People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences.
People should know how to behave differently depending on specific circumstances. In this perspective, I do agree with the statement that people should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences. Firstly, when they deal with the life of other people, they should undertake risky action cautiously. Secondly, if the probable consequence of risky action is immense and irrevocable, they have to do so, as well.
To begin with, when people deal with the life of other people, they should consider the consequences of their risky action and then, decide to either do that or not. As the life of people is the most important value among anything else, people must be careful when dealing with people’s lives, and even more careful when dealing with lives of others. Therefore, if their risky action can threaten the lives of either themselves or others, they must consider probable consequences of behavior thoroughly and decide to behave only when it is not that hazardous. For example, when doctors try to test a new treatment to patients, in South Korea, they should submit innumerable reports which analyze and explain the probable results of the test and demonstrate that it would not threaten patients’ lives. The South Korea government, based on the reasoning that people’s lives can be placed in the great danger if doctors can do risky treatment carelessly, have kept this law thoroughly in order to prevent doctors from doing risky treatment.
In addition, when the probable consequence of risky action is immense and irrevocable, people should undertake risky action only after considering its consequences carefully. As the probable its consequence is immense and irrevocable, people have to be cautious not to fail because it can cause serious damage to them. Therefore, they have to consider the consequences carefully and then take a risky action. For example, when a state plan to intrude and engage a war with neighboring countries, the political leader must consider every consequence of war carefully. This is because they have to compare each power, calculate the odds of winning and wage a war only when likely to win. If he wages a war without such consideration, they will suffer irreparable damage of losing.
Of course, critics can argue that people might miss appropriate timing to act while analyzing the consequences of an action before starting. There is proper timing for every action, but it is easy to miss if people spend too much time into analyzing the results. However, doing the wrong action is much more dangerous than doing nothing. While doing nothing makes no changes, doing wrong can inflame the problems to the extent which no one can solve the problem. Therefore, even if they might miss proper timing, doing risky action after full consideration of its consequences is better than doing so without consideration.
In sum, I do argue that people should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences. Especially, when they deal with other people’s lives or the probable consequence is immense and irrevocable, they must consider its results and then decide to act or not. Even if they might lose the proper timing to action, doing wrong is always worse than doing nothing.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-24 | Shams Tarek | 66 | view |
| 2019-10-22 | shahryar2222 | 66 | view |
| 2019-10-01 | mussob34 | 16 | view |
| 2019-09-26 | kimmj0501 | 50 | view |
| 2019-09-26 | helxing | 54 | view |
- People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences. 54
- Essay topics: GRE Argument:The following appeared in a memo from the mayor of Brindleburg to the city council."Two years ago, the town of Seaside Vista opened a new municipal golf course and resort hotel. Since then, the Seaside Vista Tourism Board h 82
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, while, for example, in addition, of course, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 12.4196629213 185% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 33.0505617978 127% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2785.0 2235.4752809 125% => OK
No of words: 536.0 442.535393258 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19589552239 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81161862636 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81261865174 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 215.323595506 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.401119402985 0.4932671777 81% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 864.9 704.065955056 123% => 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: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 15.0 3.10617977528 483% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.7238195347 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.086956522 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3043478261 23.4991977007 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.91304347826 5.21951772744 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 5.13820224719 272% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.502838905968 0.243740707755 206% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.195901504361 0.0831039109588 236% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.207920869109 0.0758088955206 274% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.378794221086 0.150359130593 252% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.176780460027 0.0667264976115 265% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.1392134831 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.55 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 100.480337079 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.