Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Article Analysis/Evolution of Cooperation. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 4 page reaction paper that offers the writer/tutor's observations and evaluation of a 2006 article by Dominic Johnson and Jesse Bering, which addresses an issue that has long puzzled social scientists, archeologists, and others, which is why and how prehistoric human societies encouraged the cooperation between people that makes civilization possible. Human cooperation includes instances in which cooperation is not explained by any one of the existing theories. This discussion considers the authors' argument, evidence and thesis, and also offers an explanation for this phenomenon, as well as an evaluation as to the strengths and weakness of their position, as well as an assessment of significance of their position. No additional sources cited.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_khevcoop.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
possible. Cooperation does occur in the animal kingdom. There are four dominant theories for explaining this behavior, which all include some discernible "payoff" to the actors involved (Johnson and Bering
220). However, human cooperation includes instances in which cooperation is not explained by any one of the existing theories. Several theories for explaining this phenomenon have been proposed, but, as
yet, there is not consensus among scholars. Therefore, in this paper, the authors propose a new perspective on this question, which is that "religious beliefs, specifically the moralizing and sanctioning
of behavior...may serve as a common origin for human cooperation" (Johnson and Bering 220). The following discussion considers the authors argument and evidence and offers evaluation as to the strengths
and weakness of their position, as well as an assessment of significance of their position. The authors present their hypothesis within the context of the literature on this subject,
indicating that people will cooperate with one another, even when each of the benefits listed in previous theories are eliminated, which is a "phenomenon dubbed strong reciprocity" (Johnson and Bering
220). They go on to write that "proponents of strong reciprocity have specifically denied any link between cooperation and religion," which is a position antithetical to research evidence (Johnson and
Bering 221). This writer/tutor feels that the authors do not adequately define and describe what is meant by the term "strong reciprocity" and, therefore, do not sufficiently describe the position
of those who oppose their thesis. Their thesis is so logical that, as they point out, it seems "incredible to suggest that religion has nothing to do with cooperation" (Johnson
and Bering 221). Therefore, more explanation is needed in order to help the reader understand how anyone can logical oppose this idea. As this implies, the authors concentrate on
...