Altruistic behavior
In his commentary, the author of the reading defines altruism as a type of a behaviour in which animals or people sacrifice themselves in favor of others. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article used to support the author’s opinion. She brings additional evidence to weaken the author’s point.
The first contradicting point is the lack of yield in altruistic behaviour. According to the reading, the donor takes almost nothing in return to his donations. The lecturer rebuts this argument, saying that donors actually gain the sense of self-worth and appreciation from other people. This is of a great value for several people.
The second contradicting point is the behaviour of sentinels and it’s feeding before or after standing guard. The author’s point is that meerkats are staying hungry during this time. The lecturer, on the other hand, claims that actually sentinels get nutrition, skipping the line, before standing guard.
The third aspect of the debate is the issue of alarm noises when danger comes from predators. According to the reading, the meerkat, which makes the sound, actually attracts the predators to themselves and is more vulnerable to the risk of being killed. The lecturer puts forth the idea that sentinels are actually the first to escape the predators, and that they may immediately run into the nearest burrow to hide. Moreover, the alarm may foster the attention of the predator on those meerkats, which start gathering or moving about quickly, increasing the danger level.
To sum up, the author of the reading and the lecturer have different points of view. While the former believes that altruistic acts provide no gains for performers of this behaviour, the latter brings additional evidence to correct the examples of the author and demonstrate how altruism may affect the performer.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-17 | Yam Kumar Oli | 35 | view |
| 2023-04-17 | Yam Kumar Oli | 52 | view |
| 2023-03-14 | Anurag96 | 80 | view |
| 2023-02-26 | Muggle | 94 | view |
| 2023-01-02 | villian7 | 3 | view |
- In twenty years there will be fewer cars in use than there are today 76
- In the 1950s Torreya Taxifolia a type of evergreen tree once very common in the state of Florida started to die out No one is sure exactly what caused the decline but chances are good that if nothing is done Torreya will soon become extinct Experts are co 3
- Archaeologists have recently found a fossil of a 150 million year old mammal known as Repenornamus robustus R robustus Interestingly the mammal s stomach contained the remains of a psittacosaur dinosaur Some researchers have therefore suggested that R rob
- Private collectors 86
- People learn things better from those at their own level such as fellows or co workers than from those at higher level such as teachers or supervisors 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 68, Rule ID: KIND_OF_A[1]
Message: Don't include 'a' after a classification term. Use simply 'type of'.
Suggestion: type of
...or of the reading defines altruism as a type of a behaviour in which animals or people sa...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 183, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ts are staying hungry during this time. The lecturer, on the other hand, claims tha...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...pping the line, before standing guard. The third aspect of the debate is the issue...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, if, may, moreover, second, so, third, while, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 30.3222958057 145% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1554.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 300.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65389441304 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.54 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 459.9 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.23620309051 170% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.1246612454 49.2860985944 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.125 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.75 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.9375 7.06452816374 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0433583684598 0.272083759551 16% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0153149058515 0.0996497079465 15% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0428234844934 0.0662205650399 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0264985507227 0.162205337803 16% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0325085754224 0.0443174109184 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.