✍️ 意図と結果、運と責任

あなたは大学入試の要約問題の採点者です。次の【英文】を150字以内の日本語で要約した【私の答案】を、100点満点で採点してください。

配点：内容（要点）50点／構成と論理20点／表現20点／字数と形式10点

次の順番で、やさしい日本語で答えてください。
1. 各観点の得点と、その理由
2. 減点された箇所の具体的な指摘（該当部分を引用して）
3. 直した例（1つだけ）
4. 次に直すべき点を3つ

採点の注意：原文の言い回しの丸写しは減点。具体例や数字を入れすぎていたら減点。自分の意見が混ざっていたら減点。字数は制限の90〜100%が理想。

【制限字数】150

【英文】
When we judge an action, we tend to give two different kinds of answers. Sometimes we say that what matters is the intention behind it, and sometimes we say that what matters is the result. A doctor who tries to save a patient and fails seems less blameworthy than one who acts carelessly and fails, yet a careless doctor whose patient happens to recover often escapes criticism entirely. Such cases show that our everyday moral judgments are less consistent than we like to believe.

Some thinkers respond by insisting that only intention should count. Their reasoning is that people control what they decide, but they do not control what follows. If two drivers are equally careless and only one of them meets a child on the road, it seems unfair to treat the second as a criminal and the first as a citizen in good standing. To hold people responsible for consequences beyond their control, according to this view, is to confuse bad luck with bad character.

This position, however, has a serious weakness. If we ignored results altogether, we would have to say that a person who plans a terrible crime but is stopped at the last moment has done nothing worse than a person who merely dreams of it. More importantly, the harm suffered by a victim does not depend on the offender's purposes. A society that cared only about what people meant could not take seriously the pain of those who were actually hurt. Moreover, we ourselves often feel regret over harm we cause by accident, even when nobody blames us, and this feeling seems to be an appropriate part of moral life.

A more balanced view is therefore worth considering. Intentions and outcomes may answer different questions: intentions tell us what kind of person someone is, while outcomes tell us what has happened to others and what repair is owed. Praise and blame belong mainly to the first, whereas compensation and the duty to clean up the damage belong to the second. This distinction does not remove every difficulty, since real cases mix the two, but it helps us explain why we can forgive a person without pretending that no harm occurred.

Ultimately, the puzzle teaches us humility. Because so much of what happens lies beyond our control, we should hesitate to judge others harshly for their misfortunes, and we should take seriously our duty toward those affected by what we do.

【私の答案】
（ここに自分の要約を貼る）

You are a strict but kind grader for university entrance exam summary tasks. Grade my summary of the passage below out of 100 points.

Scoring: Content (key points) 50 / Structure and logic 20 / Language (grammar, vocabulary, paraphrasing) 20 / Length and format 10.

Please answer in Japanese in this order:
1. Score for each category with reasons
2. Specific problems (quote the words in my summary)
3. One improved version of my summary
4. Three things to fix next time

Rules: copying whole sentences from the passage loses points. Use third-person, present tense. The ideal length is 90–110% of the target.

Target length: about 70 words

Passage:
When we judge an action, we tend to give two different kinds of answers. Sometimes we say that what matters is the intention behind it, and sometimes we say that what matters is the result. A doctor who tries to save a patient and fails seems less blameworthy than one who acts carelessly and fails, yet a careless doctor whose patient happens to recover often escapes criticism entirely. Such cases show that our everyday moral judgments are less consistent than we like to believe.

Some thinkers respond by insisting that only intention should count. Their reasoning is that people control what they decide, but they do not control what follows. If two drivers are equally careless and only one of them meets a child on the road, it seems unfair to treat the second as a criminal and the first as a citizen in good standing. To hold people responsible for consequences beyond their control, according to this view, is to confuse bad luck with bad character.

This position, however, has a serious weakness. If we ignored results altogether, we would have to say that a person who plans a terrible crime but is stopped at the last moment has done nothing worse than a person who merely dreams of it. More importantly, the harm suffered by a victim does not depend on the offender's purposes. A society that cared only about what people meant could not take seriously the pain of those who were actually hurt. Moreover, we ourselves often feel regret over harm we cause by accident, even when nobody blames us, and this feeling seems to be an appropriate part of moral life.

A more balanced view is therefore worth considering. Intentions and outcomes may answer different questions: intentions tell us what kind of person someone is, while outcomes tell us what has happened to others and what repair is owed. Praise and blame belong mainly to the first, whereas compensation and the duty to clean up the damage belong to the second. This distinction does not remove every difficulty, since real cases mix the two, but it helps us explain why we can forgive a person without pretending that no harm occurred.

Ultimately, the puzzle teaches us humility. Because so much of what happens lies beyond our control, we should hesitate to judge others harshly for their misfortunes, and we should take seriously our duty toward those affected by what we do.

My summary:
(paste your summary here)