Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.
As our society becomes more and more industrialized, with roads, skyscrapers, and factories consuming lands and vitiating habitats of animal species, how to strike a balance between nature preservation and industrial development has become a widely-discussed question. As far as I'm concerned, society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities. Since nations' and governments' resources and budgets are not unbounded, we must use this money efficiently and effectively. Moreover, natural extinction is simply an outgrowth of competition according to Darwin's theory in evolution, and our interference may cause negative effects on the environment.
Since a society's resource is limited, we must carefully distribute these resources so that it is used most effectively. Saving all endangered species certainly has negative effects on a society's overall development. There is a myriad of problems modern societies face today, one of which is the most urgent is poverty. Many people are living in abysmal situations where they experience hunger, lack of health resources, and sordid living environments. If society spends most of its effort and money in saving all endangered species, these grave problems might fail to be addressed.
Other than negative effects on human society, saving all endangered species might also have bad consequences on the environment as well. According to Darwin's theory about evolution, extinction is simply a result of competition in the natural world. Adaptive and robust species survive while feeble species are extirpated. This mechanism strikes a balance between natural resource and species diversity. If we try to play god and save all endangered species, we might vitiate this natural mechanism of competition and engender unknown turbulences. Hence, we should only try to restore this balance by saving endangered species whose potential extinction of those species is the result of our activities.
However, even though it is uneconomical, unnatural, and impossible to save all endangered species, we should still think of ways to strike a balance between natural preservation and social development. For example, there have been continuous efforts to integrate sustainable energies such as solar power into factories and develop biofuels that don't have negative impacts on the environment. Furthermore, we can also try to combine nature preservation and economic development to create a sustainable industry such as eco-friendly tourism. These efforts show that even if we don't save all endangered species, natural preservation and social development can still be progress in harmony.
In conclusion, I believe it is unnecessary to save all endangered species. We should only actively protect these species if their potential extinction is the result of human activities since society's resource is limited and we must not try to destroy the balance of natural competition. Nevertheless, it is still important that we create a sustainable society and make sure technology and social development does not destroy nature.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 280, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: I'm
... a widely-discussed question. As far as Im concerned, society should make efforts ...
^^
Line 7, column 346, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...nto factories and develop biofuels that dont have negative impacts on the environmen...
^^^^
Line 7, column 576, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ism. These efforts show that even if we dont save all endangered species, natural pr...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, still, well, while, for example, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 32.0 12.9106741573 248% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2678.0 2235.4752809 120% => OK
No of words: 476.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62605042017 5.05705443957 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67091256922 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12651065104 2.79657885939 112% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.457983193277 0.4932671777 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 865.8 704.065955056 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.4724213961 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.727272727 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6363636364 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.21951772744 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.423381085015 0.243740707755 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.139160439342 0.0831039109588 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.180099002957 0.0758088955206 238% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.262375853726 0.150359130593 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.116438340229 0.0667264976115 175% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.1392134831 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 48.8420337079 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.37 12.1639044944 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 100.480337079 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.7820224719 136% => 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.