Meerkat altruistic
Both author and lecturer discuss whether the behavior of meerkat and humans is altruistic. The former argues in favor using three reasons whereas, the latter contradicts each of these points.
First of all, the reading claims the behavior of one meerkat who guards the group is purely altruistic, as others hunt for food and eat while he stays guarding them against predators. However, the listening rebuts as the standing guard is the one who gets to eat first before starting to guard. In addition, the standing guard is always full irrespective of other group members as they might or mightn't catch prey to feed on.
Second of all, the author asserts when the standing guard sees the predator then it signals other group members by putting itself at risk, as it might be the last one to flee. On the other hand, the lecturer counters the standing guard is always near the burrow and has a higher chance to escape upon seeing the predators. Furthermore, the alarm can cause other group members to gather or move about, eventually, risking their lives.
Finally, the text mentions humans donating their kidneys to their relatives or stranger is altruistic as they gain nothing in return. In contrast, the lecture argues the kidney donor receives appreciation and approval from society which increases the person's worth in society which cannot be compared with anything and is likely worth more than almost everything.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-02 | villian7 | 3 | view |
| 2019-06-07 | farhadmoqimi | 81 | view |
- The increasingly rapid pace of life today causes more problems than it solves 58
- Claim It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero Reason The reputation of anyone who is subjected to media scrutiny will eventually be diminished 54
- Princeton GRE TEST 3 58
- TOEFL integrated writing Altruism
- Young people enjoy life more than old people 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 396, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: mightn't
...of other group members as they might or mightnt catch prey to feed on. Second of all...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, second, so, then, whereas, while, in addition, in contrast, first of all, 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: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 12.0772626932 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => 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: 1193.0 1373.03311258 87% => OK
No of words: 237.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03375527426 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92362132708 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41116259689 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.611814345992 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 342.9 419.366225166 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.3236010048 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.3 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7 21.698381199 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.4 7.06452816374 190% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.0847018649485 0.272083759551 31% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0324634055253 0.0996497079465 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0514224847536 0.0662205650399 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0482286453683 0.162205337803 30% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0326482043679 0.0443174109184 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 53.8541721854 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 63.6247240618 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => 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.