3 ms·

Leaving aside the usual quip about HN being an endless source of entertainment when it comes to attempting to comprehend basic concepts in biology that they wer

Leaving aside the usual quip about HN being an endless source of entertainment when it comes to attempting to comprehend basic concepts in biology that they weren't taught in high school, I'm wondering about something. What's with the propensity for the typical HNer, and the tech demographic in general, to subscribe to the whole alpha/beta charade in the first place? Your average programmer isn't usually a bodybuilder or even what you may call a 'Chad'. Even on social media, blogs, and generally speaking the whole ecosystem of believing dumb evopsych crap, the most prominent speakers aren't exactly paragons of traditional masculinity themselves. And conversely, Joe Rogan himself (if you're willing to consider an MMA pro 'alpha') probably doesn't care at all about the Google memo. So, like, if you're soft-spoken, introverted, maybe effete, maybe overweight, what's the point of doing all this? Why fantasize about an immutable, evolutionary-driven hierarchy of males if you're not even putting yourself at the top? Does that stem from self-loathing? Maybe a fetish of some kind? I'm curious to read different perspectives from HNers.

danielscrubs 6y ago
I’d argue that we have a lot of smart but hormonal and insecure teens on this site that are just trying to make sense of the world, especially what’s important to them.
verylittlemeat 6y ago
Isn't the self help section one of the largest in the bookstore? I don't see any great mystery - cults of personality, money, power, genius - aspirational culture. As far as we know haven't those things always been part of human nature? You can put a negative spin on it and call it self-loathing or fetishism but for some people it's motivation. The HN bubble is real and it's easy to be derisive but the OP you replied to doesn't seem to be a troll. Sincere people are easy targets for the cynical but the flawed opinions of real people are more interesting than whatever sanitized death waits by appeasing something like n-gate.
- catmistake 6y ago
  Did you notice GP's hasty generalization wrapped in a straw man? Not to mention the implied ad hominem. Also, the false equivalence of macho = alpha. GP's argument is fallacy upon fallacy, and thus weak. FWIW, I was sincere, and GP is somewhat of a ridiculing bully that took it off the rails. I was not suggesting Rogan was a monkey... he is a man. With evolution, I was suggesting the reasons for which macho is attractive. Is GP saying the the meanest monkey didn't produce the most offspring? And that it was the most sensitive monkey? I can't make heads or monkey tails of it.
catmistake 6y ago
I really don't know what you're talking about. But I do recognize a hasty generalization wrapped inside a straw man. Not sure why I'm bothering with your bully's argument. I said Rogan was "macho." Macho is not the equivalent of alpha, so that's another fallacy right there. I explained in simplest terms how macho could be the reason why the attention is there, which is due to evolution. Rogan isn't the meanest monkey, he's not a monkey, he's a man. So you're saying maybe the meanest monkey didn't produce the most offspring? That's evopsyche crap? Maybe the meanest monkey was outcast, and the most sensitive monkey produced the most offspring? I don't understand what you're saying. Why would it matter to those that tune in to him how Rogan sees himself? How could anyone know that?
curryst 6y ago
I've always figured it was an ego-preservation mechanism. Subscribers to this belief don't see themselves as successful or attractive, but being successful or attractive is a major part of their sense of self-worth. The emotionally healthy response would be to address why they don't see themselves as attractive or successful, or maybe to question whether those make sense as part of their self worth. Some people can't or won't do those options though, so their brains move to the next option to preserve their sense of self-worth: deflection. They believe they are unsuccessful or unattractive, but they can preserve some of their self-worth by believing that their perceived lack of success or attractiveness is due to factors outside their control. They were born into a hierarchy stacked against them, or they just weren't born with the right genes to concede. They're caught between a rock and a hard place; they either tell themselves that they're failures but it's okay because it's someone else's fault, or they tell themselves that they're failures and they only have themselves to blame. They literally can't see the third option, which is to tell themselves they aren't worthless. People who would genuinely consider themselves alphas don't generally subscribe to these beliefs. There are some that claim it, but I'm frankly convinced that deep down theyre terrified they might be a beta, which is what causes the constant dick measuring in those communities as they fight to prove to themselves they really are alpha. Joe Rogan doesn't give a shit about the alpha/beta male thing because he's confident that his life has value. I'm a casual, occasional listener, and I wouldn't accuse him of being overly macho. He speaks confidently, but I don't think arrogantly. I don't think he's as clever as he's often given credit for, but that's not a mortal sin. Schwarzenegger is an even better example. Physically, the man is a paragon of traditional masculinity, but he bears no resemblance to the alpha male persona. I genuinely have a lot of empathy for people that subscribe to the alpha male thing. I can't imagine the mental anguish of living an existence where you construct a mental hierarchy you are at the bottom of, because it's the best light you can think of yourself ever being in. It's easy to get lost in hating them because of how toxicly they expose their views, but underneath it all is just a person who's lashing out because they hurt.
- catmistake 6y ago
  How far can one take the GP's hasty generalizations straw man ad hominem argument? Well, pretty far, I guess. Fallacy hat trick! There sure is no accounting for logic at HN. Wow. When you can't speak to the argument, introduce a new topic and attack the man, but then, of course, lose the argument.

