[Gender Differences In Altruism]

By

Acknowledgement

I would take this opportunity to thank my research supervisor, family and friends for their support and guidance without which this research would not have been possible.

DECLARATION

I, [type your full first names and surname here], declare that the contents of this dissertation/thesis represent my own unaided work, and that the dissertation/thesis has not previously been submitted for academic examination towards any qualification. Furthermore, it represents my own opinions and not necessarily those of the University.

Signed __________________ Date _________________

Gender Differences In Altruism

ALTRUISM

Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines altruism as “unselfish regard for or devotion to welfare of others.” The term is derived from French autre and Latin alter, both meaning “other.” French sociologist Auguste Comte is credited with coining term around 1850, though scholarly interest in what is now called altruism dates back at least to ancient Greek philosophers. In moral philosophy, major exponent was eighteenth-century British writer and philosopher David Hume, who saw in human beings the natural ability to sympathize with others and to act on such sympathy through “benevolence and generosity” (Amato, 1990, 31).

As described by scholar (Batson, 1991), altruism, in common usage, has at least three components. First, altruism implies either the motivation or an intent to enhance another's well-being. Thus, if the person enhances another's well-being without meaning to do so, that is not altruism; on other hand, if the person intends to enhance another's welfare, but unintentionally diminishes it, he or she would still be considered altruistic. Second, altruism implies action; merely wishing someone well is not altruism (Becker, 1976).

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN ALTRUISM

Charles Darwin did not intend that evolution be equated with violent competition. Rather, he emphasized the question of reproductive advantage. That is, the evolution of a species is the consequence of the development of characteristics that contribute to differential reproductive success in the local environment (Amato, 1990). Reproductive success is not necessarily a function of violent competition within or between species. The 19th-century social critic Petr Kropotkin and modern evolutionary biologists have demonstrated that cooperation within and between species also plays a critical role in promoting the survival of offspring. As discussed below, animals and humans have been said to practice a reciprocal altruism in which cooperation emerges as a strategy for survival. Consider as well the process of symbiosis. Species may evolve in such a way as to intimately depend on conditions produced by other species and may even live within their bodies (Batson, 1991). This is far from Thomas Hobbes's and Spencer's war for survival.

Indeed, predicted sex differences are also found in sexual fantasy. A survey concludes that male sexual fantasies tend to be more ubiquitous, frequent, visual, specifically sexual, promiscuous, and active. Female sexual fantasies tend to be more contextual, emotive, intimate, and passive—just as theory would predict (Ellis and Symons 1990). Again, because paternity is much less certain than maternity, but can still be critical to a man's reproductive success, men should be more concerned with the biological details of insemination than women, who should instead ...