issue17 【AW狂人社】第一次作业simahui

simahuiUID: 2208751

题目：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."
字数：465          用时：4:14:37          日期：2007-3-4
提纲：    1 不公正的旧法律废除了才能产生新的公正法律
              2 我们有反对不公正法律的责任
              3 反对不公正法律需要代价，是值得的
              4公不公正的定义要从客观（社会和人类的可持续发展）的角度出发
In asserting that it is more important disobey and resist unjust laws than obey just laws, the speaker fails to acknowledge that the purpose of disobey, resist unjust laws is, at last, abolish unjust laws and establish new just laws to people obey. Nevertheless, I agree with the statement to the extent that just or unjust is not based on individuals' interest, but on human's continuable development.

Experience tells us that a new just law can be imposed only when the old unjust law was abolished. For example, in the evening of slavery period, slaves who have enough power to resist unjust laws want to attain more rights. They overthrow slaveholders' control by violence, and new laws which were drafted later entitle them more freedom. Can the new just laws establish and they get   more rights if they still obey the unjust laws? So it is more importantly to resist unfair laws when you yearn for fair laws.

Admittedly, sometime individuals and corporations fight against the existed laws and establish minority's just law which is unjust for the others. For example, manufactories reduce their expense of pollution treating by lobby legislator to adapt regulations. However, if we stand still and accept the adapted law, environmental problems will be exacerbated quickly and threat our health. So, everyone has a responsibility to oppose unjust laws.

One must admit as well, some short-term sacrifices is necessary to disobey and fight against unjust laws. Some heroes paid their life for people's freedom, some straight officer were in persecuting while they insist on setting up just society. Also sometimes we were deluded to abolish just laws and then paid high price to remedy. However，it is worthy of doing that compare with so many family’s blessedness and continuable development of human beings. Moreover, such sacrifices seem trivial when consider that people will be under the protections of just laws forever.

Finally, it is important that how to define just and unjust. Only the criterion based on society's developing and most people's interest is accepted. Addicts hate the law which deprives their right of hitting the pipe and consider it is unfair to them that one like apple can eat it anytime but they cannot do the same thing only drugs instead of apples. But on the position of government, addicts' attitude is oversimplified, drugs not only a threat to addicts' life, but also a time bomb which can destroy the safety and stability of modern society. For example china have been destroyed by opium in the end of Qing period. So only the criterion based on right position can ensure the reality of just.

In the final analysis, I consider that individuals must know how to define just impersonal, then, practise their responsibility, obey just laws and resist unjust laws.


题目：ISSUE39 - "The intellectual benefits of attending a university or college are vastly overrated: most people could learn more by studying and reading on their own for four years than by pursuing a university or college degree."
字数：70          用时：0:27:46          日期：2007-3-5

Outline:  
1. Admittedly study by one's interest is more efficient than by force, but when you study in college by your interest, more help will be supplied than study alone, such as teachers' direction, schoolmates' advice and advanced experiment equipment.
2. College not only educate knowledge, but also teach how to conduct oneself.
3. College can initiate us a integrated knowledge system which can hardly get by study oneself

小勺子的反思UID: 2280216

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 unjust laws .
Position partly agree


1 不公正的旧法律废除了才能产生新的公正法律
              2 我们有反对不公正法律的责任
              3 反对不公正法律需要代价，是值得的
              4公不公正的定义要从客观（社会和人类的可持续发展）的角度出发[好像跑题了 ，文章要讲的是 ，是否有RESPOSIBILITY TO  ，好像不是方法论 ，还有没有要讨论是不是代价和WORTHY 问题啊  ]


In asserting that it is more important disobey and resist unjust laws than obey just laws, the speaker fails to acknowledge that the purpose of disobey, resist unjust laws is, at last, abolish unjust laws and establish new just laws to people obey. Nevertheless, I agree with the statement to the extent that just or unjust is not based on individuals' interest, but on human's continuable development.

Experience tells us that a new just law can be imposed only when the old unjust law was abolished. For example, in the evening of slavery period, slaves who have enough power to resist unjust laws want to attain more rights. They overthrow slaveholders' control by violence, and new laws which were drafted later entitle them more freedom. Can the new just laws establish and they get   more rights if they still obey the unjust laws? So it is more importantly to resist unfair laws when you yearn for fair laws.

Admittedly, sometime individuals and corporations fight against the existed laws and establish minority's just law which is unjust for the others. For example, manufactories reduce their expense of pollution treating by lobby legislator to adapt regulations. However, if we stand still and accept the adapted law, environmental problems will be exacerbated quickly and threat our health. So, everyone has a responsibility to oppose unjust laws.

One must admit as well, some short-term sacrifices is necessary to disobey and fight against unjust laws. Some heroes paid their life for people's freedom, some straight officer were in persecuting while they insist on setting up just society. Also sometimes we were deluded to abolish just laws and then paid high price to remedy. However，it is worthy of doing that compare with so many family’s blessedness and continuable development of human beings. Moreover, such sacrifices seem trivial when consider that people will be under the protections of just laws forever.

