Organisation of "The Ape in the office"

Owner: Nguyen Hoang Vy Thao-10a5-Eng14-k53-CNN

登録は簡単!. 無料です
または 登録 あなたのEメールアドレスで登録
Organisation of "The Ape in the office" により Mind Map: Organisation of "The Ape in the office"

1. Introduction

1.1. Introduce about a book called "The Ape in the office",its author Richard Coniff and his research about the similarities between human and animal behavior.

2. Body

2.1. Cooperation vs Conflict

2.1.1. Topic sentence

2.1.1.1. In fact, according to Conniff, both humans and other primates are social creatures, and both groups normally try to avoid conflict.

2.1.2. Supporting ideas

2.1.2.1. However,conflict and aggression actually play a smaller role in the wild than cooperation.

2.1.2.2. For humans and other primates, conflict is rare and does not last long. For both species, cooperation is a more effective way to succeed and survive

2.2. The value of networking

2.2.1. Topic sentence

2.2.1.1. Research also shows that people and other primates use similar social networking strategies to get ahead in life.

2.2.2. Supporting ideas

2.2.2.1. Human create tight social bonds by sharing resources, doing each other favors, building teams, and making friends.

2.2.2.2. In fact, research shows that chimps often create bonds to strengthen their status, or importance, in the community.

2.3. The importance of hierarchies

2.3.1. Topic sentence

2.3.1.1. Groups of coworkers and primate groups have similar social rules.

2.3.2. Supporting ideas

2.3.2.1. In both cases, the groups organize themselves into hierarchies, and individual members know their roles.

2.4. The limit of agression

2.4.1. Topic sentence

2.4.1.1. In his book, Conniff makes the case that interacting in a kind and polite way is more beneficial for both humans and primates.

2.4.2. Supporting ideas

2.4.2.1. However, Conniff notes that conflict does not gain long-term success for either species.

2.4.2.2. “The truth is we are completely dependent on other people emotionally as well as for our physical needs,” Conniff concludes. “We function as part of a group rather than as individuals.”