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.
The arguer claims that everyone in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws, while disobeying and resisting unjust laws. I concede the reasonable parts of this argument, however, I tend to disagree with this point of view.
Firstly, there is no doubt that laws play a significant role in improving the justify of a society, so that every citizen are supposed to follow the just laws to preserve the society equality. However, not only just laws have critical effects on creating the justify atmosphere and arising the public’s awareness of justify, but also the unjust laws can achieve the same goal. For instance, for some altruism people, it might be crucial to kill those with adverse criminal behavior as punishment, which they consider as “unjust laws”, then they would like to be opposite to the implement of related laws in the name of “protecting human rights of living”. Therefore, with less serious disobeying rules and laws, it might trigger to more and more events that destroying the safeguard in the public area, especially in schools, hospitals and transport hubs by those anti-social person.
Secondly, if the individual obeys the unjust laws, then the development of justify in the society would be stemmed, since these laws are born to protect some particular parts among the public, such as the upper class, the rich, and the power. Nevertheless, the laws manifest the force in resolving the imbalance developing issues in the society. It is likely that in the short term, the results of obeying (30 min) unjust laws might be mainly shown in benefiting several groups of people, while in the long term, the consequences could be much lucid in involving every person’s daily life. Think about the poverty-related policy in China. The government put out the laws and rules about animating the economy in some areas with more advanced resources first, and then let them give a hand to those poor areas lacking resources. Although it seems that it is unjust to champion the industrialization in few areas, it did have dramatic prosperity in not only these areas, but also undeveloped places. Thus we cannot draw a conclusion that unjust laws should be against by the public.
To sum up, without ruling out these circumstance above, the argument fails to convince us that the individuals should obey just laws, and disobey and even resist unjust ones.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 75, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ws play a significant role in improving the justify of a society, so that every citizen are...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 256, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... laws have critical effects on creating the justify atmosphere and arising the public’s awa...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 997, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ese areas, but also undeveloped places. Thus we cannot draw a conclusion that unjust...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, while, for instance, no doubt, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1996.0 2235.4752809 89% => OK
No of words: 397.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02770780856 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46372701284 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72084845686 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 215.323595506 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564231738035 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 619.2 704.065955056 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 23.0359550562 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 66.5651821104 60.3974514979 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.571428571 118.986275619 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.3571428571 23.4991977007 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.5714285714 5.21951772744 203% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308988770493 0.243740707755 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0987375953951 0.0831039109588 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0622096316436 0.0758088955206 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180525403147 0.150359130593 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360084957713 0.0667264976115 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.1392134831 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.8420337079 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.1639044944 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.4 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 100.480337079 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.2143820225 118% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.