Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
With humanity's endless endeavors for the development of technology, the pollution and destruction of the environment have occurred as problematic byproducts. A variety of species have become or are at the verge of extinction and a growing number of people are demanding that society make efforts to save endangered species. This opinion is met with a counter position claiming that humans take action only if the danger of the species is the result of human activities. Although both sides make compelling arguments, I believe that humans should try to save all endangered species regardless of who is to blame for the cause.
Admittedly, it could seem like society should first take care of matters that are directly caused by human activities, because as it is the humans who have caused the problems, they are the ones that are most equipped to solve them. Morally, people should do their due diligence to clean up the mess that they have made. There are, in fact, many research data indicating that many animals are being threatened with maintaining their species because of reckless activities carried out by humans, such as lumbering, chemical waste disposal and toxic gas emissions. The animals that are in harm's way are simply collateral damage in humans' lust for a better civilization, and they indeed have the responsibility to take care of these matters first and foremost.
However, it is quite difficult to definitely discern whether the endangerment of a species was or was not related to human activities. According to the 'butterfly effect', even the smallest flutter of wings of a butterfly in China can lead to a destructive storm in the US. Everything, in essence, is connected to each other, and from this perspective, we can't say with conviction that humans are not responsible for all endangered species. People's actions have, in some way, aided in creating this problem, so society should strive to save all types of species even if the direct cause is not clearly visible.
Also, in order for the ecosystem to function properly, people should strive to save all endangered species. As there are a tremendous amount of different types of animals inhabiting the Earth, humans haven't been able to draw a full picture on exactly how the food chain of wild species evolve and change. Even the slightest anomaly or change caused by unnatural forces could lead to a devastating result; we just don't have all the facts to say for certain what our actions will lead us to. There is a case in Australia, that years ago, because the country was infested with too many mice, the country decided to import rabbits that are predators of the species. It was found that this method was effective, but the rabbits multiplied in such an extreme degree, that they are now threatening the existence of other enemy species of the rabbit. In such a case, humans cannot predict what their actions will bring exactly, so they should try to preserve all species.
In conclusion, even if it may seem plausible for society to take care of matters that are direct results of their actions, this is a short-sighted opinion. People should be aware that their actions can cause ripple effects, and they should be responsible for the whole animal species.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
the example in the fourth paragraph is not used properly. need to use an example for one species which seems extincted by itself, but actually caused by human beings activities.
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 549 350
No. of Characters: 2646 1500
No. of Different Words: 264 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.841 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.82 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.588 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 197 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 145 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.45 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.531 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.315 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.53 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.099 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 355, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...ch other, and from this perspective, we cant say with conviction that humans are not...
^^^^
Line 7, column 135, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'amounts'?
Suggestion: amounts
...ered species. As there are a tremendous amount of different types of animals inhabitin...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 201, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: haven't
...of animals inhabiting the Earth, humans havent been able to draw a full picture on exa...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 414, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...d lead to a devastating result; we just dont have all the facts to say for certain w...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 71.0 58.6224719101 121% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2711.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 547.0 442.535393258 124% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95612431444 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83611736076 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66848180868 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 270.0 215.323595506 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.493601462523 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 857.7 704.065955056 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.2221708126 60.3974514979 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.55 118.986275619 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.35 23.4991977007 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.55 5.21951772744 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240098593494 0.243740707755 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0804968838681 0.0831039109588 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.060570332411 0.0758088955206 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153855724174 0.150359130593 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0797837478225 0.0667264976115 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 100.480337079 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.