Civil Disobedience《论公民的不服从》读后感.pptxVIP

The review of Civil Disobedience Henry David Thoreau is recognized as an essayist, a poet, a naturalist, a philosopher and most importantly a transcendentalist. His masterpiece, Walden, is the embodiment of his belief which advocates feelings rather than senses and promotes individualism. There is also another one reveals the basic principle of Thoreau, that is the Civil Disobedience. In July, 1846, Thoreau was put into jail since he refused to pay a poll-tax of $2.00 to a government he thought unjust. Though this event was insignificant enough, it inspired Thoreau to write his famous essay, “Civil Disobedience” which advocating passive resistance to unjust laws of society, influenced people such as Mahatma Gandhi. Through Gandhi, Thoreau’s theory has become a great tool in political activities. In order to better understand this essay, the prerequisite is to know one concept—the civil disobedience. Is civil disobedience the same as the right against the law? What is the difference between them? After reading the book, I’ve got an idea that in some sense they are alike. But civil disobedience should be described as the resistance against unjust laws based on conscience. The civil disobedience is a moral right, while the right against the law is one of the basic human rights. Thoreau stresses on the individual’s effect, so the civil disobedience is very important. “Action from principle, the perception and the performance of right, changes things and relations; it is essentially revolutionary, and does not;consist wholly with anything which was.” So even one person who fights against the unjust law is in minority, his action may still have a great meaning. In concerning of the civil disobedience, Socrates comes into my mind. Contrary to Thoreau, who advocates the resistance against the unjust laws, he proved by his own action that even the law is unjust, we should also obey it. In comparison with Thoreau, Socrates gives us a negativ