Issue121 Spring第6次作业

lifeng_913UID: 2397925

TOPIC: ISSUE121 - "At various times in the geological past, many species have become extinct as a result of natural, rather than human, processes. Thus, there is no justification for society to make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species."
WORDS: 748          TIME: 01:39:56          DATE: 2007-12-1 19:39:40

Is it our duty to save endangered species from extinction? This topic raises a variety of issues about conscience, capability and our self-advantage. In general, I concede to agree with the notion that people should not spend a lot on preserving endangered species by providing us with the evidence that many species have already been extinct without the interference of the human beings.
    Admittedly, a variety of species disappeared from the earth long before human can exert any significant influence on, and on the other hand, offer any help to them. The environment is pristine and intact at that time and the extinction of a species mainly because natural power, such as natural catastrophe or its innate deficiencies. For example, the extinction of the dinosaur may be caused by a certain geological alternation on the earth according the newest research.  Indeed, due to the natural catastrophes and Darwin's law of selection, it is essential that extinction results from the inexorable process of so-called "natural selection" in which stronger species survive while weaker ones do not.
    However, since the naissance of our human being, we have taken over the power of dominating the existence or extinction of other species gradually. Nowadays, increasingly population take up natural place used to be inhabitation for certain animals; crescent avarice leads we human being to snatch the resources belongs to any species in the environment;  profit-oriented industries polluted environment killing large number of species; even more aggressive metropolis  reclaim territory from ocean debasing space for sea organisms. In short, we are changing the world into a different place, which is far more difficult for most species to survive.
    Therefore, we should face the fact favoring our endeavor to preserve endangered species involves intricate and subtle relationship in the nature. Every species has to rely on many others to thrive even survive. As a member of food chain, human is no exception. Lacking any component in the food chain, mainly formed by relationship between predators and natural preys, can course chaos even catastrophe to the entire earth. Thus protecting some endangered species actually means ensuring our own survival.
    Moreover, in moral sense, we are responsible to spare efforts to protect species facing extinction. With highly advanced technology and most developed brain, human beings are the strongest species existing on the earth. On the contrary, even the fiercest tiger is performing acrobatics for us; animals are so puny compared with us, not mention plants. Therefore, we have the duty to save those feeble lives exerting our superior capability. In addition, human's nature, such as sympathy, is persuading us into accomplishing this moral obligation.
    Nevertheless, limited resources refrain us form protecting all the endangered species, most of whose destiny is decided by the law of nature. According to statistical data, one species dies out in every two hours on the earth. We are never capable of dealing with such a complex and immense project to ensure every endangered species' continuation. Moreover, since most of these extinctions are corresponding to Darwin's "natural selective", we have no good reason to defy this basic law of nature. Moreover, for our own goods, we are supposed to eliminate some species that harm our interests. After all, as an animal, our selfishness, maybe crime, to some extent, is justified by evolutionism.
    Finally, in the dilemma of so many species that facing danger and our limited resource, the best way out is to entitle our protection only to some chosen species. However, another annoying question emerges----how can we choose from the sea of dying out species. Our sensibility often makes us more willing to grand our favor to animals with appealing appearance. However, this kind of basis can mislead us in the process of preserving endangered species. In other words, spending large amount of money and labor on a beautiful animal with little constructive function to the environment is totally a waste. Therefore, our aim should be species that play a critical role in nature and would cost us relatively less efforts to protect.
    In sum, the issue of endangered-species protection is a complex one, requiring subjective judgments about moral duty and the comparative value of various life forms. Thus, we should protect some endangered animals, making up for mistake we commit as well as for our own goods; saving large number of species confronted with extinction at cost of extraordinary efforts, however, it would not be a wise choice, especially when considering our limited resource and hungry people in rural region.

cinda2020UID: 2371432

Is it our duty to save endangered species from extinction? This topic raises a variety of issues about conscience, capability and our self-advantage. In general, I concede to agree with the notion that people should not spend a lot on preserving endangered species by providing us with the evidence that many species have already been extinct without the interference of the human beings. 疑问句开头就比较引人入胜，选择说明的态度又比较有风险，让人有急于看下去的感觉。
    Admittedly, a variety of species disappeared from the earth long before human can exert any significant influence on, and on the other hand, offer any help to them. The environment is pristine and intact at that time and the extinction of a species mainly because natural power, such as natural catastrophe or its innate deficiencies. For example, the extinction of the dinosaur may be caused by a certain geological alternation on the earth according the newest research.  Indeed, due to the natural catastrophes and Darwin's law of selection, it is essential that extinction results from the inexorable process of so-called "natural selection" in which stronger species survive while weaker ones do not.
    However, since the naissance of our human being, we have taken over the power of dominating the existence or extinction of other species gradually. Nowadays, increasingly population take up natural place used to be inhabitation for certain animals; crescent avarice leads we human being to snatch the resources belongs to any species in the environment;  profit-oriented industries polluted environment killing large number of species; even more aggressive metropolis  reclaim territory from ocean debasing space for sea organisms. In short, we are changing the world into a different place, which is far more difficult for most species to survive.
    Therefore, we should face the fact favoring our endeavor to preserve endangered species involves intricate and subtle relationship in the nature. Every species has to rely on many others to thrive even survive. As a member of food chain, human is no exception. Lacking any component in the food chain, mainly formed by relationship between predators and natural preys, can course chaos even catastrophe to the entire earth. Thus protecting some endangered species actually means ensuring our own survival.
    Moreover, in moral sense, we are responsible to spare efforts to protect species facing extinction. With highly advanced technology and most developed brain, human beings are the strongest species existing on the earth. On the contrary, even the fiercest tiger is performing acrobatics for us; animals are so puny compared with us, not mention plants. Therefore, we have the duty to save those feeble lives exerting our superior capability. In addition, human's nature, such as sympathy, is persuading us into accomplishing this moral obligation.
    Nevertheless, limited resources refrain us form protecting all the endangered species, most of whose destiny is decided by the law of nature. According to statistical data, one species dies out in every two hours on the earth. We are never capable of dealing with such a complex and immense project to ensure every endangered species' continuation. Moreover, since most of these extinctions are corresponding to Darwin's "natural selective", we have no good reason to defy this basic law of nature. Moreover, for our own goods, we are supposed to eliminate some species that harm our interests. After all, as an animal, our selfishness, maybe crime, to some extent, is justified by evolutionism.
    Finally, in the dilemma of so many species that facing danger and our limited resource, the best way out is to entitle our protection only to some chosen species. However, another annoying question emerges----how can we choose from the sea of dying out species. Our sensibility often makes us more willing to grand our favor to animals with appealing appearance. However, this kind of basis can mislead us in the process of preserving endangered species. In other words, spending large amount of money and labor on a beautiful animal with little constructive function to the environment is totally a waste. Therefore, our aim should be species that play a critical role in nature and would cost us relatively less efforts to protect.
    In sum, the issue of endangered-species protection is a complex one, requiring subjective judgments about moral duty and the comparative value of various life forms. Thus, we should protect some endangered animals, making up for mistake we commit as well as for our own goods; saving large number of species confronted with extinction at cost of extraordinary efforts, however, it would not be a wise choice, especially when considering our limited resource and hungry people in rural region.

楼主每篇层次逻辑性都很强，而且内容丰富，学习。