First of all, we must admit that lawyers are human beings, with all the joys and sorrows of social people and all the primitive desires of human beings. For most people, occupation as a kind of labor, its primary purpose is to satisfy people's survival. In On Human Nature, Hume believes that human needs are divided into five levels, and the needs of the latter level are based on the satisfaction of the former level. Among them, the first level is physiological needs (including food, clothing, housing and sex), and the highest level is the embodiment of self-worth. Lawyers are not exempt from customs. In this sense, it is understandable that lawyers get paid through legal labor. Therefore, lawyers are neither angels nor demons. They are human beings and need to work hard for their parents and children. It is unfair to let them bear too much social responsibility and bear too heavy moral shackles.
Secondly, we can't deny that if a person only regards work as a means to make a living, then he won't feel happy, because he won't be respected by more people, and he is doomed not to make great achievements. He just meets people's first-level needs. This is the difference between work and career. Every profession (only law) has the necessity of existence. The necessity of its existence is not only to meet individual needs, but also its social value. It's just that many of us don't realize its social significance. For example, people think that businessmen are mercenary and maximizing their own interests is the driving force of all thinking. But when they grab personal interests, they have already boosted economic growth, and their tax payment behavior itself is making contributions to society. This is still evaluated from the height of a non-national entrepreneur or philanthropist, just asking him to operate legally. Therefore, we say that the existence of the profession of lawyer is definitely a social need. Let's analyze it from a different angle. We know that in the trial mode, the public, the procuratorate and the law represent the public power of society, and these people hold the powerful judicial power endowed by the state. Although they restrict each other, the same sex of their public power determines the limitations of this restriction. From the mechanism, the degree of restriction of a kind of power directly determines the possibility that it is easy to breed corruption. Specific to the judiciary, its integrity and fairness are bound to be restricted by private rights. From this perspective, there has always been a contradiction between private rights and public rights in the whole litigation process (especially in public prosecution cases and administrative cases). In criminal cases, the defendant and plaintiff in administrative cases, no matter how domineering they are in daily social life, are completely weak in the face of powerful public power in litigation. Therefore, here, the necessity of lawyers' professional existence is reflected in their struggle for rights (especially private rights). In fact, according to the national conditions, it is difficult for lawyers to achieve this goal, so they need the understanding and support of law enforcement agencies, especially the parties.
Third, the purpose of restriction is to achieve the goal of justice. Therefore, the executors of public power and lawyers have the same goal. However, in reality, there are still some compatriots in the public security law who regard lawyers as stumbling blocks and think that lawyers are specifically obstructing their work. In fact, they don't understand the formal confrontation rather than opposition of this work. For the general public, when lawyers defend those who are classified as bad people by morality, they think that lawyers speak for bad people, at least for money, and ignore the moral standards of being a man. Actually, I have to go back to the previous topic. From an emotional point of view, many criminals do a lot of unnatural things. However, as a defender with independent litigation status, the task of lawyers is to make criminals get legal trials within the framework of law, especially in maintaining the legitimacy of procedures. The judicial spirit of never suspecting a crime, "it is better to disclose than to kill", is a reasonable price to realize justice. Lawyers are loyal defenders of this spirit. Although some lawyers violate the moral level in their work practice, it is also a reasonable price, that is, to realize the justice value of law in the whole society and sacrifice the principle of justice in the individual sense.