and unjust is not good, because law is not easy to straightforward to defined.

No just law and unjust law can exist alone, they are relative to each other, to the large extend, However, some people usually complaint how unfair the law is and take some actions to disobey even resist law. In this case some crisis and disaster might be quick arise in the country. On the contrary, the country will be more stabilized and prosperous when people obey the law and do not irrationally and radically rebel. Consider, for example, Hammurabi, laid down by ancient Babylon, turn the impoverished, savage, and barbarous area into the most modernly civilization and metropolis nation in the ancient time in the world. However, later on, the civilizes take the some law for grand and even neglect or disobey parts of law, such as some law about forestlazation. The whole county disappeared sharply and mysteriously. Just as Aristotle, ancient philosophy said (and I paraphrase), Law is an order; just law is a good order. In short, under far largely circumstance, obey the law benefit a lot, disobey the law suffer a lot.


Admittedly, there are some so call “unjust law” in the dairy life. Consider, euthanasia, for instant, individual who have special religions might totally oppose this law and indicate that such law in any event is disobey the humanity and ethics and moral principles. They may believe that God controls one person’s fate, thus, it is extremely perilous for the human being to change the longevity of one exists in the earthiness. However, most ordinary people would argue that euthanasia could end the pain and suffering the diseases gave, yet, reduce the burden and consumption from the family and relatives. Acorroding, we can accurate to illustrate that unjust law is not really unjust indeed. Actually, however, this situation basic on, to some great degree, the personal freedom, costume, culture religion and the individuals’ world value, outlook on life and so forth. Consider, another example, some company, get the numerous benefices at the cost of tremendous pollution from the surrounding. When the government bans some law or principle to prevent the environment, and maybe in this case, take some imposed fine from the company, these law or principle might not be get understand and support from some businessmen and even might be disobeyed and resisted. Back to the other aspect I mentioned above, we can find the primary reasons, the interest and stake.
However, in some sense, it is some laws that are truly indeed not proper and suitable for the society, so they are should be mended to perfect. “No society can make perpetual constitution, even perpetual law”, one politician said (and I paraphrases). The technology nowadays changed rapidly as well as all the aspect in the society. Therefore, law, modern law should keep the pace with the progress and get as much as possible to suit the society and contribute the whole county yet the whole word.

To the sum, without the just law, the whole world might be in disorder, and easily get in trouble, without the unjust law, the whole world might be hardly get progression. All in all, not only we should obey and try our best to protect the just law, but also we should mend and make every effort to balance the unjust law.

[ 本帖最后由 biess330 于 2006-8-14 11:59 编辑 ]

SayyesUID: 2186610

The speaker assert that law can [be] divided into two parts, just and unjust; it is undoubted that every citizen should obey just laws and against unjust laws. I think this assertion is too extremely; first it is not properly and irrationally to give law such definition, second despite law sometimes to some degree are so call unjust, yet we should obey, and we should promote or mend the law rather than disobey and even resist law.

Law, a formal regime, order and regulate human activities and relations through the systematic force by government and[改of] the nation. Actually, law is a tool for mandating the country and the territory, is catalyzes for improving and promoting the country to be better place to live in.[？不懂] Therefore, indicating the law as just and unjust is not good, because law is not easy to straightforward to defined.[这一段显得有些多余，如不特别说明law当然是法律，大家都知道的，而且这段也没起到有效批驳题目观点的作用]

No just law and unjust law can exist alone, they are relative to each other, to the large extend, However, some people usually complaint how unfair the law is and take some actions to disobey even resist law. In this case some crisis and disaster might be quick arise in the country. On the contrary, the country will be more stabilized and prosperous when people obey the law and do not irrationally and radically rebel[本段主题句藏在了这里，太不明显了，最好拿到段首，全段注意围绕一个主题展开]. Consider, for example, Hammurabi, laid down by ancient Babylon, turn the impoverished, savage, and barbarous area into the most modernly civilization and metropolis nation in the ancient time in the world. However, later on, the civilizes take the some law for grand and even neglect or disobey parts of law, such as some law about forestlazation. The whole county disappeared sharply and mysteriously. Just as Aristotle, ancient philosophy said (and I paraphrase), Law is an order; just law is a good order. In short, under far largely circumstance, obey the law benefit a lot, disobey the law suffer a lot.[注意谈题目disobey unjust law，这段变成了谈disobey所有的law ，建议可以用苏格拉底的例子说unjust law 也要遵守]

