? After reading the book To Kill a Mockingbird, I solved three problems that bothered me: Since there are many differences in life, why should we use the same standard to limit it? Since justice is so simple, why wait? Since people are born free, why should they be subject to various controls?
Life is different. At this moment, you may be thoughtful and determined to kill people, or you may just be insane in the cerebral cortex and lose your mind on impulse. But above the law, there is not much difference between them. In other words, IQ is determined at birth, but regardless of their level, they are always educated and tested by the same piece of paper. A student who fails because of fun gets the same evaluation as a student who fails because of mistakes. Why on earth? I think what I have overlooked is that, as a person's autonomy, Mr. Arthur, a once imprisoned eccentric, actually has a good side, and the Jules family, a lazy local ruffian, also has a conscience. You may have different IQs or different personalities, but as a complete person, you have completely independent autonomy. The role of various social regulations is to limit your autonomy to places that are beneficial to human groups.
Since justice is so simple, everyone can say the slogan of equality, and legal education seems to be achieved overnight, then for decades, people have always understood the ignorance of the legal system and encountered criminal acts with inherent thinking. Why is this simple "justice" difficult to achieve? A sentence in Astic's book made me wake up, "You don't wear other people's shoes, you walk in other people's yards step by step, and you never know what other people think." I never thought about what I would do if I met a crime. I always interpret this event with a condescending attitude. For example, some time ago, a man refused and killed the woman's family with a knife. His father voiced "murder for life". I instinctively think it's too far off the mark. How dare the father of an attempted murderer say that? But at this moment, I am lost in thought. If this happens to me, can I tell everyone with legal thinking that "my son's death is culpable of punishment!" " People can have a fair eye on everything that has nothing to do with themselves, but they are still fair to their own affairs, which is against the existence of human nature. This is also the reason why the consciousness of "justice" is difficult to be fully realized among citizens.
? Since people are born free, why should they be bound by the rules of this world? Being regulated by school discipline at school and secular control at home, even if you enter the society, you still have laws and ethics to regulate your behavior. What makes you live in control is not so much adaptation to society as assimilation to human groups. Astic's defense of blacks is his insistence on justice, but it goes beyond the secular rules. The townspeople laughed at him, but he was unmoved. He taught his son and daughter not to be influenced by what others said. At this time, he was not assimilated and was not regulated. In the end, although Astic insisted on justice again and again and made the murder of his son Jim public, the sheriff's words made him waver and finally gave up. At this time, he has been assimilated, and the future of his own son has made him accept social adjustment. Everyone is the same, and will accept the adjustment from society in constant resistance and survive in human groups. As the movie Dog Thirteen expresses, every period of youth is a murder, even youth, which extends to every period of life, killing freely and gaining the right to live in human groups.
? Finally, I hope you and I will not be assimilated by this society so early when we suffer injustice in the world and are vilified by the mob, stand up and hold our heads high, and do our best to protect the robin in our hearts like gentlemen.