avatar
I*4
1
Jurist:A nation's laws must be viewed as expressions of a moral code that
transcends those laws and serve as a measure of their adequacy. Otherwise, a
society can have no sound basis for preferring any given set of laws to all
others. Thus, any moral prohibition against the violation of statutes must
leave room for exceptions.
which one of the following can be properly inferred from the jurist's
statements?
A. Those who formulate statutes are not primarily concerned with morality
when they do so
avatar
m*t
2
inferred = must be true? therefore B is not the right answer.
同问about the thus, what's the connection there? hehe

a
all
must

【在 I****4 的大作中提到】
: Jurist:A nation's laws must be viewed as expressions of a moral code that
: transcends those laws and serve as a measure of their adequacy. Otherwise, a
: society can have no sound basis for preferring any given set of laws to all
: others. Thus, any moral prohibition against the violation of statutes must
: leave room for exceptions.
: which one of the following can be properly inferred from the jurist's
: statements?
: A. Those who formulate statutes are not primarily concerned with morality
: when they do so

avatar
M*k
3
我理解的是thus 是整个句子的结果 因为national law必须看成是 a moral code 的
expression, 否则a society can had no.......... 所以 任何条令的违反如果同时也抵触道德禁忌 一定有例外 这么理解我选E。。。。。不过也觉得很牵强 期待高手啊
B本身就是错的吧 national law已经被看成是morale code的expression了 怎么还能变
成非morale的criteria
avatar
d*h
4
moral code measures laws. Sometimes measurement is good, then moral
prohibition against violation of the law is granted. Otherwise, it's not
granted, which infers E.
avatar
S*i
5
同楼上的理解。题干首先设定了一个前提:法律必须被视为道德规范的表达,而道德规
范优于法律规定,并是衡量法律是否合理的标准。不然的话,我们就没法子解释社会为
什么要采纳这套法律原则而不是其他。所以,一个行为虽然违反制定法,但却可能合乎
道德--这就是题干说的exception。即实际上存在这种违法行为,如果用道德code来衡
量的话,非但不能予以prohibition,可能还要予以提倡,从而最后导致制定法的变化
来反应社会道德的需求。
简单来说,逻辑就是,法律应反应道德,但是两者可能不尽一致,所以我们要允许例外。
这里其实涉及了法理学上的一个基本悖论,就是“恶法非法”的问题。
A不对,因为根据题干的意思,立法者恰恰需要关心道德规范来使得法律合乎社会伦理;
B不对,因为题干要求衡量法律好恶的标准来自道德code,而不是“other than moral
code"
C不对,因为其用合法性来判断道德规则,恰好和题干要求的相反。
D不对,因为题干并不否认遵守法律的道德义务,其仅仅说因为可能存在道德和法律评
价不一致的例外。这是两回事。
E对,因为其准确复述了题干的基本逻辑。

a
all
mu

【在 I****4 的大作中提到】
: Jurist:A nation's laws must be viewed as expressions of a moral code that
: transcends those laws and serve as a measure of their adequacy. Otherwise, a
: society can have no sound basis for preferring any given set of laws to all
: others. Thus, any moral prohibition against the violation of statutes must
: leave room for exceptions.
: which one of the following can be properly inferred from the jurist's
: statements?
: A. Those who formulate statutes are not primarily concerned with morality
: when they do so

avatar
I*4
6
终于明白了~~多谢多谢!!

外。
理;

【在 S**i 的大作中提到】
: 同楼上的理解。题干首先设定了一个前提:法律必须被视为道德规范的表达,而道德规
: 范优于法律规定,并是衡量法律是否合理的标准。不然的话,我们就没法子解释社会为
: 什么要采纳这套法律原则而不是其他。所以,一个行为虽然违反制定法,但却可能合乎
: 道德--这就是题干说的exception。即实际上存在这种违法行为,如果用道德code来衡
: 量的话,非但不能予以prohibition,可能还要予以提倡,从而最后导致制定法的变化
: 来反应社会道德的需求。
: 简单来说,逻辑就是,法律应反应道德,但是两者可能不尽一致,所以我们要允许例外。
: 这里其实涉及了法理学上的一个基本悖论,就是“恶法非法”的问题。
: A不对,因为根据题干的意思,立法者恰恰需要关心道德规范来使得法律合乎社会伦理;
: B不对,因为题干要求衡量法律好恶的标准来自道德code,而不是“other than moral

相关阅读
logo
联系我们隐私协议©2024 redian.news
Redian新闻
Redian.news刊载任何文章,不代表同意其说法或描述,仅为提供更多信息,也不构成任何建议。文章信息的合法性及真实性由其作者负责,与Redian.news及其运营公司无关。欢迎投稿,如发现稿件侵权,或作者不愿在本网发表文章,请版权拥有者通知本网处理。