本文來(lái)自雅思作文網(wǎng)liuxue86.com《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》。
下面范文系北京新東方學(xué)校雅思寫作名師莊子在課堂上所寫的范文，如需轉(zhuǎn)載必須征得作者本人同意。另外，請(qǐng)各位同學(xué)不得抄襲，不得用于考試，否則會(huì)導(dǎo)致雷同而嚴(yán)重扣分。
Some people think that it is necessary to punish children so that they can learn the human virtues. What is your opinion?
有人認(rèn)為為了讓兒童學(xué)會(huì)人類的美德, 懲罰兒童是必要的. 你的觀點(diǎn)如何?
作者說(shuō)明：
本文目的在于培訓(xùn)學(xué)生寫作邏輯意識(shí)，字?jǐn)?shù)明顯超過(guò)實(shí)際應(yīng)試要求。
范文一2004-11-30寫于北京新東方總部教室，共694單詞。
How can children be well educated? A prevailing bias is that punishments are at least one of the effective ways to educate children. The prejudice is based on a false analogy between children and criminals. Its assumption is that punishments serve a function of determent. Punishments, in fact, are to revenge. Even punishments signal, signify, or at least imply the pragmatic value of violence. To punish children is to tell them that they are expected to take the measure of “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”, but this clearly betrays our human virtue for “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also”。 Unfortunately, so frequently have we human beings sought to the violence when we ask for the virtue and to the wars when we desire the peace. Superficially it is mere a child education issue, virtually this issue exerts immeasurable influences on human civilization and its various forms of conflicts, confusions, controversies, and contradictions.
Appealing to punishments logically assumes that children’s misbehaviors, delinquencies, or criminals stem, at least partially, from the consciousness of children that their behavior would not harm themselves. However, this will be clearly unable to account for the vandalism prevailing among some slums or ghettoes.
This logical analysis casts doubts on the bias that punishments can be employed under all circumstances. But this does not constitute a solid foundation to argue that punishments are always negative, nor can this be the evidence to conclude that punishments are always ineffective. The complexity of the issue thus makes it imperial to examine when, where, to whom, in which case the punishments can be employed in child education. Theoretically, it seems that exists a clear cut for people to distinguish between when punishments can be used and when not. Pragmatically, nevertheless, the imagined line is rather hard to discern or discover, even to the trained eyes. A five-year-old child blaspheming his neighbors, for instance, might pique the parents to punish the misdoer.
In this case the parents clearly manifest that the adults possess the power (if not the right) to appeal to violence when their own moral, ethic, or value is challenged, that violence (whatever the motivation of such violence) works well in case that the one who uses violence is physically stronger, and that the minors or the weak must be obedient to those who hold the power to slash.
雅思作文要想更進(jìn)一步,請(qǐng)?zhí)焯煸L問(wèn)我們.感謝閱讀《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》一文.本文來(lái)自雅思作文網(wǎng)liuxue86.com《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》。
This, ironically, is just the rules of all political games in human history. The Christian crusaders sloughed the Crescentates; the Japan Nazi killed the Asians; the whites discriminated and devastated the blacks. Enough! And believe it or not, this is part of the “noble” human culture whose pride feeds itself with the record of battles and conquests;---battles which proved nothing and settled nothing; conquests which shifted a boundary on the map, and put one ugly head instead of another on the coin which the people paid to the tax-gather. We finally trace the culture to its very roots: the child education. Cannot it be argued that punishments in child education breed the very seeds of wars?
Yet, alas, not all parents are the philosophers or preachers. They just cannot work out any other measures to discipline the kids. Punishments seem to be the natural or instinct response to the overwhelming majority of parents world around. However, if we deny or denounce the adult behavior to punish children, we must find out an effective and feasible system of ways to teach the parents how to address such issues encountered in child breeding and parenting. But, do we have? Alas!
Thus until such a system of child education has been worked out, no one can draw a telling conclusion to persuade the parents forsake the punishments. This looms vexing. So what? The world per se is such as it is. Troubles continue and the solutions remain to be revealed. This is just the very picture in which we are part.
