GRE ISSUE 31 求拍～！

moriarty4869

Society should make efforts to save endangered speciesonly if the potential extinction of those species is the result of humanactivities.
社会应该努力拯救濒危物种，只要这些物种的灭绝是人类活动的结果


The speaker claims that the society should protect those animals which are on the edge of extinction because of human beings. I somehow agree with this view of point that we should save the endangered animals, for we need to keep the balance of the nature and the various species are quite essential to that. Whereas, the rest of the claim that we are only respeonsible for those animals influenced by our activities, to my perspective, is unilateral and unpratical. Here are some reasons.

First of all, someone may argue that according to the Darwin's evolution theory that the fittest survives, what we are now doing is what we are supposed to do. However, they do not notice that the diversity of the animals and plants makes great contributions to the stability and robust of the ecosystem. The change on one kind of animals or plants can directly or indirectly have an impact on the other animals through the food chain linking them. And the unusual extinction velocity of the animals may casue the drastically change of the whole environment. For example, the unlimitted massacre towards wild wolves in the Yellow Stone national park in America between mid 19th century and 20the century not only caused the mass extinction of the whole wolves species but also the breakdown of the entire ecosystem of the national park. At first, the purpose of the hunters and farmers to kill the wolves is to protect their cattle and sheep and even themselves. However, what they ignored is that the existing of the carnivorous animals is also a key point to control the population of the herbivorous animals especially deer and buffeloes. In 1995, with the disappearance of their predators, the deer began to explosively increase. As a consequence, they caused serious damage to the vegetation in the park and thus lead to the huge reduction of the other herbivorous animals.

From the example above, we clearly see that every species has its position and duty in the whole nature. Some of them are known and some of them are not, so it is extremely dangerous to arbitrarily eradicate one kind of animals with the uncertainty of its real duty. The whole ecosystem may not be that brittle because of the diversity, for if one kind of animal disappears there may be an alternative. However, with the continuting decrease of the kinds of animals, the stability of the whole environment is being undermined. And it is apparently that the collapse of the whole ecosystem, like the case in the national park, will eventually influence ourselves.

As to the second point, someone also may argue that we do not have the ability to save all of the animals that are varnishing, because some of these reasons are natural factors and some of them we even do not know. For these animals what we can do is just saving them in the sanctuary or in the zoo. However, these efforts are doom to be in vain, for the scare diversity of the genes in the group will lead to the degeneration and finally kill all of the animals. So we only need to focus on animals that are identified as the victims of our activities.

But they ignored a very significant assumption that makes their claim sounds plausible.  That is we should firstly have the ability to discriminate the varnishing animals that are caused by us or not by us. however, this is very difficult in reality. For example, the emission of the green house gases lead to the global warming and caused a sharp rise of the temperature of the ocean, during this process we even do not know how many animals are influenced and how many of them are died out. How can we identify which kind of animal should be saved which should not be? Besides that our effort may be effectiveless, but what we can do will slow down the speed at which the animals disappear. There may be an another 20 yearss for a kind of animals to extinction, before that we probably have already find the solution.


In conclusion, as we can not classify the animal into the groups that we should save and we shouldn't, perhaps it will be wiser to focus on the influence of our activities and save all the animals that can be saved. It is not only for them but also for us.
1H, 730 words

普渡哥

你提到Darwin's evolution theory，如果是个基督徒，应该不会给你高分的。在美国只有部分人相信进化论。

moriarty4869

普渡哥 发表于 2013-6-7 11:25
你提到Darwin's evolution theory，如果是个基督徒，应该不会给你高分的。在美国只有部分人相信进化论。 ...

呃，这个真的会有影响吗？我去，碰上了只能算倒霉了....对文章结构给点儿意见吧。。。。