Altruism is a type of behavior in which an animal sacrifices its own interest for that of
another animal or group of animals. Altruism is the opposite of selfishness; individuals
performing altruistic acts gain nothing for themselves.
Examples of altruism abound, both among humans and among other mammals.
Unselfish acts among humans range from the sharing of food with strangers to the
donation of body organs to family members, and even to strangers. Such acts are altruistic in that they benefit another, yet provide little reward to the one performing the act.
In fact, many species of animals appear willing to sacrifice food, or even their
life, to assist other members of their group. The meerkat, which is a mammal that
dwells in burrows in grassland areas of Africa, is often cited as an example. In groups
of meerkats, an individual acts as a sentinel, standing guard and looking out for
predators while the others hunt for food or eat food they have obtained. If the sentinel meerkat sees a predator such as a hawk approaching the group, it gives an
alarm cry alerting the other meerkats to run and seek shelter. By standing guard,
the sentinel meerkat gains nothing—it goes without food while the others eat, and
it places itself in grave danger. After it issues an alarm, it has to flee alone, which might
make it more at risk to a predator, since animals in groups are often able to work together
to fend off a predator. So the altruistic sentinel behavior helps ensure the survival of
other members of the meerkat’s group
You know, often in science, new findings force us to re-examine earlier beliefs and assumptions. And a recent study of meerkats is having exactly this effect. The study examined the
meerkat’s behavior quite closely, much more closely than had ever been done before. And
some interesting things were found . . . like about eating habits . . . it showed that typically
meerkats eat before they stand guard—so the ones standing guard had a full stomach!
And the study also found that since the sentinel is the first to see a predator coming, it’s the
most likely to escape . . . because it often stands guard near a burrow, so it can run immediately into the burrow after giving the alarm. The other meerkats, the ones scattered about
looking for food, are actually in greater danger.
And in fact, other studies have suggested that when an animal creates an alarm, the
alarm call might cause the other group members either to gather together or else to move
about very quickly, behaviors that might actually draw the predator’s attention away from
the caller, increasing that animal’s own chances of survival.
And what about people—what about some human acts that might be considered
altruistic? Let’s take an extreme case: uh, suppose a person donates a kidney to a relative, or
even to a complete stranger. A selfless act, right? But . . . doesn ’t the donor receive appreciation and approval from the stranger and from society? Doesn’t the donor gain an increased
sense of self-worth? Couldn’t such nonmaterial rewards be considered very valuable to
some people?
The reading article introduces the topic of altruism. In particular, the writer highlights the behavior of altruism that is prevalent in many species of animals including humans. On the contrary, the listening passage disagrees with the claims made by the author regarding how some animals perform unselfish acts without gaining any prominent rewards.
First and foremost, the author begins by stating that the sentinel meerkat is a prime example of an animal displaying altruism. He points out how a sentinel meerkat sacrifices food and even his life for its group. The lecturer disapproves of this viewpoint by contending that the recent research on meerkat has shown that sentinel meerkat first to eat food and as it is first to see the potential predator, it is more likely to make an escape after alerting its group. Furthermore, it is explicitly said that it stands guard near a burrow that increases its chances of survival.
Secondly, the writer asserts the act of donating food and organs by humans to his kin or stranger as altruistic behavior. Not surprisingly, the professor argues the statement to be inaccurate. The lecturer points out that even if materialistic benefits are not achieved in such actions, the intangible rewards gained by an individual should not be overlooked. In many cases, such actions are driven by an eagerness to gain self-satisfaction and appraisal from society.
To conclude, the writer and the lecturer have different perceptions of the altruistic behaviors shown by meerkat and humans, among other animals.
| 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 |
| 2022-12-09 | KerryFromHere | 3 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Young people enjoy life more than older people do Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer Be sure to use your own words Do not use memorized examples 60
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship 70
- Eco certified Wood Products 83
- A teacher s ability to relate well with students is more important than excellent knowledge of the subject being taught 60
- Voting System 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 99, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...organs by humans to his kin or stranger as altruistic behavior. Not surprisingly, ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, if, look, regarding, second, secondly, so, in particular, in many cases, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1305.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 249.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24096385542 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97237131171 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92004604839 2.5805825403 113% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590361445783 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 399.6 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.9980936463 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.75 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.75 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06452816374 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.268849483365 0.272083759551 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0869840997834 0.0996497079465 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0636925959854 0.0662205650399 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136013334916 0.162205337803 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0766577042426 0.0443174109184 173% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.64 8.42419426049 114% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27 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.