怎樣才能很好地教育兒童呢？一個(gè)流行的偏見是對(duì)兒童的懲罰至少是一種有效的方法。這種偏見基于一種錯(cuò)誤的類比: 把兒童比作罪犯。這種偏見假定懲罰起起到威懾的作用。實(shí)際上懲罰是對(duì)過(guò)失的報(bào)復(fù)。甚至是用暴力。這明顯是教育兒童要 “以其人之道還制其人之身”。但是這是違背人類的德行的。我們非但不應(yīng)“以眼還眼，以牙還牙，而且要寬恕甚至是愛我們的敵人，若是有人打右臉，我們當(dāng)把左臉伸過(guò)去?！被闹嚨木褪俏覀儗で蟮滦袝r(shí)，我們使用不道德的手段；當(dāng)我們尋求和平時(shí)我們使用戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。表面上只是兒童教育的問(wèn)題，實(shí)際上影響遠(yuǎn)及人類文明的困惑和沖突。
訴諸于懲罰邏輯上假設(shè)兒童的過(guò)失，錯(cuò)誤，甚至疏忽或者罪行至少部分起因于兒童沒有意識(shí)到其行為后果會(huì)傷害自己。然而這種假設(shè)無(wú)法解釋貧民窟中普遍的惡意行為。
這些邏輯上的分析駁斥了所有場(chǎng)合懲罰兒童有效的錯(cuò)誤論點(diǎn)。但是這并不構(gòu)成證據(jù)去論證懲罰永遠(yuǎn)是負(fù)面的，這些邏輯分析也不能證明懲罰總是無(wú)效的。這個(gè)問(wèn)題的復(fù)雜性是人類必須審視何時(shí)，何地，對(duì)誰(shuí)，在什么具體情況下可以懲罰？從理論上講仿佛存在著一條清晰的界限告訴人們何時(shí)可以懲罰而何時(shí)不可。但是實(shí)際上這條想象的界限從來(lái)都不是那么容易地被發(fā)現(xiàn)。甚至是專家也會(huì)困惑。假定一個(gè)5歲的兒童咒罵鄰居。這會(huì)激怒家長(zhǎng)采取暴力措施懲罰做錯(cuò)事的孩子。
雅思作文要想更進(jìn)一步,請(qǐng)?zhí)焯煸L問(wèn)我們.感謝閱讀《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》一文.本文來(lái)自雅思作文網(wǎng)liuxue86.com《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》。
當(dāng)父母懲罰兒童時(shí)，懲罰者證明了成年人在自己的道德，倫理，或者價(jià)值觀念受到挑戰(zhàn)時(shí)，擁有“能力”（如果不是權(quán)力）去訴諸暴力解決問(wèn)題，還證明了無(wú)論動(dòng)機(jī)如何暴力很有作用，如果發(fā)動(dòng)暴力者實(shí)際更加強(qiáng)大，暴力就其作用，并且證明了弱者必須服從強(qiáng)者。
具有諷刺意味的，這正是人類歷史上所有政治游戲的規(guī)則?；浇掏罋⒁了固m教；日本納粹屠殺亞洲平民；白人屠殺仇視黑人。不勝枚舉。終于從人類兒童教育中發(fā)現(xiàn)了文明的淵源。難到不可以因此認(rèn)為人類對(duì)兒童的懲罰孕育了戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的種子嗎？
遺憾：不是所有的父母都是哲學(xué)家或者布道者。他們只是找不到更好的辦法去約束兒童。懲罰似乎是大多數(shù)父母的本能反應(yīng)。 可是如果我們反對(duì)或者斥責(zé)懲罰，那么我們就必須找出一套行之有效的教育體系措施告訴父母如何解決教育或者養(yǎng)育兒童中遇到的種種問(wèn)題。但是我們有嗎？可憐。
因此，如果找補(bǔ)出這種體系，就不能勸告父母不要懲罰兒童。這挺惱人的。那又怎么樣呢？世界就是這個(gè)樣子。問(wèn)題會(huì)繼續(xù)，答案還沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)。這正是我們身置其中的世界圖景。
(莊子 新東方學(xué)校雅思寫作名師)
雅思作文要想更進(jìn)一步,請(qǐng)?zhí)焯煸L問(wèn)我們.感謝閱讀《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》一文.
