Issue212 【challenge yourself小组】第三次作业

sabrinabaobaoUID：2515866

Issue212 【challenge yourself小组】第三次作业 by sabrinabaobao

作者的论断过于绝对，因当具体问题具体分析
断定手段是合理必须满足两个前提：第一，必须在基本的道德准则约束下，否则不论目标多么有价值，不择手段肯定是不合理的；第二，与所追求的目标一致，不会因为成本过高而得不偿失。
在满足以上前提的条件下，只要目标值得实现，那么努力就是合理的
不可排除另一种可能，在某些特殊情况下，可以付出任何代价去实现目标，比如历史上人们为了国家安危和维护和平正义不惜使用武力来解决问题。

The speaker believes if a goal is valued, then any means taken to attain it is justifiable. It is undoubted that the worthy goal deserves any efforts to achieve it in some cases, while we should measure the benefits as well as the expense when we in the process to pursuit the goal and the possible effect caused by the means in other cases. So I think the assertion goes to extreme and ignore the necessity to take a consideration depended on the different circumstances.

First of all, whether the means to realize the aim is warrantable rests on the two premises: Basically, the means should follow the restriction of the recognized ethical norms, otherwise no matter how the aim is worthwhile we should give up implementing the evil device. Machiavelli, the Italian political theorist and the precursor of realistic, was condemned for his avocations in his book The Prince that a determined ruler can go to every expedient and be indifferent to moral consideration to realize a centralized government and strengthen Florence. He is one of the most disreputable political theorists in the history; for he ignored that a justifiable means ought to be an ethical means at first.

Moreover, it is necessary to weigh the benefits gained by the means against the costs and side-effects as a result. To illustrate the point evidently, we can analyze the example about the mitigation of the global warming. Global warming has become an international emergency, because the increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the arch criminal for the abnormal climate and natural catastrophe in global sphere. If we can solve the problem, the entire human can benefit from it. Does it mean we should stop all the industrial factories and no longer drive automobiles to decrease the quantity of co2 from the source? The answer is no; mitigation of the global warming is not a profitable and worthy goal any more, if we attain it at the expense of economic depress and large scale unemployment. Hence, we should think about the two premises before judging and guarantee the means taken is consistent with the ends.

As long as the two conditions are satisfied, the means we take is surely justifiable to attain a valued goal. For instance, in order to mitigate the global warming, we can use the neo regenerated or efficient energy instead of the fossil fuel to provide the power for industry and people’s daily life, and replace some facilities with the energy-saving ones. Such means is both effective and beneficial to achieve the target．

The premises are the standard to judge whether the means is reasonable or not, however, we cannot be limited by them and overlook the case to case analysis. In some particular environment, the goal is completely worth devoting everything including our lives to attain it. Dating back to the 1930s, the world war two, 60 percent of countries in the world participated in the war against the fascists at the expense of 50 million people’s life and destroyed industry and economy. In order to eliminate injustice and restore peace, the states repeatedly use military force in history, even though it caused destructive loss. So the worthiness of means taken to attain goals was determined by the different cases, we cannot conclude arbitrarily without deeply analysis.

To sum up, the author begs the points. The means should obey to the people’s moral restriction before being taken to achieve very worthy goals, and it is necessary to compare the benefits and expense or bad influence before taking actions except some particular cases.

superjiang001UID：2300426

The speaker believes if a goal is valued, then any means taken to attain it is justifiable. It is undoubted that the worthy goal deserves any efforts to achieve it in some cases, while we should measure the benefits as well as the expense when we in the process to pursuit the goal and the possible effect caused by the means in other cases. So I think the assertion goes to extreme and ignore the necessity to take a consideration depended on the different circumstances.

First of all, whether the means to realize the aim is warrantable rests on the two premises: Basically, the means should follow the restriction of the recognized ethical norms, otherwise no matter how the aim is worthwhile we should give up implementing the evil device(没有查到device有means或者aim的含义，不知道你这个词用的对否). Machiavelli, the Italian political theorist and the precursor of realistic, was condemned for his avocations in his book The Prince that a determined ruler can go to every expedient and be indifferent to moral consideration to realize a centralized government and strengthen Florence. He is one of the most disreputable political theorists in the history; for he ignored that a justifiable means ought to be an ethical means at first.（例子举得挺好的，要是能具体说一下他为了实现集权统治具体做了什么违背道德标准的事似乎更令人信服，光谈别人对他的评价好像有点人云亦云的感觉）

Moreover, it is necessary to weigh the benefits gained by the means against the costs and side-effects as a result. To illustrate the point evidently, we can analyze the example about the mitigation of the global warming. Global warming has become an international emergency, because the increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the arch criminal（criminal用的挺好的） for the abnormal climate and natural catastrophe in global sphere.（大家应该都清楚温热效应是指什么，这句介绍不要也可以，只是我的想法，呵呵） If we can solve the problem, the entire human can benefit from it. Does it mean we should stop all the industrial factories and no longer drive automobiles to decrease the quantity of co2 from the source? The answer is no（短句很有力，得向你学习）; mitigation of the global warming is not a profitable and worthy goal any more, if we attain it at the expense of economic depress and large scale （是不是要加个of）unemployment. Hence, we should think about the two premises before judging and guarantee the means taken is consistent with the ends.