Finally, it is important that how to define just and unjust. Only the criterion based on society's developing and most people's interest is accepted. Addicts hate the law which deprives their right of hitting the pipe and consider it is unfair to them that one like apple can eat it anytime but they cannot do the same thing only drugs instead of apples. But on the position of government, addicts' attitude is oversimplified, drugs not only a threat to addicts' life, but also a time bomb which can destroy the safety and stability of modern society. For example china have been destroyed by opium in the end of Qing period. So only the criterion based on right position can ensure the reality of just.

In the final analysis, I consider that individuals must know how to define just impersonal, then, practise their responsibility, obey just laws and resist unjust laws.


你是不是用孙 远的书啊 ，ta在很多文章的提纲里也犯了类似的错误的  ，我们在讨论 ，如果是跑题 ，问题就很大了

[ 本帖最后由 小勺子的反思 于 2007-3-7 15:00 编辑 ]

simahuiUID: 2208751

没有孙远的书，可能想到一块了。我的思路是这样的：要不要遵守法律首先要看他公正否，每个人对公正的定义是不一样的，只有正确定义才有下文。

讨论：我在第一段有I agree with the statement to the extent that just or unjust is not based on individuals' interest, but on human's continuable development.因此how to define just作为我的观点之一在最后一段提到。

你说的跑题是否是指不应该在文章里提及how to define 的问题

leonchunshengUID: 2247481

题目：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."
字数：465          用时：4:14:37          日期：2007-3-4
提纲：    1 不公正的旧法律废除了才能产生新的公正法律
              2 我们有反对不公正法律的责任
              3 反对不公正法律需要代价，是值得的
              4公不公正的定义要从客观（社会和人类的可持续发展）的角度出发
In asserting that it is more important(to) disobey and(to) resist unjust laws than (to)obey just laws, the speaker fails to acknowledge that the purpose of disobey(disobeying), resist(resisting)unjust laws is, at last,(to) abolish unjust laws and (to)establish new just laws to people obey(for pepople to obey). Nevertheless, I agree with the statement to the extent that just or unjust is not based on individuals' interest, but on human's continuable development(和我的想法差不多).

Experience tells us that a new just law can be imposed only when the old unjust law was abolished. For example, in the evening of slavery period, slaves who have enough power to resist unjust laws want to attain more rights. They overthrow (overthrew)slaveholders' control by violence, and new laws which were drafted later entitle（这里是不是应用过去式啊！entitled） them more freedom. Can the new just laws establish(应该是被动语态吧！be established )and they get   more rights if they still obey the unjust laws? So it is more importantly(important) to resist unfair laws when you yearn for fair laws.

Admittedly, sometime individuals and corporations fight against the existed laws and establish minority's(so-called) just law which is unjust for the others. For example, manufactories reduce their expense of pollution treating by lobby legislator to adapt regulations. However, if we stand still and accept the adapted law, environmental problems will be exacerbated quickly and threat our health. So, everyone has a responsibility to oppose unjust laws.

One must admit as well, some short-term sacrifices is necessary to disobey and fight against unjust laws. Some heroes paid their life for people's freedom, some straight officer were in persecuting while they insist on setting up just society. Also sometimes we were deluded to abolish just laws and then paid high price to remedy. However，it is worthy of doing that compare with so many family’s blessedness and continuable(是不是没有这个词啊！我查了半天没查到，改成continuous) development of human beings. Moreover, such sacrifices seem(to be) trivial when consider(considering) that people will be under the protections of just laws forever.

Finally, it is important that how to define just and unjust. Only the criterion based on society's developing and most people's interest is accepted. Addicts hate the law which deprives their right of hitting the pipe and consider it is unfair to(for) them that one like(likes) apple can eat it anytime but they cannot do the same thing only drugs instead of apples. But on the position of government, addicts' attitude is oversimplified, drugs（缺谓语吧！are) not only a threat to addicts' life, but also a time bomb which can destroy the safety and stability of modern society（加上at any time吧！, 针对 a time bomb）. For example china have（时态，had） been destroyed by opium in the end of Qing period. So only the criterion based on right position can ensure the reality of just.

In the final analysis, I consider that individuals must know how to define just impersonal, then, practise their responsibility, obey just laws and resist unjust laws.

评：我觉得整体思路还是可以的，从第一个论点到最后一个从逻辑上还是挺顺畅的。就是语法错误多了点，我想可能是写得太急了吧！和我差不多，我也是经常犯语法错误。咱们共同努力吧！


题目：ISSUE39 - "The intellectual benefits of attending a university or college are vastly overrated: most people could learn more by studying and reading on their own for four years than by pursuing a university or college degree."
字数：70          用时：0:27:46          日期：2007-3-5

Outline:  
1. Admittedly study by one's interest is more efficient than by force, but when you study in college by your interest, more help will be supplied than study alone, such as teachers' direction, schoolmates' advice and advanced experiment equipment.
2. College not only educate knowledge, but also teach how to conduct oneself.
3. College can initiate us a integrated knowledge system which can hardly get by study oneself

simahuiUID: 2208751

谢谢sheng， 这些错误我自己都没注意到，一个句子写的太久前后内容都忘了。

还有可持续发展我查了应该是sustainable development

我在引用过去例子时候时态比较乱，是不是应该全部用过去时？

leonchunshengUID: 2247481

我想过时式和一般现在时都可以吧! 只要保证前后一致应该就可以了吧!
我个人认为是这样,也许不对.