Many animals are endangered. Some people argue that we should only protect animals that are useful to humans.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Answer 8.0+
In recent years, the concern about endangered animals has triggered debates over whether we should prioritize protection exclusively for species useful to humans. However, I believe this perspective overlooks the moral imperative to protect all endangered species, regardless of their utility to humanity.
Firstly, the concept of utility is subjective and can change over time. What may seem nonessential today might hold untold value for future generations. Countless scientific breakthroughs have arisen from studying seemingly obscure organisms. For instance, the venom of the Gila monster, a lizard considered non-useful by some, has led to the development of medications for diabetes. Therefore, the potential of various other species to significantly contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge and the field of medicine should not be underestimated.
Secondly, biodiversity is crucial for ecosystem stability. Removing a species, even if seemingly useless to humans, disrupts ecosystems and has far-reaching consequences for ecosystem health and resource availability. Consider honeybees. While their direct benefits might be questioned, these pollinators are vital in agriculture, supporting the growth of many essential crops like fruits, vegetables, and nuts. Without conservation, bee population decline could reduce food production, increasing global food prices and impacting human well-being. Thus, safeguarding seemingly non-utilitarian species like bees indirectly benefits us.
In conclusion, while the concept of protecting only “useful” animals may seem pragmatic, it fails to consider the broader implications for science, ecosystems, and our moral duty to safeguard the diversity of life on Earth. Protecting endangered animals, irrespective of their utility to humans, is essential for the well-being of our planet and future generations.
Total words: 262