下面范文系北京新東方學(xué)校雅思寫作名師莊子在課堂上所寫的范文，如需轉(zhuǎn)載必須征得作者本人同意。另外，請(qǐng)各位同學(xué)不得抄襲，不得用于考試，否則會(huì)導(dǎo)致雷同而嚴(yán)重扣分。
Some people think that it is necessary to punish children so that they can learn the human virtues. What is your opinion?
有人認(rèn)為為了讓兒童學(xué)會(huì)人類的美德, 懲罰兒童是必要的. 你的觀點(diǎn)如何?
作者說(shuō)明：
本文目的在于培訓(xùn)學(xué)生寫作邏輯意識(shí)，字?jǐn)?shù)明顯超過(guò)實(shí)際應(yīng)試要求。
范文一2004-11-30寫于北京新東方總部教室，共694單詞。
How can children be well educated? A prevailing bias is that punishments are at least one of the effective ways to educate children. The prejudice is based on a false analogy between children and criminals. Its assumption is that punishments serve a function of determent. Punishments, in fact, are to revenge. Even punishments signal, signify, or at least imply the pragmatic value of violence. To punish children is to tell them that they are expected to take the measure of “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”, but this clearly betrays our human virtue for “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also”。 Unfortunately, so frequently have we human beings sought to the violence when we ask for the virtue and to the wars when we desire the peace. Superficially it is mere a child education issue, virtually this issue exerts immeasurable influences on human civilization and its various forms of conflicts, confusions, controversies, and contradictions.
Appealing to punishments logically assumes that children’s misbehaviors, delinquencies, or criminals stem, at least partially, from the consciousness of children that their behavior would not harm themselves. However, this will be clearly unable to account for the vandalism prevailing among some slums or ghettoes.
This logical analysis casts doubts on the bias that punishments can be employed under all circumstances. But this does not constitute a solid foundation to argue that punishments are always negative, nor can this be the evidence to conclude that punishments are always ineffective. The complexity of the issue thus makes it imperial to examine when, where, to whom, in which case the punishments can be employed in child education. Theoretically, it seems that exists a clear cut for people to distinguish between when punishments can be used and when not. Pragmatically, nevertheless, the imagined line is rather hard to discern or discover, even to the trained eyes. A five-year-old child blaspheming his neighbors, for instance, might pique the parents to punish the misdoer.
In this case the parents clearly manifest that the adults possess the power (if not the right) to appeal to violence when their own moral, ethic, or value is challenged, that violence (whatever the motivation of such violence) works well in case that the one who uses violence is physically stronger, and that the minors or the weak must be obedient to those who hold the power to slash.
雅思作文要想更進(jìn)一步,請(qǐng)?zhí)焯煸L問(wèn)我們.感謝閱讀《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》一文.本文來(lái)自雅思作文網(wǎng)liuxue86.com《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》。
This, ironically, is just the rules of all political games in human history. The Christian crusaders sloughed the Crescentates; the Japan Nazi killed the Asians; the whites discriminated and devastated the blacks. Enough! And believe it or not, this is part of the “noble” human culture whose pride feeds itself with the record of battles and conquests;---battles which proved nothing and settled nothing; conquests which shifted a boundary on the map, and put one ugly head instead of another on the coin which the people paid to the tax-gather. We finally trace the culture to its very roots: the child education. Cannot it be argued that punishments in child education breed the very seeds of wars?
Yet, alas, not all parents are the philosophers or preachers. They just cannot work out any other measures to discipline the kids. Punishments seem to be the natural or instinct response to the overwhelming majority of parents world around. However, if we deny or denounce the adult behavior to punish children, we must find out an effective and feasible system of ways to teach the parents how to address such issues encountered in child breeding and parenting. But, do we have? Alas!
Thus until such a system of child education has been worked out, no one can draw a telling conclusion to persuade the parents forsake the punishments. This looms vexing. So what? The world per se is such as it is. Troubles continue and the solutions remain to be revealed. This is just the very picture in which we are part.
