This episode’s vocabulary
Hooligan
noun — a violent person who fights or causes damage in public places.
Chaos
noun — a state of total confusion with no order.
Hindrance
noun — something that makes it more difficult for you to do something or for something to develop.
To conform
verb — to behave according to the usual standards of behaviour that are expected by a group or society.
Disturbance
noun — something that interrupts someone or makes someone feel worried.
Law-abiding
adj. — someone who is law-abiding - obeys the law.
Incentive
noun — something that encourages a person to do something.
To second-guess
verb — to guess what someone will do in the future.
To justify
verb — to give or to be a good reason for.
Boundary
noun — a real or imagined line that marks the edge or limit of something.
To impart
verb — to communicate information to someone.
First and foremost
idiom — more than anything else.
Dispute
noun — an argument or disagreement, especially an official one between, for example, workers and employers or two countries with a common border.
On a par (with someone/something)
phrase — the same as or equal to someone or something.
At face value
idiom — for what something appears to be.
To preempt
verb — to prevent something from happening by taking action first.
Questions and answers
Rory, do people in your country usually obey the law?
I would imagine so, given that you don't really see things like hooligans out on the streets causing chaos, and people are still quite good about following rules and regulations, even if they are a bit of a hindrance sometimes.
What kinds of behaviour are considered good behaviour?
Well, I mean, that's determined by the culture you live in, really. But broadly speaking, I suppose it's all about how well you conform to the definition of what's good. So where I come from, that's about being respectful of others and their property and not causing too much disturbance in terms of noise and actions.
Do you think children can learn about the law outside of school?
Absolutely. They have lives outside of school, even when they are school-aged. And of course, they get some moral instruction from their parents before they even get there. They could come to know it through learning the rules of games or even their experiences of seeing how orderly and law-abiding people behave.
What are the benefits of obeying rules?
Well, when it comes to the law, you don't go to prison, so that's a great incentive. Beyond that, if you stick to the rules, then social interaction becomes more stable and predictable. So there's less stress from constantly second-guessing others. And that would probably have some health benefits too if you aren't stressed out all the time.
How can parents teach children to obey rules?
Well, in the first place, probably by aiming to set a good example and not breaking too many rules themselves, or at least justifying their decisions when they do, and show it's all not just random and selfish or self-interested behaviour. Another way might be discussing and enforcing reasonable boundaries to impart power to behave decently.
And why do some people become lawyers?
Well, lots of reasons. First and foremost, lawyer, or being a lawyer, is quite a well-respected position to have in life. So that's one incentive. Another might be the pay. Lawyers sometimes are extremely well paid. And they're powerful if they do their jobs correctly. And then, on top of that, it's a pretty stable career. I mean, there will always be disputes between people that must be resolved, and so you'll always need lawyers.
And why do some people prefer to be a lawyer rather than a policeman?
Well, being a police officer is quite dangerous, and whereas being a lawyer, it could be dangerous, but it's probably not as dangerous as being a police officer. I'm not sure about the pay. They might be on par with each other, but not so sure. But certainly, it seems at face value, that being a police officer would be less well-paid than being a lawyer.
And how should lawmakers address the controversy surrounding certain laws?
That will depend on the effect they want to achieve. Some controversies just burn themselves out naturally. So taking steps to avoid this might actually wind up making it worse, whereas others, they could preempt it by telling people what's going to happen and preparing them accordingly. I think those are the two best ways. There are others, of course, but I think those were the ones that seemed like the most popular choices.