danielscrubs 6y ago

I’d argue that we have a lot of smart but hormonal and insecure teens on this site that are just trying to make sense of the world, especially what’s important to them.

verylittlemeat 6y ago

Isn't the self help section one of the largest in the bookstore? I don't see any great mystery - cults of personality, money, power, genius - aspirational culture. As far as we know haven't those things always been part of human nature? You can put a negative spin on it and call it self-loathing or fetishism but for some people it's motivation. The HN bubble is real and it's easy to be derisive but the OP you replied to doesn't seem to be a troll. Sincere people are easy targets for the cynical but the flawed opinions of real people are more interesting than whatever sanitized death waits by appeasing something like n-gate.

catmistake 6y ago
Did you notice GP's hasty generalization wrapped in a straw man? Not to mention the implied ad hominem. Also, the false equivalence of macho = alpha. GP's argument is fallacy upon fallacy, and thus weak. FWIW, I was sincere, and GP is somewhat of a ridiculing bully that took it off the rails. I was not suggesting Rogan was a monkey... he is a man. With evolution, I was suggesting the reasons for which macho is attractive. Is GP saying the the meanest monkey didn't produce the most offspring? And that it was the most sensitive monkey? I can't make heads or monkey tails of it.

catmistake 6y ago

I really don't know what you're talking about. But I do recognize a hasty generalization wrapped inside a straw man. Not sure why I'm bothering with your bully's argument. I said Rogan was "macho." Macho is not the equivalent of alpha, so that's another fallacy right there. I explained in simplest terms how macho could be the reason why the attention is there, which is due to evolution. Rogan isn't the meanest monkey, he's not a monkey, he's a man. So you're saying maybe the meanest monkey didn't produce the most offspring? That's evopsyche crap? Maybe the meanest monkey was outcast, and the most sensitive monkey produced the most offspring? I don't understand what you're saying. Why would it matter to those that tune in to him how Rogan sees himself? How could anyone know that?

curryst 6y ago

I've always figured it was an ego-preservation mechanism. Subscribers to this belief don't see themselves as successful or attractive, but being successful or attractive is a major part of their sense of self-worth. The emotionally healthy response would be to address why they don't see themselves as attractive or successful, or maybe to question whether those make sense as part of their self worth. Some people can't or won't do those options though, so their brains move to the next option to preserve their sense of self-worth: deflection. They believe they are unsuccessful or unattractive, but they can preserve some of their self-worth by believing that their perceived lack of success or attractiveness is due to factors outside their control. They were born into a hierarchy stacked against them, or they just weren't born with the right genes to concede. They're caught between a rock and a hard place; they either tell themselves that they're failures but it's okay because it's someone else's fault, or they tell themselves that they're failures and they only have themselves to blame. They literally can't see the third option, which is to tell themselves they aren't worthless. People who would genuinely consider themselves alphas don't generally subscribe to these beliefs. There are some that claim it, but I'm frankly convinced that deep down theyre terrified they might be a beta, which is what causes the constant dick measuring in those communities as they fight to prove to themselves they really are alpha. Joe Rogan doesn't give a shit about the alpha/beta male thing because he's confident that his life has value. I'm a casual, occasional listener, and I wouldn't accuse him of being overly macho. He speaks confidently, but I don't think arrogantly. I don't think he's as clever as he's often given credit for, but that's not a mortal sin. Schwarzenegger is an even better example. Physically, the man is a paragon of traditional masculinity, but he bears no resemblance to the alpha male persona. I genuinely have a lot of empathy for people that subscribe to the alpha male thing. I can't imagine the mental anguish of living an existence where you construct a mental hierarchy you are at the bottom of, because it's the best light you can think of yourself ever being in. It's easy to get lost in hating them because of how toxicly they expose their views, but underneath it all is just a person who's lashing out because they hurt.

catmistake 6y ago
How far can one take the GP's hasty generalizations straw man ad hominem argument? Well, pretty far, I guess. Fallacy hat trick! There sure is no accounting for logic at HN. Wow. When you can't speak to the argument, introduce a new topic and attack the man, but then, of course, lose the argument.