Below is a very simple, non-legal, daily example to illustrate the flaws in the little fishing village, so obvious even a child could spot them.
Imagine a student, let's call him Alex, who is tasked with drafting a new school rule for his class. Alex comes up with the following:
Alex's Proposed Rule:
"There will be no 'Unfriendly Behavior' in class. 'Unfriendly Behavior' is not officially defined in the school handbook, but it's like a bad vibe. You can tell it's 'Unfriendly Behavior' if someone is looking at you weirdly, or talking about you behind your back, or just generally making others feel uncomfortable. Even if it's not strictly against an existing rule, it can still be harmful to the classroom environment, and it won't be ignored."
Now, let's break down the flaws using this example, in a way anyone can understand:
The Flaws Explained with Alex's Rule:
"Unfriendly Behavior is not officially defined, but it's like a bad vibe."
The Problem: This is the Nulla Poena Sine Lege flaw. If "Unfriendly Behavior" isn't defined, how does anyone know what it is? Is tapping your pencil "unfriendly"? Is yawning "unfriendly"? Without a clear definition, every student is left guessing, and the teacher can decide it means whatever they want, whenever they want. It's impossible to follow a rule if you don't know what the rule is.
"You can tell it's 'Unfriendly Behavior' if someone is looking at you weirdly, or talking about you behind your back, or just generally making others feel uncomfortable."
The Problem: This is the Vagueness Doctrine flaw. What's "looking at you weirdly"? One person's "weird" is another's normal expression. How do you prove someone was talking "behind your back" or what their "intention" was? And "making others feel uncomfortable" is totally subjective – one joke might make one person laugh and another uncomfortable. These criteria are so unclear that they can be applied to almost anything, or nothing at all, based purely on opinion.
"Even if it's not strictly against an existing rule, it can still be harmful to the classroom environment, and it won't be ignored."
The Problem: This is the "Harmful but not Illegal" paradox. So, if there's no rule against it, why are you going to "not ignore" it? This means the teacher can punish you, or give you a bad mark, or give you detention, even though you haven't broken any actual rule. It's like saying, "You didn't break a rule, but I just don't like what you did, so you're still in trouble." This destroys fairness and predictability. If there's no rule, there shouldn't be punishment.
Imagine Alex also said: "My new rule about 'Unfriendly Behavior' has nothing to do with whether the classroom is actually messy or boring. The problems are purely from outside the class!"
The Problem: This is the Res Ipsa Loquitur fallacy in reverse, or avoiding accountability. If the classroom environment is "bad," but the teacher claims it's never because of their own teaching or how they organize things, only because of "outside forces" (like a noisy corridor), then they're refusing to admit their own potential role in the problem. It's easier to blame an undefined "bad vibe" than to fix the actual issues.
Why these flaws are obvious to anyone:
Kids get it: Any child would immediately say, "That's not fair! How am I supposed to know what 'Unfriendly Behavior' is if you don't tell me?"
Lack of Fairness: Everyone instinctively understands that rules need to be clear so everyone knows what they can and cannot do.
Arbitrary Power: If the "rule" is so vague, it gives the teacher unlimited power to decide, on a whim, who is "unfriendly" and who isn't, leading to favoritism or unfair targeting.
No Safety: You can't feel safe or secure if you can be penalized for something that isn't even a defined offense.
This "Unfriendly Behavior" example perfectly mirrors the logical and legal flaws in the fishing village argument, demonstrating how a lack of clarity, subjective criteria, and intervention without legal basis undermine fairness and predictability in any system, be it a classroom or a society.
發表文章
