Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Laws are generally enforced by governments to aid stability of society, and are generally justified as being vital to the population’s welfare. When dealing with an individual’s responsibility with respect to evaluating laws and obeying them only if they are justified, an absolute stance is hard to take, as there are many things at play, that may affect what ‘responsibility’ encompasses, and what may be safe or feasible for a citizen to do. In my opinion, I disagree with the stated claim, albeit only to a certain extent. In reasoning out a stance on this issue, there are two main points to consider.
To begin, it may not always be safe or feasible for an individual to obey only the laws they like, and to resist laws that they perceive as unjust. Consider the authoritarian regime of the People’s Republic of China, and the well-known Tianmen Square incident: Students and young people gathered to protest the lack of transparency in the government’s functioning, and they demanded a provision for them to be able to express their dissent. This is a clear case of individuals resisting the laws that kept them from having any amount of legislative power, which they believed to be greatly unjust. One may argue that this led to a huge pro-democracy movement, and that it even set an example for the people of other countries to protest injustice. However, since then, all information about the incident was claimed to be untrue by the Chinese government, and lots of censorship measures were put in place that effectively banned people from even acknowledging it. This has greatly suppressed any potential for the Chinese people who want to have a voice in their government. Consider the points of view of the students: They were fired upon by the military, and anyone suspected of being pro-democracy was severely punished. For the countless students who lost their lives that day, standing up to laws that they considered unjust led to their deaths. Thus, in these kind of situations where the government is highly authoritarian, and hence more likely to punish rebels harshly, it would not be feasible for individuals to ‘rise up’ against the establishment, or in their best interests, considering the trouble that they may get into.
Should people simply disobey laws that they think are unjust? One may argue that such defiance would set an example for those who are afraid to disobey unjust laws, and that this would send a message to the government. However, an assumption made here is that all individuals know what is best for them, and that what they consider ‘just’ is skewed by their other views, and possibly faulty moral compass. Consider the ‘anti-vax’ movement of the United States, that was composed of people who were against vaccinations, making baseless claims that vaccines are a cause of autism and that there were supposedly ‘micro-chips’ in them. They provided no empirical evidence for their claims, and dived into conspiracy after conspiracy when challenged. When such people disobeyed laws by not wearing a mask during the COVID-19 pandemic era when a mask mandate was in place, they placed themselves at a higher risk of contracting the disease. Hence, when an individual’s view on a law or measure goes against what they believe is true, but they have no substantiative evidence to back up their claims on the apparent ‘injustice’ of the law, then it would not be in their best interests to flout the law and be a potential hazard to other people.
In conclusion, every individual in a society does not have a responsibility to obey only the laws that are ‘just,’ since it may not be safe for them, as individuals, to openly flout the law, or it might be the case that their view of justice is heavily skewed. The reason I do not ‘strongly’ disagree with the prompt is the fact that, indeed, there may be some situations where civil disobedience works in favour of the people. However, based on the points discussed above, my stance on the issue is that on average, the stated claim is proven to be untrue or unreasonable.
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you ag 79
- Sports stars and movie stars have an obligation to behave as role models for the young people who look up to them In return for the millions of dollars that they are paid we should expect them to fulfill this societal responsibility Write a response in wh 66
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a listener supported public radio station For the past year as part of an effort to broaden our supporter base our Folk on the Air program has allocated less time to traditional American folk musi 68
- Nowadays there are a large number of coffee shops and fast food vendors on high streets and in town centres Why are there so many of these outlets What effect is this having on the society 84
- An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor s record of treating similarly afflicted patients Through gaining such access the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition Write a re 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1363, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this kind' or 'these kinds'?
Suggestion: this kind; these kinds
...ed unjust led to their deaths. Thus, in these kind of situations where the government is h...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, however, if, may, so, then, thus, well, in conclusion, kind of, in my opinion, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 42.0 19.5258426966 215% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 33.0 11.3162921348 292% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 70.0 33.0505617978 212% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 99.0 58.6224719101 169% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3423.0 2235.4752809 153% => OK
No of words: 691.0 442.535393258 156% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.95369030391 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.12707312764 4.55969084622 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96309616577 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 322.0 215.323595506 150% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.465991316932 0.4932671777 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1059.3 704.065955056 150% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 16.0 1.77640449438 901% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 30.0 23.0359550562 130% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 72.7773360513 60.3974514979 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.826086957 118.986275619 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.0434782609 23.4991977007 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.60869565217 5.21951772744 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 5.13820224719 253% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221195198017 0.243740707755 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0711301056666 0.0831039109588 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0672695084764 0.0758088955206 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.163289127928 0.150359130593 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0456536511261 0.0667264976115 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 14.1392134831 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.49 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.1639044944 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 159.0 100.480337079 158% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.2143820225 125% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.