Many people now undertake extreme activities, from hang-gliding to mountain climbing.
Why do people risk their lives in this way, and do you think this is a good trend?
Give reasons for your answer, and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Recently, I was disturbed to read of a prominent* female cave diver, who drowned upon becoming disoriented deep in a labyrinthine cave system in South Australia. Such sad events inevitably raise the question of why people dice with death in extreme activities. After giving one reason, I will argue, perhaps surprisingly, that it is a good trend.
The main incentive* for this high-risk recreation is the challenge it provides, often seen as one of the core purposes of being alive. The feeling for the human psyche of defying the odds, conquering that fear, or seeing sights never seen before must be extremely gratifying, if not totally rejuvenating, and clearly irresistible to many. Whether hang-gliding, parasailing, or scaling formidable cliff faces, the weekend thrill seekers are merely following an innate urge to live life by‘cheating death’.
I would say this is a good trend, since such activities generate revenue for a wide range of commercial enterprises. These, in turn, provide legitimate* livelihoods and direct economic benefit to countries. Nepal is a good example, depending heavily on the ambitions of both professional mountaineers and dedicated amateurs to summit the notoriously dangerous Mount Everest. Apart from exorbitant climbing fees, this provides employment to hundreds of Sherpa porters and guides. Few could begrudge them this ready-made opportunity.
Lest I be accused of cynicism, another reason these activities are good is the release they offer from that pressure and banality of life. Most members of modern society are confined to safe and predictable paths, essentially divorced from the natural world. They necessarily lead Thoreau’s ‘lives of quiet desperation’, since money must be earnt, mortgages met, and children raised. Any escape from this mundane existence, however short-lived or transitory, must leave people more fulfilled and content, and a society composed of such individuals is ultimately a better one.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-13 | utbongtuyet | 89 | view |
| 2019-05-16 | Võ Ngọc Trang Thanh | 67 | view |
| 2019-05-03 | MattDu | 89 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, apart from
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1699.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 302.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62582781457 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16640966535 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 176.041082164 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.708609271523 0.561755894193 126% => OK
syllable_count: 536.4 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.1495916005 49.4020404114 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.266666667 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1333333333 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.8 7.06120827912 25% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.209819884193 0.244688304435 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0608144433293 0.084324248473 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434668420876 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109934304357 0.151304729494 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0202169874398 0.056905535591 36% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 50.2224549098 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.37 12.4159519038 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.43 8.58950901804 121% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 78.4519038076 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.