評(píng)論
打印
類似的題目之前曾經(jīng)考過，而在今年的1月12日再次出現(xiàn)。對(duì)于這個(gè)題目，很多學(xué)生會(huì)非常容易的陷入一個(gè)陷阱(pitfall)，那就是認(rèn)為說如果讓學(xué)生接受教育或就業(yè)培訓(xùn)的話，那就是等同于有充分的人身自由了。其實(shí)不然，這里的教育或就業(yè)培訓(xùn)并不代表說把囚犯與普通的學(xué)生或接受培訓(xùn)者一樣等同的對(duì)待，而是一樣的要限制他們的自由，只不過說不像在監(jiān)獄里整天關(guān)在牢房里無所事事，而是要接受教育和培訓(xùn)。關(guān)于這個(gè)題目，其實(shí)就變成了一個(gè)兩者之間的對(duì)比，可以從以下幾個(gè)方面進(jìn)行論述。
1. 監(jiān)獄同教育或就業(yè)培訓(xùn)相比有很強(qiáng)的阻嚇作用，這樣可以有效的抑制犯罪率的上升。
In stark contrast to placing criminals on educational courses or employment retraining, prisons appeared more effective in deterring potential, would-be wrongdoers from committing crimes, thus drastically decreasing the likelihood of rising crime rate.
2. 監(jiān)獄更多的對(duì)罪犯來說是一種懲罰，因此能夠避免再犯。
Being locked up behind the bars is a punitive measure imposed on criminals who are highly unlikely to turn into a recidivist in consideration of their fear of setting foot into jails ever again.
Arguments for education and job retraining
1. 罪犯在監(jiān)獄里所被包圍的是一群囚犯，這對(duì)罪犯的改造不是好的，反而是不好的影響。接受教育可以讓罪犯在一個(gè)積極的環(huán)境里，真正的意識(shí)到對(duì)與錯(cuò)。
"Captivity of negativity" is a terminology intended to describe the destructive, rather than constructive impact on criminals who are locked up in prison, surrounded by people who probably have committed even more serious charges. Education serves to correct any misconception or eliminate twisted thoughts they have by immersing them in a positive environment.
2. 大多數(shù)罪犯往往是沒有什么文化知識(shí)和生存技能，出獄后通常很難找到工作。教育和就業(yè)培訓(xùn)能夠讓他們?cè)谌蘸蟮纳钪锌孔约荷嫦氯ィ恢劣谝驗(yàn)闆]有收入來源而再次誤入歧途。
A significant proportion of criminals are sadly illiterate without adequate fundamental knowledge and survival skills and it wouldn’t be easy for them to find a decent job after being released from the jail. With convenient access to education and job retraining, they are able to survive by themselves, greatly reducing the chance of becoming a recidivist in times when they are financially challenged.
3. Should individual choices interfere with the society that is based on rules and laws
這是今年10月11號(hào)的考題，這道題目主要討論的核心是一種矛盾。那就是社會(huì)始終是以法規(guī)和法律為基礎(chǔ)的，而有時(shí)社會(huì)的利益往往是與個(gè)人的選擇相矛盾的。當(dāng)這種矛盾發(fā)生時(shí)，應(yīng)該將哪一個(gè)放在首位？為什么？這次考試結(jié)束后，我曾經(jīng)與幾個(gè)參與考試的學(xué)生討論過，很多學(xué)生的反映就是這個(gè)題目其實(shí)并不難，但就是不知道如何下手。還有某位學(xué)生直接就舉了一個(gè)我們不能隨便殺人，因?yàn)檫@是違反法律的事情的這樣一個(gè)例子。其實(shí)，這個(gè)題目最為關(guān)鍵的是兩點(diǎn)：如何去法律的范圍還有就是要找到一個(gè)合適法律與個(gè)人選擇發(fā)生沖突的這么一個(gè)結(jié)合點(diǎn)。我對(duì)這個(gè)題目的段落結(jié)構(gòu)以及內(nèi)容的理解如下：
1.這種矛盾的產(chǎn)生主要是因?yàn)榉煞ㄒ?guī)是從大眾和國家的利益出發(fā)，而個(gè)人利益則絕大多數(shù)情況下是站在個(gè)人角度考慮問題的。一個(gè)有利于個(gè)人的問題如果給其他人造成了無謂的傷害，則是不應(yīng)該允許的。
The conflict of public interest and personal interest accounts largely for the issue of the extent to which is the interference of personal choices justified with the society governed by rules and laws.
