Some people believe that society should try to save every plant and animal species, despite the expense to humans in effort, time, and financial well-being. Others believe that society need not make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
The author of issue contends that there are two varied perspectives at the precision of caring should be taken about the animal and plants. While there are some people who believe that the nation should take a holistic caring about the entire creatures in nature and ecosystem, some other people credit that the endangered species should be bolded. In what follows, I will list the possible reasons for both groups outlook and finally, I will state my attitude toward this prompt.
Those people who emphasize on the consideration of the entire ecosystem for saving may base their thought on the consistency of the ecosystem. Indeed, there is a subtle interconnection between species in the whole ecosystem, the thrive and the existence of creature depends and relies on the other creature at another part of system. Consequently, by a general consideration, the whole ecosystem will be supported by the haphazard danger in the future which can put in risk the human beings’ life too. This perspective is more lucidly expressed in the Einstein quotation that if the honeybee becomes extinct then it will be a few years before the whole human race perishes.
On the other hand, the group which highlights the importance of caring the endangered fauna and flora may have two reasons for this belief. Firstly, they can weigh other factors important than the whole ecosystem. For instance, issues such as the sufficient nutritious food sources, potable water, or even financial crisis seem more crux than the ecosystem and biodiversity. They may hold the view that the main force and support should be allocated to the poor people who do not have sufficient nutrition and drinkable water rather than taking care of flowers or dogs. Secondly, they may feel the urgent and emergency of the endangered species is higher than the whole ecosystem. A lucid example of is the Iranian Chita which is in real danger of extinction, in this case, the priority of support should focus on this species instead of the privilege plants.
For my perspective, the advocacy of nature is completely depending on national wealth and power. In the case, society is in welfare, and there is a plethora of financial and scientific support, in this case, all biodiversity should be inattention. However, a poor society should give the importance to initial issues related to its denizens. For example, the expectation from some African cities which are in hunger and do not possess the pure water to take care of the African giraffe is amiss. On the contrary, the wealthy countries in the Europe, and United States where the majority of the people own a welfare lifestyle, should focus on the entire ecosystem of their own region and even they should support the areas that do not have the sufficient force and power for controlling the ecosystem. Since the interaction species has the global scoop.
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned arguments illustrate my view toward these two groups, if a nation has the power to control the ecosystem, it should consider this issue on a universal scale. In addition, if society does not have this power, the importance should be given to its national.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 409, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'groups'' or 'group's'?
Suggestion: groups'; group's
...will list the possible reasons for both groups outlook and finally, I will state my at...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 225, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...between species in the whole ecosystem, the thrive and the existence of creature depends a...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 44, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
... my perspective, the advocacy of nature is completely depending on national wealth and power. In the ca...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 802, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...nd power for controlling the ecosystem. Since the interaction species has the global ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, finally, first, firstly, however, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, then, while, for example, for instance, in addition, such as, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2649.0 2235.4752809 118% => OK
No of words: 530.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99811320755 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79809637944 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70104142462 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 249.0 215.323595506 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.469811320755 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 844.2 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 11.0 4.99550561798 220% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.0851348714 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.142857143 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2380952381 23.4991977007 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.61904761905 5.21951772744 165% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => 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: 0.121545663442 0.243740707755 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0393588862007 0.0831039109588 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0401961760779 0.0758088955206 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0770701202939 0.150359130593 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0350409689601 0.0667264976115 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.1392134831 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.1639044944 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 100.480337079 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => 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.