Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.
Extinction is seen as a natural process in the history but it does not mean that each species' faith is to be vanished. Humans' activities can cause the speed up the natural extinction process but humans also have the ability to save species. Some disagree with this idea and thinks that natural process must not be perturbated unless it is caused by people. Still, not helping those animals could cause imbalances in ecosystem and humans' lives.
To begin with, each animal or plant has a significant role in the ecosystem. When one of them is extinct, this could endenger serious problems for humans. For example, flies are disturbing insects and thought to be useless. Actually, while they feed on the dead animals and garbages, they decompose the material for earth to use again. Moreover, many plants, spiders and bigger inspects feed on flies for its protein. Therefore, losing flies can cause severe disturbances on the food chain and ecosystem recycling. If there is a slight possibility that ecosystem is off balance due to an extinction, people must find a way to help the organism. Otherwise, our daily lives would be interrupted severily.
Secondly, humans heavily rely on certain animals both for companionship and meat production. While dogs are the loyal friends of people, chickens and cows are used to keep many people from starving. Let's think about a natural outbreak occuring among chickens. Since their numbers are decreasing substantially, butchers and markets cannot supply enough to feed humans. In the process, the price of other meats increases and more people are under risk of dying. If the policy was implemented, penury would result in many people to starve or get sick. Even in the annihilation due to natural causes, having responsibilities to help chickens could help us to save many lives around the world.
On the opposite side, some may discuss the laissez-faire intuition for the nature, which tells that human cannot be involved in a natural process unless they are the cause. If the nature does not prefer to host a species, it has a right to remove it from earth surface. For instance, mentioned rule suggests that we should not help a dog fallen inside of a frozen lake. What about a child starving due to natural causes? After taking a picture of a starving boy in Africa, the famous cameraman did not help the kid, which completely complies with laissez-faire. The incident is not moral even though the rule suggests it. Furthermore, considering laisses-faire for only animals is speciesism, which also is not moral because all living creatures are the part of this nature.
In conclusion, consequences of the policy are pernicious imbalances in human life and ecosystem. Disappearences of species, which each has a purpose in nature including humans, endanger the functioning of nature. Also, it leads to horrible results for human beings. Hence, society must save endangered species although some people think that as an intervene to nature's businesses because the consequences of not helping are worst than intervening.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 200, Rule ID: LETS_LET[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Let's'?
Suggestion: Let's
...used to keep many people from starving. Lets think about a natural outbreak occuring...
^^^^
Line 5, column 218, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he nature is ruling out a species, it is Mentioned rule suggests that we should n...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example, in fact, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 58.6224719101 61% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1552.0 2235.4752809 69% => OK
No of words: 314.0 442.535393258 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.94267515924 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.55969084622 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66384474135 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.617834394904 0.4932671777 125% => OK
syllable_count: 483.3 704.065955056 69% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.2018711747 60.3974514979 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.6842105263 118.986275619 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5263157895 23.4991977007 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.21052631579 5.21951772744 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 4.97078651685 60% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0531201764856 0.243740707755 22% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0137520005619 0.0831039109588 17% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0185922785978 0.0758088955206 25% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0361142123586 0.150359130593 24% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0174549850254 0.0667264976115 26% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 14.1392134831 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.8420337079 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.1743820225 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 12.1639044944 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 100.480337079 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.