Admittedly, there are some so call “unjust law” in the dairy[daily] life. Consider, euthanasia, for instant, individual who have special religions might totally oppose this law and indicate that such law in any event is disobey the humanity and ethics and moral principles. They may believe that God controls one person’s fate, thus, it is extremely perilous for the human being to change the longevity of one exists in the earthiness. However, most ordinary people would argue that euthanasia could end the pain and suffering the diseases gave, yet, reduce the burden and consumption from the family and relatives. Acorroding, we can accurate to illustrate that unjust law is not really unjust indeed. Actually, however, this situation basic on, to some great degree, the personal freedom, costume, culture religion and the individuals’ world value, outlook on life and so forth. Consider, another example, some company, get the numerous benefices at the cost of tremendous pollution from the surrounding. When the government bans some law or principle to prevent the environment, and maybe in this case, take some imposed fine from the company, these law or principle might not be get understand and support from some businessmen and even might be disobeyed and resisted. Back to the other aspect I mentioned above, we can find the primary reasons, the interest and stake. [感觉这段谈just 和 unjust 的相对性，但是还是主题不明显，导致读到后面论证时不知道作者究竟要表达什么意思]

However, in some sense, [it is删] some laws that are [truly indeed删一个] not proper and suitable for the society, so they are[删] should be mended to [be] perfect[这句话语法结构有问题]. “No society can make perpetual constitution, even perpetual law”, one politician said (and I paraphrases). The technology[怎么提到technology了？] nowadays changed rapidly as well as all the aspect in the society. Therefore, law, modern law should keep the pace with the progress and get as much as possible to suit the society and contribute the whole county yet the whole word.

To the sum, without the just law, the whole world might be in disorder, and easily get in trouble, without the unjust law, the whole world might be hardly get progression.[啊？just 和unjust的都有好处啊，怎么感觉前面没提到阿] All in all, not only we should obey and try our best to protect the just law, but also we should mend and make every effort to balance the unjust law.

楼主的问题主要在文章的逻辑结构，首先从提刚上看，观点就不太明确，三个理由之间没有有效的关联。主题要回应题目，也就是要回答两个问题1，law可不可以分为just和unjust，2，个人可不可以disobey unjust law[关于just law 要不要obey，有什么好处，其实不用谈了]。开头回答这两个问题，然后给理由。给出的理由一定和主题直接相关，特别是每段主题句一定要明显，且少绕弯子。
楼主连接词使用很丰富，就是要注意内容一定真正有关联
总之，行文要建立强的逻辑连接。另外注意一些语法问题
大家一起努力，加油！

alexbandUID: 2216821

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."


The issue concerning with law and justice is a complicated one.At first glance this argument seems relatively sound,while after considering the complexity of the definition of law,the difference between law and morality,and the individual perspectives on laws,the statement which the speaker holds is too ambuguious,thus oversimply the influence of the law upon human society.

First,I concede that every individual is obligated to obey just laws.A basic purpose of law in our society is to maintain order and to resolve disputes.In this connextion we must bear in mind that law in not simply a set of rules of conduct.It is also the means to impose responsibility and enforce social justice.Laws have been defined by authority to regulate and conduct civilians.For example,the first law code had ever been defined is the The Code of Hammurabi which is a symbol of civilization of ancient Babylon.This law code indicates that even 4000 years ago,ancient babylons,as a civilized tribe,is already pursue a rational way to govern their countary which in the end contrubuted to their economy,politics as well as cultrue.Even more,in a modern society,we induviduals should obey the just laws,since the development of our society,without a better regulation of just laws,will be laid down or even distroied.In summary,I totally agree with the speakers statement in the first part.

The second fundamental problem with the statement is that the items just and unjust are too simple to be used to to categorize the kinds of laws .Consider ,for example, the controversial issue of abortion.Individuals with different value systems varies in their minds that people with particular beliefs see the law which allowing abortion as unjust while others see it as a respect of human rights.Just or unjust is too ambuguious in this issue.Another striking instance of this lies in the cloning issue.If reproductive cloning were viewed by civilians as an aspects of the fundamental right to reproduce--and the jurisprudence on this point is murky--then it would be difficult for the goverment to ban it.In short,unless there is a clear definition of just and unjust law,the speaker's statement is too extreme.


However,there are some certain effection of this statement which overlooked by the speaker,if we take this statement as grant. First,compelling people to obey the law undermine the importance of the traditional value system--the escence of our society.In this case,it is moral standard and customes of our civilization rather than rules and clauses that tells the younger people what is good.Most of the time,laws are used to prevent people commit crime ,while punishing criminal seems to be its basic function.Second,emphasizing too much on resist unjust laws may cause instability of a society.Human by nature want more freedom,if once a violation of law is justified,they might sanction all illegal behavior.Thus I cannot hold this statement merely omit the possible consequences.

All in all,laws,as a manifestation of our value and standard,enforced by the government,serve as the guidance of our everyday life and provide a secure,democracy,stabilized society.It is our duty to consummate the law,and which in turn,vindicate the justice of human society.