GRE写作Issue部分精品素材分享之社会契约论

2015年07月13日16:52 来源：小站整理

参与（0） 阅读（3262）

想要在GRE作文部分的考试中写出优秀的文章，论据素材是重要的一环。好的论据不仅能帮助你支撑观点，加强说服力，还能体现出考生在阅读量上的积累和深厚扎实的语言功底基础。特别是ISSUE作文，更是需要大量好素材作为储备，才能保证考生无论遭遇那种题目，都能游刃有余地完成一篇高分作文的写作。小编为大家整理了GRE ISSUE作文各类题目的精品优质素材，一起来看吧。

对社会公正的反对

Social justice may be unfeasible economically. Many water-poor countries have recognized a “basic right to have drinking water” and then provided that access accordingly. This often resulted in water sources being over-used and then decimated.

On the other hand, some scholars reject the very idea of social justice as meaningless, religious, self-contradictory, and ideological, believing that to realize any degree of social justice is unfeasible, and that the attempt to do so must destroy all liberty. The most complete rejection of the concept of social justice comes from the Friedrich Hayek of the Austrian School of Economics: “The phrase ‘social justice’ is simply a semantic fraud from the same stable as People’s Democracy.” The purported goal of social justice is to eliminate economic inequities, but because these inequities are largely a result of individuals’ own choices, they can only be corrected by controlling said choices.

对社会公正的批评

Criticism of the idea that there is an objective standard of social justice has come from several circles. First, there are moral relativists (such as the Sophists), who do not believe that there is any kind of objective standard for justice in general. Second, there are cynics who believe that any ideal of social justice is ultimately a mere justification for the status quo. Third, there are libertarians who believe that social justice violates the non-aggression principle. Additionally, postmodernism has also developed its own critique of the concept of social justice.

Many other people accept some of the basic principles of social justice, such as the idea that all human beings have a basic level of value, but disagree with the elaborate conclusions that may or may not follow from this. One example is the statement by H. G. Wells that all people are “equally entitled to the respect of their fellowmen”.

社会契约与契约理论

However, the philosophical concept of social contract does not address the same issues as present-day juridical contract theory, making the name “social contract” potentially misleading. For this reason some thinkers preferred the term “social compact”. The key notion of social

contract or compact is that the individual consents by entering or remaining on the dominion of an existing society, which is usually a geographic territory, in much the same way one does when entering or remaining in someone’s household or private property. People are normally brought up from childhood to respect the boundaries of societies, including families, and the rules made by them for their territorial spaces. That is part of the socialization development process.

对社会契约的违反

The social contract and the civil rights it gives us are neither “natural” nor permanently fixed. Rather, the contract itself is a means towards an end—the benefit of all—and is only legitimate to the extent that it meets the general interest. Therefore, when failings are found in the contract, we renegotiate to change the terms, using methods such as elections and legislature.

Since rights come from agreeing to the contract, those who simply choose not to fulfill their contractual obligations, such as by committing crimes, risk losing some of their rights, and the rest of society can be expected to protect itself against the actions of such outlaws. To be a member of society is to accept responsibility for following its rules, along with the threat of punishment for violating them. Most of us are comfortable with laws punishing behavior that harms people because we are concerned about others harming us and don’t plan on harming others. In this way, society works by “mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon”.