As long as the two conditions are satisfied, the means we take is surely justifiable to attain a valued goal. For instance, in order to mitigate the global warming, we can use the neo regenerated or efficient energy instead of the fossil fuel to provide the power for industry and people’s daily life, and replace some facilities with the energy-saving ones. Such means is （are）both effective and beneficial to achieve the target．(你的两个前提应该还是定义了什么是worthy goal,题目意思是在满足是worthy goal的前提下，任何措施去实现它都是可取的，这个任何措施到底应不应该带点负面影响啊？我是请教哈，从你这里提出的措施看，比如用新能源代替有污染的能源，是不带负面影响的)

The premises are the standard to judge whether the means is reasonable or not, however, we cannot be limited by them and overlook the case to case analysis. In some particular environment（你意思是不是说在一些特殊环境（情况）下？environment不能这么用吧？）, the goal is completely worth devoting（用sacrifice可能好点） everything including our lives to attain it. Dating back to the 1930s, the world war two, 60 percent of countries in the world participated in the war against the fascists at the expense of 50 million people’s life and destroyed industry and economy. In order to eliminate injustice and restore peace（restore不知道能不能这么用）, the states repeatedly use military force in history（in history有点突兀，during the war可能好点）, even though it caused destructive loss. So the worthiness of means taken to attain goals was determined by the different cases, we cannot conclude arbitrarily without deeply analysis.

To sum up, the author begs the points. The means should obey to the people’s moral restriction before being taken to achieve very worthy goals, and it is necessary to compare the benefits and expense or bad influence before taking actions except some particular cases.

哇，哥们，读你的文章真是爽啊，就跟读北美似的，咱俩水平根本不在一档次，我真不能帮你改什么了，改了反倒觉得不好了，呵呵
帮个忙，我8月15号就考了，现在很着急，你给个提高水平的建议吧，句式要有变化多背北美行否？
另外，能不能把你以前写的文章打包发给我观摩一下啊？信得着我的话我也可以帮你提提意见，尽我最大努力，呵呵，感谢啊！
QQ：274748703 姜智超

superjiang001UID：2300426

发我邮箱里也行，superjiang001@163.com, 如果可以的话，感谢

tongdawpUID：2500696

The speaker believes if a goal is valued, then any means taken to attain it is justifiable. It is undoubted that the worthy goal deserves any efforts to achieve it in some cases, while we should measure the benefits as well as the expense when we（缺谓语） in the process to pursuit（pursuit是名词，动词是pursue） the goal and the possible effect caused by the means in other cases（in other cases放在when后面，用逗号隔开比较好，放在这读起来别扭）. So I think the assertion goes to extreme and ignore the necessity to take a consideration depended on the different circumstances.（最好是用一个句子明确提出观点。）First of all, whether the means to realize the aim is warrantable rests on the two premises: Basically, the means should follow the restriction of the recognized ethical norms, otherwise no matter how the aim is worthwhile we should give up implementing the evil device. Machiavelli, the Italian political theorist and the precursor of realistic, was condemned for his avocations in his book The Prince that a determined ruler can go to every expedient and be indifferent to moral consideration to realize a centralized government and strengthen Florence. He is one of the most disreputable political theorists in the history; for he ignored that a justifiable means ought to be an ethical means at first.（例子很帅啊，不是那些俗的不能再俗的人物，对论点的支持也很好。）Moreover, it is necessary to weigh the benefits gained by the means against the costs and side-effects as a result. To illustrate the point evidently, we can analyze the example about the mitigation of the global warming. Global warming has become an international emergency, because the increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the arch criminal for the abnormal climate and natural catastrophe in global sphere. If we can solve the problem, the entire human can benefit from it. Does it mean we should stop all the industrial factories and no longer drive automobiles to decrease the quantity of co2 from the source? The answer is no; mitigation of the global warming is not a profitable and worthy goal any more, if we attain it at the expense of economic depress and large scale unemployment.（这个例子和北美范文的好像啊，呵呵，不过变化的很好。有一个问题，就是例子叙述的过长。） Hence, we should think about the two premises before judging and guarantee the means taken is consistent with the ends.As long as the two conditions are satisfied, the means we take is surely justifiable to attain a valued goal. For instance, in order to mitigate the global warming, we can use the neo regenerated or efficient energy instead of the fossil fuel to provide the power for industry and people’s daily life, and replace some facilities with the energy-saving ones. Such means is both effective and beneficial to achieve the target．The premises are the standard to judge whether the means is reasonable or not, however, we cannot be limited by them and overlook the case to case analysis.（这句和上面的衔接不太好，前面一句用让步语气感觉更好些。Though…, we cannot…）In some particular environment, the goal is completely worth devoting everything including our lives to attain it. Dating back to the 1930s, the world war two, 60 percent of countries in the world participated in the war against the fascists at the expense of 50 million people’s life and destroyed industry and economy. In order to eliminate injustice and restore peace, the states repeatedly use military force in history, even though it caused destructive loss. So the worthiness of means taken to attain goals was determined by the different cases, we cannot conclude arbitrarily without deeply analysis.（这一段怎么看都感觉夹在这里有点不舒服，和文章整体有点格格不入。类似的问题我也出现过，看北美范文时总见到这种结构：主题-分论点1-分论点2-排除特例-结尾。读人家的文章感觉就是一个思路下来的，自己这么写就读着非常不顺畅，怎么会这样呢？）To sum up, the author begs the points. The means should obey to the people’s moral restriction before being taken to achieve very worthy goals, and it is necessary to compare the benefits and expense or bad influence before taking actions except some particular cases