怎樣才能很好地教育兒童呢？一個(gè)流行的偏見是對(duì)兒童的懲罰至少是一種有效的方法。這種偏見基于一種錯(cuò)誤的類比: 把兒童比作罪犯。這種偏見假定懲罰起起到威懾的作用。實(shí)際上懲罰是對(duì)過(guò)失的報(bào)復(fù)。甚至是用暴力。這明顯是教育兒童要 “以其人之道還制其人之身”。但是這是違背人類的德行的。我們非但不應(yīng)“以眼還眼，以牙還牙，而且要寬恕甚至是愛我們的敵人，若是有人打右臉，我們當(dāng)把左臉伸過(guò)去?！被闹嚨木褪俏覀儗で蟮滦袝r(shí)，我們使用不道德的手段；當(dāng)我們尋求和平時(shí)我們使用戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。表面上只是兒童教育的問(wèn)題，實(shí)際上影響遠(yuǎn)及人類文明的困惑和沖突。
訴諸于懲罰邏輯上假設(shè)兒童的過(guò)失，錯(cuò)誤，甚至疏忽或者罪行至少部分起因于兒童沒有意識(shí)到其行為后果會(huì)傷害自己。然而這種假設(shè)無(wú)法解釋貧民窟中普遍的惡意行為。
這些邏輯上的分析駁斥了所有場(chǎng)合懲罰兒童有效的錯(cuò)誤論點(diǎn)。但是這并不構(gòu)成證據(jù)去論證懲罰永遠(yuǎn)是負(fù)面的，這些邏輯分析也不能證明懲罰總是無(wú)效的。這個(gè)問(wèn)題的復(fù)雜性是人類必須審視何時(shí)，何地，對(duì)誰(shuí)，在什么具體情況下可以懲罰？從理論上講仿佛存在著一條清晰的界限告訴人們何時(shí)可以懲罰而何時(shí)不可。但是實(shí)際上這條想象的界限從來(lái)都不是那么容易地被發(fā)現(xiàn)。甚至是專家也會(huì)困惑。假定一個(gè)5歲的兒童咒罵鄰居。這會(huì)激怒家長(zhǎng)采取暴力措施懲罰做錯(cuò)事的孩子。
雅思作文要想更進(jìn)一步,請(qǐng)?zhí)焯煸L問(wèn)我們.感謝閱讀《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》一文.本文來(lái)自雅思作文網(wǎng)liuxue86.com《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》。
當(dāng)父母懲罰兒童時(shí)，懲罰者證明了成年人在自己的道德，倫理，或者價(jià)值觀念受到挑戰(zhàn)時(shí)，擁有“能力”（如果不是權(quán)力）去訴諸暴力解決問(wèn)題，還證明了無(wú)論動(dòng)機(jī)如何暴力很有作用，如果發(fā)動(dòng)暴力者實(shí)際更加強(qiáng)大，暴力就其作用，并且證明了弱者必須服從強(qiáng)者。
具有諷刺意味的，這正是人類歷史上所有政治游戲的規(guī)則?；浇掏罋⒁了固m教；日本納粹屠殺亞洲平民；白人屠殺仇視黑人。不勝枚舉。終于從人類兒童教育中發(fā)現(xiàn)了文明的淵源。難到不可以因此認(rèn)為人類對(duì)兒童的懲罰孕育了戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的種子嗎？
遺憾：不是所有的父母都是哲學(xué)家或者布道者。他們只是找不到更好的辦法去約束兒童。懲罰似乎是大多數(shù)父母的本能反應(yīng)。 可是如果我們反對(duì)或者斥責(zé)懲罰，那么我們就必須找出一套行之有效的教育體系措施告訴父母如何解決教育或者養(yǎng)育兒童中遇到的種種問(wèn)題。但是我們有嗎？可憐。
因此，如果找補(bǔ)出這種體系，就不能勸告父母不要懲罰兒童。這挺惱人的。那又怎么樣呢？世界就是這個(gè)樣子。問(wèn)題會(huì)繼續(xù)，答案還沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)。這正是我們身置其中的世界圖景。
(莊子 新東方學(xué)校雅思寫作名師)
雅思作文要想更進(jìn)一步,請(qǐng)?zhí)焯煸L問(wèn)我們.感謝閱讀《懲罰兒童以讓其學(xué)會(huì)美德是否正確？》一文.