Can you correct this essay and tell me if it is well-organized and if you understand everything I wrote?Thank you.
The article discusses a fascinating topic pertaining to altruism, a type of behaviour, which is considered the opposite of selfishness. While the reading passage gives examples of this behaviour in animals and in human beings, the professor discusses fundamental objections, which recent studies have shown.
First, the reading passage discusses how humans can be altruistic by sharing food with people who don't know or, for example, by donating body organs to someone. In contrast, the professor provides information that though this kind of behaviour is not rewarded with something material like money or gifts, it is valuable as well. In fact, the individual who acts in this way would be appreciated and approved from strangers and society. Clearly, a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the professor. As a result, we can assume that human beings are not altruistic as they may seem.
Secondly, the article pushes forth the idea the animals can behave in an altruistic way as well. It gives the example of a group of meerkats, in which there is a sentinel who controls if a predator is coming and risks his own life for the survival of other members. However, the classroom discussion confirms that a sentinel can easily escape after seeing a predator and in actual fact members who are looking for food are in greater danger.
In summary, while the article says that animals and humans can sacrifice their own interest without gaining something, the reading passage supports that quite closely studies have undermined these beliefs, because of all the reasons mentioned above.
The article discusses a fascinating topic pertaining to altruism, a type of behaviour, which is considered the opposite of selfishness. While the reading passage gives examples of this behaviour in animals and in human beings, the professor discusses fundamental objections, which recent studies have shown.
First, the reading passage discusses how humans can be altruistic by sharing food with people who don't know or, for example, by donating body organs to someone. In contrast, the professor provides information that though this kind of behaviour is not rewarded with something material like money or gifts, it is valuable as well. In fact, the individual who acts in this way would be appreciated and approved from strangers and society. Clearly, a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the professor. As a result, we can assume that human beings are not altruistic as they may seem.
Secondly, the article pushes forth the idea the animals can behave in an altruistic way as well. It gives the example of a group of meerkats, in which there is a sentinel who controls if a predator is coming and risks his own life for the survival of other members. However, the classroom discussion confirms that a sentinel can easily escape after seeing a predator and in actual fact members who are looking for food are in greater danger.
In summary, while the article says that animals and humans can sacrifice their own interest without gaining something, the reading passage supports that quite closely studies have undermined these beliefs, because of all the reasons mentioned above.
