Traditionally, animals were used by humans for many purposes depending on their capabilities predominantly for transportation and farming. With the evolution of technology, especially in developed countries, animals are replaced by machines; however, animals are still utilized in a number of ways: the most obvious use is to generate meat for food and carry out research for testing new medicines. An increased number of people advocate that animals have the same rights of human and ought not to be misused, while others believe that animals are created for the purpose of serving human beings.
To begin with, societies which are bounded by religious beliefs promote the culture of equality for each and every living thing on the earth, and decry the use of animals for any gain of the mankind whatsoever. According to such beliefs, animals feel the same amount of sufferings and pains as human do that is proven by experiments carried out by scientists. For instance, it is considered illegal by several religions to consume animals’ meat due to fact that animals have to go through a torture in the whole process. In addition, animals are used unnecessarily for experiments such as testing cosmetics on animal’s skins. It would be better off to think alternatives so as to avoid hurting animals.
On the flip side, animals are utlised in various fields without which human lives would be adversely impacted. The meat sourced from slaughtered animals completes a major chunk of human food needs and generation of meat from animals is rightly justified by the ecological cycle created by God. A good example of this is that many species are predators of other species in order to fulfill their dietary needs. Can we imagine a lion-king of jungle-to live on grass and leaves? This does not mean that animals have no rights at all: it is still the human obligation to ensure animals are fairly treated.
In conclusion, animals are created in this world so that people can generate benefits provided that their basic rights are protected and are not overburdened. In my opinion, there is no harm to employ animals for certain benefits because humans’ survival is nearly impossible in case of non-usage.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 682, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...uld be better off to think alternatives so as to avoid hurting animals. On the flip s...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 603, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n to ensure animals are fairly treated. In conclusion, animals are created in th...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, still, while, as to, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 13.1623246493 175% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 41.998997996 145% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1864.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 365.0 315.596192385 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10684931507 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82129265585 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547945205479 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 605.7 506.74238477 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5750833473 49.4020404114 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.266666667 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 20.7667163134 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.8 7.06120827912 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.378577166693 0.244688304435 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127394213649 0.084324248473 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.075044305698 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.234742886831 0.151304729494 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0698475518836 0.056905535591 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 78.4519038076 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.