every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws
Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws to a certain extent. The reason and the change wanted needs to be accessible to the entire society and should not harm any individual.
Over the course of history, there have many occasions in which individuals of a society have taken the responsibility to disobey unjust laws. For example, the Jim Crow laws of the 1950s in America were inherently racist and disregarded civil and human rights. These laws were unjust and it was the response of the society to such laws that forced the government to change the law to be more inclusive. It was the individuals in the society who protested, resisted and rallied to change the law. Similarly, in the 1970s, the women in the US, fought for equal rights and equal pay as at the time it was legal to discriminate on the basis of sex as it violates basic human rights. This shows that the law itself needs to be a hundred percent tolerant of all the individuals in the society and not intent to cause any individual harm. Here the law actively suppressed and hindered the progress of a group of people and it would be the individual responsibility to stand up for themselves and for others. However, it is important to acknowledge that some individuals may not have the luxury of being able to do that.
However, society is made up of different individuals with different thought, ideas and ideologies. This makes it hard to ‘know’ how to define “just” and “unjust” laws as human thought and belief is subjective. For example, if a law exists that directly contradicts one’s political beliefs then that individual would think it is justified for them to stand up and disobey the law. This would lead to a scenario where individuals start to take the law into their own hands which would lead to anarchy. The definition of “just’ and “unjust” laws in a society would depend on a number of factors such as the individuals who make up the While the lines of “just” and “unjust” laws were blurred during World War II where the regime systematically manipulated individuals into believing Jews were inferior. In such situations an individual’s morality and sense of right and wrong should dictate action, as it did in many heroic individuals who went on to saving millions of lives at the risk of their own by resisting and disobeying the law. This shows that lawmakers who are also human, have biased and subjective ideas about the laws which influence what sorts of laws they pass, this means that the law can never be completely objective.
Individuals do have a responsibility to obey just laws and disobey unjust laws however one needs to evaluate the law objectively, without colouring it with their own politic or ideological biases. They must evaluate the trade off and see is a majority of the society is benefitting from that law and that that law is not actively discriminating, marginalising and excluding selected individuals.
- A recent five-year study of the sleeping habits of a selection of people challenges the belief that receiving at least eight hours of sleep a night is healthy. People in this study who reported sleeping eight or more hours a night had a higher rate of spe 55
- Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archaeologists have recently discovered molds of human hea 69
- It is not possible for one person to succeed without another somewhere failing Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim made above In your response use specific examples and explain how those examples shape your position 50
- “Allowing our children to spend hours a day IM’ing and employing social media is bound to impede their social skills as they enter adulthood and the workforce.” 66
- Claim: The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpointReason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does on really discover the value of that idea. 83
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, may, similarly, so, then, while, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 28.0 14.8657303371 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 12.9106741573 23% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2560.0 2235.4752809 115% => OK
No of words: 516.0 442.535393258 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96124031008 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76609204519 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16534514567 2.79657885939 113% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 215.323595506 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.455426356589 0.4932671777 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 822.6 704.065955056 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.1662783422 60.3974514979 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.736842105 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1578947368 23.4991977007 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.78947368421 5.21951772744 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => 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: 0.547446936775 0.243740707755 225% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.207151485208 0.0831039109588 249% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.191967868172 0.0758088955206 253% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.433410655157 0.150359130593 288% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.111993760125 0.0667264976115 168% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.