Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
The unprecedented power acquired by the humanity brings numerous questions about our responsibilities into the existence. Such as the question, should we try to impede the possible extinction of the endangered species? Although it seems like a noble pursuit, the society shouldn’t try to save the endangered animal species unless the reason behind the extinction is the humanity due to three specific reasons.
First of all, saving the endangered species requires extreme amount of resources, and the resources spent would get wasted in future since the species will diminish when the aegis provided by the society flag. The extinction causes can be bifurcated into two categories: human-made and natural. The latter one, natural causes, are not the factors that are not brought into existence suddenly, and they can be understood as the gradual changes in the habitat that are not congenial for the survival of the species that are diminishing. Additionally, they can’t be reversed without harming the habitat since they are inherent aspects of it. Therefore, it is not possible to save a species from extinction eternally, the human intervention can place the extinction to a state of abeyance, but that is all that can be done. Henceforth, trying to save a species from extinction is a rather extravagant and petty way to spend resources; hence it is inadvisable.
Certainly, one can claim that the species can be placed on another habitat that supports them, and thus can be saved. However, this act, almost certainly, might be detrimental to other species living in the habitat that the endangered species are migrated. Consider an area where the main predators are the hyenas and the prey are the deer, and a pack of wolves that are endangered are placed into the region. Hunting by the wolves may decrease the number of deer or make them faster by hunting the slower deer, and implicitly harm the hyena population. This situation creates a conundrum which coerces us to choose which species are more valuable than the other. Remembering that we are also a species and not gods and hindering ourselves from intervening could be the wisest choice.
Moreover, a forced migration event might cause irreversible changes on the ecosystem that would turn the habitat into a desert. If not intervened by the man, the changes of the ecosystems occur very slowly and gradually. A sudden addition of a new species may cause to a huge and unpredictable changes that’d harm the ecosystem and exterminate the some of the species. As an example, imagine a forced migration of a bug species to an ecosystem. It is possible that the plants, who had numerous protections against the inveterate species of the bugs, couldn’t protect themselves from the new bug species. This may cause the extirpation of the several plant species which are keystones of an ecosystem, and the ecosystem itself can collapse. Even though the example given may look rather exaggerated, the regular luggage checks in the international airports to make sure there are no possible living organisms or seeds, is a testament of the possible disasters.
To sum it up, despite the fact that ardor to save a species from the extinction is a noble pursuit, militating against a natural process like this one requires extreme resources, and the victory gained is an ephemeral one at best since the opponent faced is a behemoth. Moreover, forcing the habitat to help the species to survive may disturb the natural balance, could harm more species than it helped, and can turn our ephemeral victory into a pyrrhic one. Thus, the society shouldn’t intervene a natural extinction event.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-31 | savaga1883 | 66 | view |
| 2023-10-02 | Alex Cheng | 54 | view |
| 2023-09-09 | graceeehgq | 66 | view |
| 2023-07-17 | soap | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-17 | M1randa | 50 | view |
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain y 66
- Arctic deer live on islands in Canada s arctic regions They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough at le 50
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be su 50
- In order for any work of art for example a film a novel a poem or a song to have merit it must be understandable to most people Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning f 60
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a journal on environmental issues Over the past year the Crust Copper Company CCC has purchased over 10 000 square miles of land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia Mining copper on this land will in 79
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 348, Rule ID: THE_SOME_DAY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'same'?
Suggestion: same
... harm the ecosystem and exterminate the some of the species. As an example, imagine ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 348, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... harm the ecosystem and exterminate the some of the species. As an example, imagine a force...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 526, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t intervene a natural extinction event.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, look, may, moreover, so, therefore, thus, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 12.4196629213 185% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 33.0505617978 115% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 58.6224719101 114% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3059.0 2235.4752809 137% => OK
No of words: 601.0 442.535393258 136% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08985024958 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.95129289623 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81585059848 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 282.0 215.323595506 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.46921797005 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 972.9 704.065955056 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 9.0 1.77640449438 507% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.8839306658 60.3974514979 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.36 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.04 23.4991977007 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.04 5.21951772744 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => 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: 0.203432429757 0.243740707755 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0644329353832 0.0831039109588 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0464526581597 0.0758088955206 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128621707868 0.150359130593 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0487978400914 0.0667264976115 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 145.0 100.480337079 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.